An Bord Pleanála

A 10 year planning permission for development at Dublin Airport, east of the existing terminal building adjoining Pier C. The development will consist of the construction of: 1) a passenger terminal (which will be built in two phases) of ca. 92,049 sq.m. in 4 no. interconnecting blocks ranging in height from two to four stories with an overall height of 35m, which partially bridges the access road to the existing passenger terminal building; 2) a three storey Pier Building with an overall height of 18m (ca. 24,052 sq.m.), complete with 19 no. air bridges and associated fixed links. 3) a two storey over basement energy centre containing water storage and plant for power supply, heating and cooling systems (ca. 5,049 sq.m. with total height of 11m and a chimney stack of 38m); 4) external service yard; 5) realignment of existing internal access road infrastructure and provision of new access roads, including pedestrian and cycle routes, all contained within the existing airport campus; 6) Rearrangement of the existing coach park adjacent to the north of the existing terminal building; 7) separate car, taxi and bus set-down areas; 8) associated services connections; site development; and landscaping works, including a feature access area; 9) refurbishment of the existing Pier C; 10) demolition of the following; Corballis House a two storey protected structure with an area of ca. 482 sq.m.; a single storey storage building (ca. 1295 sq.m.); 3 no. single and two storey car hire buildings ca 280 sq.m., 690 sq.m. and 1925 sq.m.); a single storey boiler house building (ca 373 sq.m.); single and two storey DAA Maintenance offices (ca 1,290 sq.m.); a mainly single storey Hanger Building (ca 2,165 sq.m.) and fixed links to Pier C (ca 380 sq.m.). All on an application site of ca. 32,646 ha. The following will be included within the passenger terminal and pier; check-in areas including 58 no. manned desks and 24 no. self-service facilities; passenger services and associated terminal support facilities; departure lounge; baggage processing hall; baggage reclaim area; ca. 5,813 sq.m. of retail (ca. 840 sq.m. landside, ca. 4,973 sq.m. airside); ca 2,730 sq.m. of catering facilities (ca. 643 sq.m. landside, ca. 2,087 sq.m. airside); 2 no. public houses totalling ca. 1,278 sq.m. (1 no. landside of ca. 491 sq.m., 1 no. airside of ca. 787 sq.m.); airline security, immigration and customs offices( ca. 4,625 sq.m. airside); links to a future multi storey car park and the existing passenger terminal; security check-in and arrival areas; associated plant, circulation and toilet space. An Environmental Impact Statement will be submitted to the Planning Authority with the application.

VOLUME 5 –APPENDIX

Report on Transportation Aspects

Of

Planning Appeal for Second Terminal & Associated Works

at

Dublin Airport

Report

by

Jerry Barnes, MRTPI, MIPI, ASCS, MRICS

for

An Bord Pleanála

An Bord Pleanála Ref:PL06F.220670

P.A. Reg Ref:F06A/1248

Description:New airport terminal and ancillary works, including the demolition of Corballis House (protected structure).

Address:Dublin Airport, T/Ds of Collinstown, Rock & Corballis, Barony of Coolock, Co. Dublin

Applicant:Dublin Airport Authority Plc

Planning Authority:Fingal County Council

PL06F.220670Page 1 of 84

CONTENTS

Page

1INTRODUCTION4

1.1Terms of Reference4

1.2Background Information4

2ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT4

2.1Relevant Transportation Sections and Guidelines4

2.2Assessment5

2.3Transportation Aspects of Project Splitting28

2.4Conclusions30

3POLICY CONSIDERATIONS30

3.1National Transportation Policy30

3.2Regional Transportation Policy32

3.3County and Local Transportation Policy34

4PUBLIC TRANSPORT 40

4.1Metro Issues40

4.2Bus Issues 42

4.3Taxi46

5ROADS AND TRAFFIC 46

5.1Strategic Network Capacity 46

5.2Local Roads Impacts48

5.3Junction Impacts51

5.4Kerbside Capacity and Access53

5.5Emergency Access54

5.6Construction Traffic54

5.7Development Contributions55

6DEMAND MANAGEMENT AND PARKING56

6.1Mode Share56

6.2Mobility Management Plan58

6.3Parking Policy59

6.4Passenger Parking 60

6.5Employee Parking 62

6.6Car Hire and Other Parking62

6.7Maximum Parking Provision63

7LOCATIONAL AND LAYOUT ISSUES 63

7.1Alternative Sites within the Campus63

7.2Ground Transportation Centre 64

7.3Pedestrian Movement and Provision for Mobility Impaired66

7.4Cycle Facilities 67

7.5Servicing 67

7.6Passenger Travel Information 67

7.7VMS and Other Signage67

8FIRST PARTY APPEAL AGAINST CONDITIONS67

8.1Condition No.6 – Upgrade of the M5067

8.2Condition No.27 – Construction Compound68

8.3Condition No.29 – Travellator68

8.4Condition No.43 – Contribution Condition68

9CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS69

9.1Phase 169

9.2Phase 2 80

1INTRODUCTION

1.1Terms of Reference

1.1.1The Board has requested the undersigned to provide advice in writing concerning transportation issues relating to the proposed terminal and associated works at Dublin Airport, Co. Dublin (PL06F.220670). In addition, I attended the oral hearing on the 16th to 23rd, 25th April and the 3rd May 2007. I visited the site and surrounding area on the 12th April 2007. This report addresses the following requirements of the brief:

a)Adequacy and robustness of the traffic related information in the EIS, having regard to the likely significant impacts upon the environment.

b)Report on the traffic and transportation aspects of the application/appeal.

It should be noted that the views expressed relate solely to the issue of transportation and where there is a conflict with other non-transportation considerations, then resolution of these issues are matters for the Inspector and the Board.

1.2Background Information

1.2.1Reference shall be made, as appropriate, to relevant policy documents, the written appeal submissions and the proceedings of the oral hearing.

2ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.1Relevant Transportation Sections and Guidelines

2.1.1Considerations relating to the transportation assessment are contained in various sections of the EIS and in particular, Chapter 2 (Background to Project), Chapter 3 (Proposed Site and Scheme Description), Chapter 4 (Planning and Policy Context), Chapter 5 (Construction Activities), Chapter 6 (Landside Traffic), Chapter 9 (Air Quality), Chapter 17 (Impact on Human Beings), Chapter 20 (Other Impacts and Interactions), and Chapter 21 (Summary of Mitigating Measures and Residual Impacts). In addition, due regard has also been had to the additional information submitted on the 27th March 2007 pursuant to the Board’s request of the 14th March 2007 and the first party’s oral and written submissions presented to the hearing.

2.1.2In the evaluation of the transportation elements of the submitted EIS, due regard has been paid to the following:

  • The nature and extent of the proposal for which development consent is sought.
  • Article 94 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001, as amended.
  • Guidelines on the information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements – EPA, 2002.
  • Advice notes on current practice in the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements – EPA, 2003 (with particular regard to pages 67-69).
  • Submissions and observations received in relation to transportation aspects of the EIS. In this context a significant proportion of the third party appeal submissions argued that the EIS, and in particular many of the assumptions underpinning the transport assessment, were flawed.
  • Assessment

Background to the Project (Chapter 2)

Alternatives

2.2.1This chapter outlines the background to the development and in particular outlines the alternatives considered. At the strategic level the Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick (2004) Dublin Airport – Runway 10L/28R Alternatives Report is referred to, which considers strategic alternatives, including:

  • alternative location for northern parallel runway at Dublin Airport;
  • provision of a single runway elsewhere in the Greater Dublin Area; and
  • replacement of Dublin Airport on a new site.

Mr. Evans’s (applicant) evidence to the oral hearing (submission F, 16th April) supplemented the contents of the EIS in this regard. He highlighted that Baldonnel and Gormanstown were specifically considered and the assessment included accessibility, transportation and environmental considerations. The development of a complementary Airport on a new site was also examined. The replacement of Dublin Airport on a new site was reviewed having regard to accessibility, transportation and the environmental impacts. Zones of opportunity were considered in this assessment and Mr. Evans confirmed to the hearing that catchment and accessibility were central considerations in the analysis.

2.2.2Alternatives were also considered in the context of developing Dublin Airport Terminal and Piers Development Study (2004), which would bring the capacity of the Airport up to 30 million passengers per annum (mppa).The four options outlined in this study were:

Option 1 – East – Extend existing terminal to the south and east to be served by the same set of landside and airside facilities.

Option 2 – West – Construction of a large new 30 mppa facility on the western campus and the eventual conversion of the eastern campus to other uses.

Option 3 – East/West – Develop one terminal facility on the eastern campus and one on the western campus, which would be of equal size.

Option 4 - North - Develop existing terminal up to a capacity of 18 mppa and a further terminal on the northern side of the existing site to cater for 12 mppa.

These options were considered on the basis of functionality, deliverability and cost. The landside transportation considerations formed part of the functionality consideration. The principal transportation considerations were in relation to kerbside requirements, campus roadways, ground transportation centre, car parking (including public transport mode split targets), taxi holding areas and Metro provision. While accessibility was a consideration, there was no multi-modal modelling undertaken at this stage. This does not however constitute a major deficiency in the assessment of alternatives at this level. The preferred site option was Option 1 – East.

The site options were refined for the final EIS, having regard to the Dublin Airport LAP 2006 and the Government’s policy, as outlined in Aviation Action Plan (2005), to provide a second terminal capable of independent operation. Option 9 was selected as the preferred alternative and it is considered due regard was had to the environmental and transportation impacts of this option, viz a viz road access and proximity to Metro, the Ground Transportation Centre (GTC), Bus Terminus and car parking, in addition to consideration of the pier design.

Submissions

2.2.3The Portmarnock Community Association, An Taisce, Teresa Kavanagh, Bridget Byrne and Ryanair appeals all contend that inadequate alternatives were considered as part of the application and EIS. These suggested inadequacies relate to consideration of alternative transport modes and alternative locations. However, it is considered that in relation to alternatives contained in the EIS and supplementary information submitted at the hearing, from a transportation perspective, an adequate assessment of alternative locations, sites and building forms has been undertaken. The appropriateness of the selected option is considered in further detail in the assessment of the proposed development.

Demand and Capacity Provision

2.2.4The demand and capacity of the facility is of relevance to the transportation assessment in so far as these factors will dictate the transportation demands on road and public transport infrastructure. Two planning horizons have been established for Terminal 2:

  • Phase 1 - The opening year of 2009 with first full year of operation in 2010, which has a design capacity to 2015-2016 and a mid-point demand year of 2013.
  • Phase 2 - Open in approximately 2015 to 2016 when it is predicted that an additional phase may be required, which would be fully utilised by 2021 and has a midpoint demand year of 2018.
  • The applicant’s ‘centreline’ forecasts for 2006 indicate that 30 mppa could be reached by 2015-2016. A ‘high growth’ forecast has also been developed. Peak hour demand of 4,200 was selected for 2009 and 5,500 for 2015. Planning day schedules were then developed to reflect the selected departures peak hour and capacity. The forecasted annual volumes would be 24.9 mppa by 2010, 30.6 mmpa by 2016 and 35.6 mppa by 2021. The annual volumes for Terminal 2 - Phase 1 would be 11.4 mppa and 14.9 mppa for Phase 2. These figures formed the basis for the transport modelling exercise undertaken as part of Chapter 6.

Submissions

2.2.6Ms. Congdon’s (Ryanair) evidence to the hearing (submission M, 17th April) contends that the capacity of Terminal (T) 1 and 2 would far exceed the 35 mppa specified in the EIS. Ms. Congdon concludes that the effective capacity (presumably after Phase 2) lies between 46 and 52 mppa, rather than the 35 mppa indicated in the EIS. Ms. Weston subsequently rebutted this evidence in submission A of the 18th April, which indicates that the calculation of the busy hour was based upon the future planning day schedules for the Aer Lingus. The applicant’s evidence indicated that the scheduling information was confidential and could not be presented to the hearing.

2.2.7The ultimate theoretical capacity of terminal facility is not a matter for the transportation assessment, as the key issue is what is contained in the assumptions for the EIS and transport impact assessment. In this regard, the planning authority’s contention that the full application is effectively for a 35 mppa facility (both T1 and T2) is rational. Any material increase in use over and above this figure will result in a development that has not been assessed by the EIS. It should be noted that the EIS forms part of the application and is therefore an integral part of any planning permission issued. Any material increase in use of the facility over and above the 35 mppa could be argued to represent an intensification in use requiring a further planning permission.

2.2.8It is therefore considered that, on the basis that the application is for a 35 mppa facility, the demand and capacity provisions of the EIS provide a sound basis for transportation assessment.

Proposed Site and Scheme Description (Chapter 3)

Scheme Description

2.2.9Section 3.5 of the EIS describes the terminal proposal, which is to cater for the needs of up to about 15 mppa. The development would be split into two phases.

Phase 1

Design Capacity

  • 4,200 passengers in busy hour

Buildings

  • Terminal – 74,082 sqm
  • Central Plant Building - 5,049 sqm
  • Pier E – 24,052 sqm.

Internal Road Network

  • Retain the one-way system with Corballis Road North & South and the East Link Road to a design speed of 60 km/h.
  • Road widening of East Link Road and Corballis Road South.
  • Approaches to T1 and T2 to be constructed off-line of the current terminal access.
  • Realignment of Corballis Road South and access to the GTC and multi-storey car park.
  • Widening of Corballis Road North.
  • Kerbs to departure and arrivals 300m in length.
  • Upgrade of pedestrian footpaths and segregated cycle tracks.
  • Gantries and variable message signage and wayfinding system.

Phase 2

Design Capacity

  • 5,500 passengers in busy hour (Phase 1 and 2)

Building

  • Terminal – 12,918 sqm (T2 total 92,049 sqm)

The road network, central plant building and external building services have been designed to the Phase 2 peak hour capacity of 5,500 passengers, but would be provided during the construction of Phase 1.

It is considered that the EIS adequately describes these elements.

2.2.10Section 3.6 of the EIS also considers other elements of the transportation infrastructure serving the Airport. These include:

  • Bus and taxi access to T1 and T2.
  • Courtesy buses from long term car parks.
  • Private car drop off and use of short stay car parks.

2.2.11The site to the north of the T2 is identified as a location for the Metro station, which will be located close to the coach parking area. Paragraph 3.6.1.2 describes access from the external road network, which will be via the Airport Roundabout and Corballis Road South. This description, however, reflects the existing road network. The GTC would be located in the centre of the campus and a 1,500 space multi-storey car park is also envisaged immediately to the north of the proposed terminal building. A high level walkway would be provided linking T1, the GTC, the proposed multi-storey car park and T2. These are illustrated in Figure 3.29 V3 of the EIS. However, it should be noted that the following elements do not specifically form part of the subject application:

i)GTC

ii)1,500 multi-storey car park

iii)high level walkway connecting T1, T2 and GTC

iv)Remote construction compound

v)Any part of the Metro

vi)External road improvements

Submissions

2.2.12The An Taisce, Angela Lawton, Teresa Kavanagh and Ryanair submissions to the hearing indicated that full details of some, or all of the above the elements should be submitted as part of the proposed scheme and be described in the public notices and the EIS. These are developments which directly arise as a result of the proposed scheme. Page 19 of the EPA’s Advice Notes on Current Practice in the Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements indicates that it is just sufficient to the draw attention to the fact that ancillary developments are likely to occur, specifying the location, if possible. This does not, however, remove the need for the environmental effects to be assessed in line with EIA regulations. The description of the proposed scheme and the associated direct and indirect projects are considered to be adequate.

Planning and Policy Context (Chapter 4)

Planning Policy

2.2.13This chapter satisfactorily outlines the national, regional and local transportation policy framework for the Airport and environs. Compliance with the policy framework will be considered in further detail below in the assessment of the application. It is also noted that the provisions of this section were supplemented by a number of background studies and reports submitted to the oral hearing.

Planning History

2.2.14The planning history detailed in section 4.7 of the EIS was supplemented by submission BM, 3rd May presented to the oral hearing and is considered to be satisfactory.

Construction Sites, Compounds and Site Access (Chapter 5)

2.2.15A remote site construction compound will be the subject of a separate planning application. In this regard it is noted that planning permission has been granted for a compound to the east of the R132 (P.A. Reg. Ref:F06A/1949). Temporary site access is described in section 5.4.3 and in Figures 5.1.V3 to 5.6. V3 of the EIS. This is considered comprehensive and adequate.

2.2.16The source and transportation of materials are considered in section 5.6.1 and 5.6.2 of the EIS. Other than to state that crushed concrete will be reused on site and that construction material will be sourced from local suppliers, the details are somewhat limited. This is not considered, however, to be a fundamental inadequacy. Off-site parking for construction workers will be provided at the remote compound and workers will be transported by shuttle bus to the construction site. Adequate mitigating measures are proposed to Section 5.17, particularly in relation to waste management measures.

Submissions

2.2.17Mr. Sweetman’s (Teresa Kavanagh) oral submission to the hearing indicated that he considered that the EIS was deficient as it did not identify the location of the remote compound and its associate traffic impacts. The applicant indicated at the hearing that the compound permitted under P.A. Reg. Ref:F06A/1949 was that required to serve the subject development. The EPA’s advice notes highlight that it is adequate to specify the location of ancillary developments.

Landside Traffic (Chapter 6)

Receiving Environment and Proposed Development

2.2.18The receiving environment is adequately described. The description of the proposed development reflects Chapter 1. Detailed information is provided in relation to kerbside requirements and operations, peak passenger movements and vehicular access arrangements. Again, it is specified that a 1,500 space multi-storey car park would be required. It is confirmed that there are no committed plans to alter current taxi operations, other than to provide a taxi loading and advance staging area at T2. Scheduled bus services would be accommodated in a reconfigured coach park. It is noted that planning permission has already been granted for the coach park (P.A. Reg. Ref:F06A/0232), but the subject proposal alters this permitted development through the rearranged access and egress arrangements. The described internal road access, pedestrian facilities and cycle ways are as described in Chapter 2 of the EIS.