Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 20 Mar 2002

Vol. 550 No. 4

Written Answers. - Port Development.

Richard Bruton

Question:

160 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources the status of the latest application by Dublin Port Company for a harbour work order; and if no decision can be taken on this unless the Dublin Port Company has first obtained planning permission from Dublin City Council. [9040/02]

Harbour works orders are issued under section 134 of the Harbours Act, 1946. However, since being incorporated as a State port company in March, 1997, Dublin Port Company operates under the Harbours Acts, 1996, and the facility of a harbour works order no longer applies in its case.

Dublin Port Company owns the foreshore in question and, as such, the relevant legislation is section 10 of the Foreshore Act, 1933, as amended.

A new application for permission to reclaim 21 hectares of Dublin port was made on 8 March 2002. The application was accompanied by an EIS. My Department has forwarded the EIS to its consultants for examination to confirm that it meets statutory minimum requirements and constitutes a basis for me to make a decision on the application. The consultants will report in due course and I will then consider whether I can accept the EIS as being adequate. If I find it to be acceptable, it will be necessary for Dublin Port Company to go to public consultation and interested parties will have one month in which to make submissions.

Deputies will be aware, from my responses to previous questions on this issue, that in the case of privately owned foreshore, I am only allowed consider applications for permission in the context of impacts upon shipping, fishing and the environment. In order for me to fully consider the impacts upon the environment in a case such as this, I must be satisfied that the development has planning permission before any reclamation work is undertaken.

Deputies will appreciate that the environmental consequences of reclamation taking place and planning permission being subsequently refused would be entirely different from the environmental consequences of the planned development being developed under planning permission. In the former case we would be faced with a wasteland existing at the entry to Dublin port – a situation which I think everybody would find unacceptable – while in the latter we would have a modern, planned and approved commercial development.

I expect to have the initial report from my Department's consultants within four to six weeks. Assuming that it is satisfactory, the public consultation process can then commence. It is a matter for Dublin Port Company to decide on when it will make an application for planning permission.

Top
Share