Skip to main content
Normal View

Airport Development Projects.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 15 June 2004

Tuesday, 15 June 2004

Questions (399, 400, 401, 402, 403, 404)

Pat Breen

Question:

452 Mr. P. Breen asked the Minister for Transport, further to Question No. 326 of 25 May 2004, if he will provide consultation facilities for affected parties in keeping with both the spirit and the principles of Regulating Better, the recently launched White Paper on better regulation. [17370/04]

View answer

Pat Breen

Question:

458 Mr. P. Breen asked the Minister for Transport, further to Question No. 326 of 25 May 2004, his views on whether the difference in the depiction of the western threshold of runway 10/28 as between the ERM report of June 2003 and the Aer Rianta consultation brochure rather than being of the order of approximately 100 metres is greater than 200 metres; his further views on whether such a major difference in relation to the simple transfer of information from one map to another on the part of ERM is surprising and the public may have serious reservations in respect of the subsequent mathematical modelling and risk analysis conducted by that company behind closed doors; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17376/04]

View answer

Written answers

I propose to take Questions Nos. 452 and 458 together.

In the consultation undertaken by ERM, the difference was noted and has been corrected. Both the Aer Rianta consultation brochure of October 2002 and the final ERM report which has been submitted to myself and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government are consistent with each other. The proposed new runway 10/28 at Dublin Airport is still at the design stage, and no planning permission has yet been given for the runway in question.

Before ERM finalised its report, it conducted two separate rounds of public consultation. I am happy that the public has been kept fully informed of the contents of the report and that any comments or queries about ERM's report have been seen and considered by ERM. Full details of the methodology used by ERM were given in the draft report it published, which is still available on the company's website.

Pat Breen

Question:

453 Mr. P. Breen asked the Minister for Transport if obstacle 11 on the current ICAO aerodrome obstacle chart, type A, for runway 11/29 at Dublin Airport was constructed during a period in which his Department had sole responsibility for the preparation and revision of such charts; if so, if he will provide details of the said obstacle with particular reference to its identity, date of construction, distance from the nearby runway threshold, length, breadth, height and its height relative to the notional 1.2% slope on the chart in question at its innermost edge that is nearest to the nearby runway threshold; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17371/04]

View answer

Obstacle 11 on the current ICAO aerodrome obstacle chart, type A, for runway 11/29 at Dublin Airport was constructed in 1991. At this time, preparation and revision of aeronautical charts at the State airports was managed within the Air Navigation Services Office of the Department.

Obstacle 11, the FLS hangar was constructed in 1991 and is approximately 170 metres long by 110 meters wide by 30 metres high. Part of the hangar penetrates the take-off flight path area as depicted on the type A chart. At the point of penetration, the hangar is 720 metres approximately from the runway threshold and penetrates the 1.2% surface by approximately 19.5 metres.

SI 14 of 2002, Irish Aviation Authority (Obstacles to Aircraft in Flight) Order 2002, requires the reporting of obstacles to the authority and provides for the marking and lighting of same as required by the authority. The penetration of the obstacle limitation surface by the FLS building is published on the type A chart, is included in the aeronautical information publication and is also included in the aerodrome licence issued by the Irish Aviation Authority. The building itself is lit with red obstacle lights, which is the required procedure where any building penetrates an obstacle limitation surface.

Pat Breen

Question:

454 Mr. P. Breen asked the Minister for Transport, further to Question No. 325 of 25 May 2004, if following the tabling of amendment No. 1 to section 14 of the Air Navigation and Transport Bill 1949 on 8 March 1950 by Mr. Hawkins in Seanad Éireann, the then Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry and Commerce (details supplied) gave an assurance in relation to future protected areas promulgated in accordance with the said section 14 that persons interested would receive a map, that is, persons interested in the sense of owner or occupier; if so, the reason such a firm assurance on the part of the said Parliamentary Secretary was not subsequently honoured by his Department many years later in respect of any of the three orders in question at Dublin, Shannon and Knock airports; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17372/04]

View answer

The debates which took place more than 50 years ago that the Deputy is referring to were in the context of an amendment sought that would give any interested person a right to purchase a map associated with any section 14 orders made. I understand that the amendment was not carried, but assurances were given by former Deputy Liam Cosgrave that interested persons would get a map. I understand that records have been found in the Irish Aviation Authority since the Deputy's previous question was replied to which indicate that landowners in relation to two of the three orders affecting sites in County Dublin and County Mayo received copies of the orders including their maps. It appears that landowners, other than the landowner from whom the site was acquired, in relation to the third order affecting a site in County Clare did not receive a copy of that order. However, I can inform the Deputy that all the three orders, SI 284 of 1988, SI 114 of 1989 and SI 205 of 1993, including their maps, are available free of charge on the Attorney General's website, under the link to the Irish Statute Book.

Pat Breen

Question:

455 Mr. P. Breen asked the Minister for Transport, further to his confirmation by way of a reply to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 447 to 455, inclusive of 1 July 2003, that a minor realignment of runway 10/28 took place prior to its construction, the precise details of such realignment with particular reference to its orientation, any change of overall length and any alteration to either of its proposed end points; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17373/04]

View answer

As advised in response to Question No. 312 of 11 May 2004, the length of the southern parallel runway was finalised at 8,650 feet. The alignment of the runway was determined to comply with all appropriate International Civil Aviation Organisation, ICAO, safety margins and to provide for maximum operational efficiency.

Pat Breen

Question:

456 Mr. P. Breen asked the Minister for Transport, further to Question No. 637 of 27 April 2004, if cross runway 16/34 at Dublin Airport is also protected as an instrument runway; if so, the reason this runway and the cross runways at Cork and Shannon airports are each protected as instrument runways when a similar cross runway 11/29 at Dublin Airport is merely protected as a non-instrument runway; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17374/04]

View answer

The reason a particular runway at Dublin Airport is designated as an instrument or a non-instrument runway is a technical matter for Aer Rianta and not a matter in which I have a function.

Top
Share