AN oral hearing is to be held by An Bord Pleanála next month into the controversial €54m incinerators planned for Cork Harbour.
It will be the second oral hearing into the planned incineration scheme at Ringaskiddy with local residents, opposed to the development, faced with forking out about e80,000.
The first An Bord Pleanála hearing took place in 2003. However, the board disregarded the recommendations of their senior inspector and, instead, granted planning permission to developers, Indaver.
Cork Harbour for a Safe Environment (CHASE), in the meantime, sought a judicial review of the decision. By the time the court action was finished, the initial planning had expired.
This time, however, Indaver lodged planning permission with the board under the Strategic Infrastructure Act. Amendments to the planning act were aimed at fast-tracking vital national infrastructure and sidestepping local authorities.
It is reported An Bord Pleanála received 284 submissions in relation to the proposed new incinerators. The hearing will take place from April 27.
The Department of the Environment is among the objectors, on the grounds of potential risks to human, plant and animal life.
Objections were also received from the IFA, the Irish Midwives Association, Cobh Doctors Association, East Cork Tourism, local primary and secondary schools and their boards of management.
CHASE spokeswoman Linda Fitzpatrick yesterday said the new hearing will cost the local community e80,000 to outline their case as they will have to bring in experts from all over the world. However, locals are delighted, she said, that health issues will be discussed, this time, unlike the previous hearing.
"We’re glad that we can state our case again but the financial cost is quite high. Last time, the inspector was not allowed to hear, and had to ignore, any health-based evidence. New EU planning rules means that these issues will be under the microscope," she said.
A spokeswoman for Indaver said the company was looking forward to dealing with arguments raised in submissions at the oral hearing. "We have always placed a high value on engaging with the people of the localities in which we operate. ... We are confident that the facts, not hearsay, will determine the merits of the proposal," she said.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Showing posts with label incinteration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label incinteration. Show all posts
Friday, 27 March 2009
Sunday, 12 October 2008
Hearing on Meath landfill deferred
AN BORD Pleanála has adjourned a hearing into plans to build an eight megawatt biomass incinerator and ash landfill in Co Meath after it emerged that more than five acres of land earmarked as part of the landfill does not belong to the company.
College Proteins has applied under the Strategic Infrastructure Act (SIA) to the board for permission for the development on its existing site in Nobber.
On Thursday, the ninth day of the hearing, landowner David Horgan told Oisín Collins for North East Against Incineration that the field was his and he had not been asked to sell or for permission to include it in the plans, or to allow a waste licence on it.
Mr Collins asked Pauline Fitzpatrick, the inspector chairing the hearing, to rule the application invalid.
When the hearing resumed yesterday, Suzanne Murray for College Proteins confirmed the field was owned by Mr Horgan. She said it was with adjoining fields to be used for soil depositions during the construction of the landfill.
She argued that the SIA did not give the inspector or the board the power to invalidate the application. If it did decide to invalidate it, the company would be seeking its planning application fee returned.
Ms Fitzpatrick yesterday requested the company to "take time to consider their position" and said there was a legal requirement for an applicant to have a significant interest in a site.
She was not in a position to make a ruling and she would report to the board. She adjourned the hearing for three weeks.
The Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
College Proteins has applied under the Strategic Infrastructure Act (SIA) to the board for permission for the development on its existing site in Nobber.
On Thursday, the ninth day of the hearing, landowner David Horgan told Oisín Collins for North East Against Incineration that the field was his and he had not been asked to sell or for permission to include it in the plans, or to allow a waste licence on it.
Mr Collins asked Pauline Fitzpatrick, the inspector chairing the hearing, to rule the application invalid.
When the hearing resumed yesterday, Suzanne Murray for College Proteins confirmed the field was owned by Mr Horgan. She said it was with adjoining fields to be used for soil depositions during the construction of the landfill.
She argued that the SIA did not give the inspector or the board the power to invalidate the application. If it did decide to invalidate it, the company would be seeking its planning application fee returned.
Ms Fitzpatrick yesterday requested the company to "take time to consider their position" and said there was a legal requirement for an applicant to have a significant interest in a site.
She was not in a position to make a ruling and she would report to the board. She adjourned the hearing for three weeks.
The Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Field mix-up halts incinerator hearing
An oral hearing into plans to build an incinerator has been adjourned after it emerged that more than five acres earmarked as part of an adjoining landfill did not belong to the company.
College Proteins had applied under the Strategic Infrastructure Act (SIA) to An Bord Pleanala for permission for the development on its existing site in Nobber, Co Meath, where it operates a rendering factory.
However, David Horgan told the ninth day of the hearing that a five-acre field included in the plans was his.
He told Thursday's sitting that he had not been asked to sell the field or asked for permission to include it in the plans.
When the hearing resumed yesterday, Ms Suzanne Murray counsel for College Proteins confirmed that the field "was owned by Mr Horgan and is not owned by College Proteins".
She said it was with adjoining fields to be used for soil depositions during the construction of the landfill.
She said that the SIA did not give the inspector or the board the power to invalidate the application. If it did decide to invalidate it, the company would seek its planning application fee to be returned.
Elaine Keogh
Irish Independent
www.buckplanning.ie
College Proteins had applied under the Strategic Infrastructure Act (SIA) to An Bord Pleanala for permission for the development on its existing site in Nobber, Co Meath, where it operates a rendering factory.
However, David Horgan told the ninth day of the hearing that a five-acre field included in the plans was his.
He told Thursday's sitting that he had not been asked to sell the field or asked for permission to include it in the plans.
When the hearing resumed yesterday, Ms Suzanne Murray counsel for College Proteins confirmed that the field "was owned by Mr Horgan and is not owned by College Proteins".
She said it was with adjoining fields to be used for soil depositions during the construction of the landfill.
She said that the SIA did not give the inspector or the board the power to invalidate the application. If it did decide to invalidate it, the company would seek its planning application fee to be returned.
Elaine Keogh
Irish Independent
www.buckplanning.ie
Friday, 2 November 2007
Delay to Cork incinerator challenge sought
Campaigners opposed to the State's first hazardous waste incinerator want to put their legal challenge to the project on hold until separate proceedings before the European Court of Justice are concluded.
The legal challenge has been initiated by local residents opposed to the planned €75 million incinerator at Ringaskiddy, Co Cork.
Counsel for the residents told the High Court yesterday that their challenge would be profoundly affected by the European Commission's decision to bring a legal action against the State to the European Court of Justice.
The commission's case is based on its formal view that Ireland has failed to properly transpose into Irish law an EC directive relating to the environmental impact assessment of public and private projects, including incinerators and projects affecting important archaeological sites such as the proposed N3 motorway near the Hill of Tara.
Among the grounds on which the Ringaskiddy residents had initially challenged the proposed incinerator development is that the same EC directive was not properly transposed.
The State, however, is opposing the application by the residents to adjourn. The hearing of the adjournment application opened yesterday before Mr Justice Patrick McCarthy at the High Court and continues today.
The State is insisting that the court is bound at this stage by a Supreme Court decision earlier this year rejecting a challenge by a Co Meath man, Eric Martin, to the development of an incinerator in Co Meath.
In this case the Supreme Court dismissed claims that the EIA directive was not properly transposed. The Supreme Court had also refused Mr Martin's request to refer to the European Court of Justice the issue of whether the directive was properly transposed.
If the European Court of Justice decides the directive was not properly given effect to, then that decision effectively nullifies the Supreme Court decision as European law takes precedence over domestic law, Michael Collins SC, for the residents, said yesterday.
In those circumstances, he asked the judge to adjourn the two sets of proceedings challenging the incinerator development until the European Court of Justice gave its decision.
The court was due yesterday to begin hearing a judicial review challenge by several local people to the incinerator development.
That action is against An Bord Pleanála and the State and arises from the board's decision on January 15th, 2004 to grant permission to Indaver NV, trading as Indaver Ireland, to construct the development.
In the second proceedings, the Ringaskiddy and District Residents Association is seeking leave from the court to bring proceedings against the Environmental Protection Agency and the State arising from that agency's decision to grant a waste licence for the development.
Earlier hearings were told that more than 20,000 people were opposing the incinerator development, which is intended to handle up to 100,000 tonnes of hazardous and non-hazardous industrial and commercial waste annually.
Mr Collins said his side had learned only last week from an Irish Times report that the European Commission had last June delivered a reasoned opinion outlining its view that Ireland was in breach of Directive 85/337 EEC as amended relating to the issuing of development consents for projects such as incinerators.
The commission took the view that the State was in breach because the system which it had established when considering such projects did not provide for an "integrated" assessment.
Mary Carolan
The Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
The legal challenge has been initiated by local residents opposed to the planned €75 million incinerator at Ringaskiddy, Co Cork.
Counsel for the residents told the High Court yesterday that their challenge would be profoundly affected by the European Commission's decision to bring a legal action against the State to the European Court of Justice.
The commission's case is based on its formal view that Ireland has failed to properly transpose into Irish law an EC directive relating to the environmental impact assessment of public and private projects, including incinerators and projects affecting important archaeological sites such as the proposed N3 motorway near the Hill of Tara.
Among the grounds on which the Ringaskiddy residents had initially challenged the proposed incinerator development is that the same EC directive was not properly transposed.
The State, however, is opposing the application by the residents to adjourn. The hearing of the adjournment application opened yesterday before Mr Justice Patrick McCarthy at the High Court and continues today.
The State is insisting that the court is bound at this stage by a Supreme Court decision earlier this year rejecting a challenge by a Co Meath man, Eric Martin, to the development of an incinerator in Co Meath.
In this case the Supreme Court dismissed claims that the EIA directive was not properly transposed. The Supreme Court had also refused Mr Martin's request to refer to the European Court of Justice the issue of whether the directive was properly transposed.
If the European Court of Justice decides the directive was not properly given effect to, then that decision effectively nullifies the Supreme Court decision as European law takes precedence over domestic law, Michael Collins SC, for the residents, said yesterday.
In those circumstances, he asked the judge to adjourn the two sets of proceedings challenging the incinerator development until the European Court of Justice gave its decision.
The court was due yesterday to begin hearing a judicial review challenge by several local people to the incinerator development.
That action is against An Bord Pleanála and the State and arises from the board's decision on January 15th, 2004 to grant permission to Indaver NV, trading as Indaver Ireland, to construct the development.
In the second proceedings, the Ringaskiddy and District Residents Association is seeking leave from the court to bring proceedings against the Environmental Protection Agency and the State arising from that agency's decision to grant a waste licence for the development.
Earlier hearings were told that more than 20,000 people were opposing the incinerator development, which is intended to handle up to 100,000 tonnes of hazardous and non-hazardous industrial and commercial waste annually.
Mr Collins said his side had learned only last week from an Irish Times report that the European Commission had last June delivered a reasoned opinion outlining its view that Ireland was in breach of Directive 85/337 EEC as amended relating to the issuing of development consents for projects such as incinerators.
The commission took the view that the State was in breach because the system which it had established when considering such projects did not provide for an "integrated" assessment.
Mary Carolan
The Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)