Application Date:______

For Office Use

Ref. No.______

Application date:______

Date of receipt. ______

Date Validated:______

APPLICATION FOR A LEASE/LICENCE/CONSENT UNDER THE FORESHORE ACT 1933 (AS AMENDED)

 Applications for Offshore renewable energy (ORE) projects should use an ORE specific form.  Please complete the form electronically. Type details in the boxes provided, space will expand as you type.  The enclosures checklist should also be completed  Tá an leagan Gaeilge den fhoirm seo ar fáil ar iarratas.

Applicant Details:

Contact Name: Mr Eamon McElroy

Company/Organisation: Dublin Port Company

Address: Port Centre, Alexandra Road, Dublin 1

Phone No: 01 887 6000

E-mail address: [email protected]

Nominated Contact/Agent (Where different from above):

Name: Ms Ruth Barr

Company: RPS

Address: Elmwood House, 74 Boucher Road, Belfast, BT12 6RZ

Phone No: +44 2890 667914

E-mail address: [email protected]

Applicant’s Legal Advisor:

Name: Beauchamps Solicitors

Address: Riverside Two, Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2

Phone No: 01 4180600

E-mail address: [email protected]

Standard application form 09th April 2013

Part 1: Proposal Details (Attach additional documents as required)

1.1 Description of proposed works/activity.

The Alexandra Basin Redevelopment (ABR) Project comprises the following main elements:

 Works at Alexandra Basin West including construction of new quays and jetties, remediation of contamination on the bed of the basin, capital dredging to deepen the basin and to achieve the specified depths of -10m Chart Datum (CD) at the new berths.

 Infilling of the Basin at Berths 52 & 53 and construction of a new river berth with a double tiered Ro-Ro ramp.

 Deepening of the fairway and approach to Dublin Port to increase the ruling depth from -7.8m CD to -10.0m CD.

 Provision of a marina protection structure along the northern boundary of Poolbeg Yacht, Boat Club and Marina.

The sediments within Alexandra Basin West were tested and found to be unsuitable for disposal at sea. These sediments will be dredged and brought ashore at Berth 52/53 where they will be treated using ex-situ stabilisation / solidification (S/S) techniques. The treated material will be recovered/recycled for use as a fill material within the Berth 52/53 basin and Graving Dock #2. The treatment and recovery process will take place in accordance with the conditions of an Industrial Emissions Licence to be obtained from the EPA.

The sediments within the Navigation Channel and fairway were tested and found to be suitable for disposal at sea. The disposal process will take place in accordance with the conditions of a Dumping at Sea Permit to be obtained from the EPA.

The full extent of the proposed development works are presented in Chapter 4 (Project Description) of Volume 1 of the ABR EIS and the Planning Drawings.

1.2 Describe the nature and scale of any structure to be erected on the foreshore. Is the structure proposed to be temporary or permanent?

Permanent structures will be placed on the foreshore. The nature and scale of these structures are shown on Drawings numbers:

IBM0569-FS-0008 Proposed General Arrangement at Alexandra Basin Sheet 1 IBM0569-FS-0009 Proposed General Arrangement at Alexandra Basin Sheet 2 IBM0569-FS-0010 Proposed General Arrangement at Alexandra Basin Sheet 3 IBM0569-FS-0011 Proposed General Arrangement at New Berth 52 IBM0569-FS-0012 Proposed Sections at Alexandra Basin Sheet 1 IBM0569-FS-0013 Proposed Sections at Alexandra Basin Sheet 2 IBM0569-FS-0014 Proposed Sections at New Berth 52 IBM0569-FS-0015 Proposed Marina Layout and Section IBM0569-FS-0016 Proposed Channel Works at New Berth 52 and Great South Wall IBM0569-FS-0017 Channel Works at New Berth 52 and Great South Wall Typical Sections IBM0569-FS-0019 Foreshore Reclamation Alexandra Basin IBM0569-FS-0020 Foreshore Reclamation Berth 52

1.3 Indicative timing of the works/activity: (i) Start date (ii) Duration (iii) Any other information relevant to timing.

The proposed timescales involved for the project are outlined in the project construction programme which is provided in Appendix 4 of Volume 2 of the EIS. The indicative start date for the project is Quarter 3, 2015. The duration of the construction period is six years.

1.4 Primary usage for proposed development (please tick)

Use Industrial

Commercial √

Within Fishery Harbour Centre Sea Fisheries Local Authority Community/Co Op scheme Other(specify)

1.5 Do the proposed works provide for public use, commercial use, restricted use or strictly private use? Provide Details

The ABR project is the first phase of works to be advanced from the Dublin Port Masterplan 2012 – 2040. The works are required to make timely provision for the anticipated growth in volumes of both cargo and passengers, including cruise liners.

The proposed works are for commercial use and for the restricted use by ferry and cruise passengers.

1.6 Might the proposed works restrict public use/enjoyment of the foreshore? Provide details.

There will be no change to the use made of the foreshore by the public as a result of the works (see responses to Section 6 Navigational Safety Considerations)

1.7 Has the applicant held or does the applicant hold any previous Foreshore Licences, Leases or applications over the area sought or over any other area including pending applications? (Give details including Department’s file reference number(s)).

There are a number of foreshore licenses granted to Dublin Port Company. The reference numbers are as follows:

MS/51/4/481A Construction of seawater pumping platform

MS51/4/473 Extending, constructing and maintaining a berth and quays at Berth 50 in Dublin Port

MS51/4/481 Infilling of Graving Dock No. 1 and adjacent area in Dublin Port

Dublin Port Company currently have an application lodged with DoECLG for maintenance dredging in the navigation channel and selected berthing pockets. This application was lodged in March 2015 and the reference number is FS006495.

1.8 Status of planning permission application: Granted

Consent Authority: An Bord Pleanála Reference Number: PL29N.PA0034

(Please provide copies of consents granted)

A copy of the consent is appended

1.9 Are any other consents required for this proposal? Please detail.

Consent type Dumping at Sea Permit Consent Authority: EPA Reference Number: not yet available Status of application: Submission to the EPA will be made in July 2015

Consent type IED License Consent Authority: EPA Reference Number: not yet available Status of application: Submission to the EPA will be made in July 2015

(Please provide copies of consents granted)

1.10 Employment Implications (if any)

The ABR Project will have a significant community benefit through the creation of new employment in both the construction and operational phases of the development. An economic assessment of the Project detailed in Chapter 13 of Volume 1 of the EIS (Tables 13.6 – 13.10) estimates that the ABR Project will have the following benefits during construction:

 375 workers will be employed on the project during the various phases of development.

 Gross wages generated from employment on the Project will be €22.8m with Labour Tax payments to the Exchequer of €5.78m.

 A conservative income multiplier effect of 2 means that there should be an injection of €34.2m into the wider community.

Once operational, the development works proposed under the ABR Project will help to secure existing employment in Dublin Port and provide opportunities for further employment associated with a continued growth in trade. Dublin Port Company currently employs more than 140 people directly. A further 4,000 people are employed within the Dublin Port Estate

The potential for the growth of cruise tourism as indicated in Figure 13.5 of Chapter 13 of Volume 1 of the EIS indicates real potential for this growing area to generate significant additional economic impacts, rising from €45m in 2013 to €515m in 2043.

There will however be an unavoidable loss of circa 26 jobs associated with ship repairs as a result of the closure of Graving Dock #2 within Alexandra Basin West.

1.11 Capital cost of proposed works € - Euro – 200 million

1.12 Do the proposed works involve the draw down of European Union or State funding? If “Yes” give details, including any time restrictions, etc. applying

The strength of Dublin Port Companies financial position ensures that it is well placed to meet the objective of providing port capacity without recourse to Exchequer funding. The proposed ABR Project will deliver essential additional capacity directly to the heart of the largest market on the island and will be financed in full by Dublin Port Company from its own resources.

Dublin Port Company nevertheless made an application for additional European Union grant aid under the “Connecting Europe Facility” (TEN-T) programme in Quarter 1, 2015.

Part 2: Proposed Site. (Attach additional documents as required)

2.1 County: Dublin

2.2 Location name and nearest townland name:

The location name is Dublin Port. There are two adjoining townlands: North Dock B and Pembroke East A.

2.3 Geographic co-ordinates of the area under application in degrees minutes and seconds WGS84 for offshore developments and where the area can also be identified on the Ordnance Survey map and /or is connected to the seashore/mainland , specify Ordnance Survey map no and Irish National Grid co-ordinates

Co-ordinates to Irish National Grid, as shown on Drawing number IBM0569-FS- 0018

Alexandra Basin West A1 E 318296.6 N 234392.6 A2 E 318328.6 N 234640.9 A3 E 318857.7 N 234611.0 A4 E 319091.0 N 234267.3

New Berth 52 B1 E 320373.7 N 234265.9 B2 E 320359.6 N 234627.0 B3 E 320485.9 N 234630.8 B4 E 320554.3 N 234315.3

Navigation Channel C1 E 318111.0 N 234355.1 C2 E 318108.2 N 234274.5 C3 E 323286.0 N 234274.4 C4 E 323190.7 N 234024.0 C5 E 328429.6 N 233731.3 C6 E 327276.6 N 232522.1

Burford Bank Dumpsite D1 E 329949.6 N 233330.7 D2 E 331259.2 N 233366.7 D3 E 331305.3 N 231697.8 D4 E 330317.1 N 231670.6 D5 E 329984.5 N 232051.2

2.4 Please indicate the size of the Foreshore area (Ha) or (M2) or (KM2)

Area shown on drawing IBM0569-FS-0001.

Alexandra Basin West, New Berth 52 & Channel = 4,956,516m2 (496Ha)

Dump Site at Burford Bank = 2,124,962m2 (212Ha)

Total Foreshore Area under this application = 7,081,478m2 (708Ha)

2.5 If offshore please indicate distance from shore (Km):

Great South Wall to Entrance to Navigation Channel: Approx 5.2km Great South Wall to Dumpsite at Burford Bank: Approx. 6.8km

2.6 Is any of the foreshore in the proposed site in private ownership? If yes please provide documentary evidence of same (e.g. folio)

Yes. Refer to drawing IBM0569-FS-0005 which shows the proposed development overlaid on Dublin Port Company land lease areas.

Drawings IBM0569-FS-0021 & IBM0569-FS-0022 show the area of the footprint of the proposed works on the foreshore, overlaid on the ownership map.

2.7 Any other site details considered relevant:

All other relevant site details are included in the EIS and supporting documentation and drawings, e.g. proximity of site to environmentally sensitive areas.

Part 3. Maps and Drawings, Please refer to Guidance on map and drawing requirements.

3.1 Site location map attached? Please include reference no(s).

Yes. Please refer to drawing numbers:

IBM0569-FS-0001 Overall Site Layout on A3 IBM0569-FS-0002 Site Location Maps IBM0569-FS-0003 Site Location at Alexandra Basin West IBM0569-FS-0004 Site Location at New Berth 52 IBM0569-FS-0018 Site Location Plan with Co-ordinates

3.2 Foreshore Lease/Licence map attached? Please include reference no(s).

Yes. Please refer to drawing numbers:

3.3 Drawings of structures to be used and or layout (if required) attached? Please detail and include reference no(s).

Yes. Please refer to the following drawings:

IBM0569-FS-0008 Proposed General Arrangement at Alexandra Basin West Sheet 1 IBM0569-FS-0009 Proposed General Arrangement at Alexandra Basin West Sheet 2 IBM0569-FS-0010 Proposed General Arrangement at Alexandra Basin West Sheet 3 IBM0569-FS-0011 Proposed General Arrangement at New Berth 52 IBM0569-FS-0012 Proposed Sections at Alexandra Basin West Sheet 1 IBM0569-FS-0013 Proposed Sections at Alexandra Basin West Sheet 2 IBM0569-FS-0014 Proposed Sections at New Berth 52 IBM0569-FS-0015 Proposed Marina Layout and Section IBM0569-FS-0016 Proposed Channel Works at New Berth 52 and Great South Wall IBM0569-FS-0017 Channel Works at New Berth 52 and Great South Wall Typical Sections

3.4 Admiralty Chart attached?

Yes. Please refer to drawing IBM0569-FS-0002

3.5 Other maps/drawings attached ?– please detail and include reference numbers

Yes. Drawings IBM0569-FS-0006 and IBM0569-FS-0007 refer to the proposed demolition works which will alter the foreshore footprint of the port.

Part 4: Pre- application consultations

4.1 Describe briefly any consultations undertaken with the following bodies.

 National Parks & Wildlife Service (NPWS)  National Monuments Service (NMS) of Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht  Inland Fisheries Ireland  Sea Fisheries Protection Authority  Marine Institute  Marine Survey Office

Please also provide copies of correspondence.

Details of the consultation process carried out as part of the ABR Project are documented in Chapter 2 of Volume 1 of the EIS. Copies of correspondence are appended.

National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS)

A letter and information pack on the proposed ABR project was sent to the Development Applications Unit of DAHG at the outset of the ABR Environmental Impact Appraisal process.

Two letters of response were received from NPWS dated 23rd May 2013 and 15th July 2013.

Meetings were also held with NPWS on 14th August 2013 and 8th November 2013.

NPWS submitted an observation to An Bord Pleanála with respect to the Planning Application for the ABR project, letter dated 7th May 2014.

NPWS submitted a second observation to An Bord Pleanála in response to the submission to the Request for Further Information (RFI), letter dated 24th September 2014.

NPWS participated at the Oral Hearing and agreed Mitigation Measures for the protection of Marine Mammals.

National Monuments Services (NMS) of Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht

A letter and information pack on the proposed ABR project was sent to the Development Applications Unit of DAHG at the outset of the ABR Environmental Impact Appraisal process.

A letter of response was received from the Underwater Archaeological Unit, National Monuments Services, DAHG dated 14th May 2013.

Meetings were also held with representatives of the Underwater Archaeological Unit, National Monuments Services of DAHG and the Architectural Heritage Advisory Unit of DAHG on 10th July 2013 and 6th November 2013. Dublin City Council were also represented at the meeting on 10th July 2013.

The National Monuments Services and the Architectural Advisory Unit of DAHG submitted an observation to An Bord Pleanála with respect to the Planning Application for the ABR project, letter dated 7th May 2014.

The Architectural Advisory Unit of DAHG also participated at the Oral Hearing.

Inland Fisheries Ireland

A letter and information pack on the proposed ABR project was sent to Inland Fisheries Ireland (IFI) at the outset of the ABR Environmental Impact Appraisal process.

The following IFI personnel were also consulted during the preparation of the EIS:

Dr Willie Roche regarding salmonids in the Liffey, Dodder and Tolka Rivers; Dr Jimmy King regarding lamprey in the Liffey; and Dr Des Chew regarding recreational angling.

IFI submitted an observation to An Bord Pleanála with respect to the Planning Application for the ABR project, email dated 7th May 2014.

Sea Fisheries Protection Authority

The Sea Fisheries Protection Authority (Howth Office) were consulted during the preparation of the EIS regarding commercial fishing within the general Dublin Bay area including the proposed offshore disposal site to the west of the Burford Bank.

Marine Institute

The Marine Institute were consulted during the preparation of the EIS regarding the programme of sediment quality sampling and analysis. Email correspondence from Marine Institute is included in the attachment.

Marine Survey Office

No consultation took place pre-application with the Marine Survey Office.

Dublin Port Company maintain detailed hydrographic information of the navigation channel and the general Dublin Bay area.

4.2 Describe briefly any consultations undertaken with other relevant authorities (e.g. Local Authority, port/harbour authority etc) or State Agencies.

Details of the consultation process carried out as part of the ABR EIA are documented in Chapter 2 of Volume 1 of the EIS.

A letter and information pack on the proposed ABR project was sent to the relevant Local Authority, Dublin City Council at the outset of the ABR Environmental Impact Appraisal process.

A letter of response was received from Dublin City Council dated 14th May 2013.

A series of meetings were held with Dublin City Council in their role as the Planning Authority.

Dublin City Council submitted a Planning Authority Report to An Bord Pleanála with respect to the Planning Application for the ABR project.

Dublin City Council also participated at the Oral Hearing.

4.3 Describe any consultations undertaken to date with other foreshore users.

Consultations took place with the following organisations:

 Poolbeg Yacht Club (2nd May 2014 and 26th June 2014)  Rowing Clubs (10th June 2014, 14th June 2014 and 18th June 2014)  Irish Nautical Trust (28th February 2014 and 4th May 2014)  Sail Training Ireland (18th June 2014)  Poolbeg Training Rinn Voyager (12th August 2014 and 9th September 2014)  Irish Underwater Council (14th April 2014)  Seatruck (30th April 2014, 4th June 2014 and 28th August 2014)  P&O (17th April 2014 and 25th September 2014)  Irish Ferries (19th March 2014)  Dublin Ferryport Terminals (21st February 2014)  Stena Line (12th April 2014)

4.4 Describe any likely interactions with activities of the public or other foreshore users during the construction and operational phases of the works/activities (e.g. fishing, aquaculture, sailing, and surfing swimming, walking). Describe any measures proposed to minimise inconvenience to other users.

The proposed development is taken place almost entirely within the confines of Dublin Port and the existing navigation channel. Dublin Port is a working port with restrictions already in place regarding what activities can take place within its jurisdiction. Fishing or aquaculture does not take place within Dublin Port. There are existing agreements in place already for the control of small vessels within Dublin Port, “Dublin Bay Guidance Notes on Leisure Craft”.

4.5 Have adjacent land owners, whose properties may be affected by these works been consulted? Please provide details/permissions as appropriate.

An extensive programme of public consultation was undertaken during the planning process, details of which are provided in Section 2.3.2 of Chapter 2 of Volume 1 of the EIS.

Public consultation included:

 Publication of a community newsletter circulated to over 40,000 homes in the areas adjacent to Dublin Port;

 Briefing local public representatives;

 Meetings with local community groups;

 Provision of a dedicated website; and

 An extensive media campaign to publicise the ABR Project which secured wide coverage in national and local print, electronic and online media outlets.

An Bord Pleanála received observations with respect to the Planning Application for the ABR project from the following groups/individuals:

 Dublin Bay Watch  The Irish Underwater Council  Coastguard Station Residents Group  Clontarf Residents Association  Sandymount and Merrion Residents Association  Peadar Farrell  Donna Clooney

All the above groups/individuals participated at the Oral Hearing.

Part 5: Environmental Considerations (your consultations with National Parks and Wildlife Service and National Monuments Service may inform your answers. Attach additional reports as required and mark under the R column)

www.epa.ie/downloads/advice/ea/guidelines/

www.environ.ie/en/DevelopmentHousing/PlanningDevelopment/EnvironmentalAss essment/

http://www.npws.ie/protectedsites/appropriateassessment/

http://webgis.npws.ie/npwsviewer/

Environmental legislative requirements Yes No R

5.1 Is an Environmental Impact Statement required for this X X proposal?

An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required for the ABR Project. The EIS (4 volumes) is included with this application.

5.2 Is a Natura Impact Statement required for this proposal? X X A Natural Impact Statement is required for the ABR project. The Habitats Directive Assessment Natura Impact Statement (NIS) is included with this application.

5.3 Is the area within or adjacent to a NHA, pNHA, SAC, SPA, or National Park? Specify site names and code(s).

Yes, the list of Natura 2000 sites within the study area are X X presented in Table 2.1 of the NIS.

An Appropriate Assessment screening exercise identified 5 Natura 2000 sites which could potentially be affected by the ABR Project:

 North Dublin Bay cSAC (site code:000206)

 South Dublin Bay cSAC (site code:000210)

 Rockabill to Dalkey Island cSAC (site code:003000)

 North Bull Island SPA (site code:004006)

 South Dublin Bay & Tolka Estuary SPA (site code:004024)

A Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment was undertaken with respect to the above 5 sites. The results of the appraisal are presented in the NIS which is included with this application.

5.4 Describe any other projects or plans for the area, anticipated or developed, that in combination with this proposal, may have a significant effect on a Natura 2000 site: Please list with planning reference numbers (where available).

An appraisal of other projects, plans or programmes in the X general vicinity of the ABR Project was undertaken during the preparation of the EIS, in order to assess in-combination effects / cumulative impacts. This assessment was also undertaken within the scope of the Natura Impact Statement. Further detail is provided in the witness statement of Dr Alan Barr.

Of note, the evaluation of in-combination effects included the proposed Dublin Eastern Bypass, ESB’s proposed 220kV replacement cable crossing of the River Liffey, the proposed Dublin Array (offshore wind farm) and the Ringsend Waste Water Treatment Plant upgrade including a proposed 9km long sea outfall.

Dublin Eastern By-pass

The Dublin Eastern By-pass concept is a possible future urban motorway to connect the existing Dublin Port Tunnel to the M50 in the Sandyford area to achieve an orbital road network around Dublin.

The ABR Project has been designed to ensure that it will not compromise any potential corridor running along the port boundary in line with the existing East Quay Wall and the East-Link Bridge. Indeed, a 55m exclusion zone along the North Wall Quay Extension from the East-Link Bridge has been incorporated into the design of the ABR Project.

Dublin Array

This proposed development comprises the construction of up to 145 offshore wind turbines on the Kish and Bray Banks.

The key issue is the potential cumulative impact of the ABR Project and noise generated from piling the foundations of the wind tubines in relatively deep water with respect to harbour porpoise. The underwater noise assessment presented in Appendix A of the response to the RFI demonstrates that the ABR Project will have no significant impact on underwater noise within the Rockabill to Dalkey cSAC and it can therefore be concluded that there will be no cumulative noise impact.

Ringsend Waste Water Treatment Plant upgrade including a proposed 9km long sea outfall

The implications of the ABR Project on the Dublin Sewage Outfall discharge plume was assessed and found to have no perceptible impact (see response to Issue 10.4 in the Response to the Request for Further Information).

Irish Water released a statement on 12 May 2014 to confirm that the proposed Ringsend long sea outfall was cancelled.

Poolbeg Waste to Energy Plant

The proposed Waste to Energy Plant is land-based, located on the Poolbeg peninsula. The cooling water system will however result in a localised increase in temperature of the receiving waters. The ABR Project’s capital dredging scheme is not expected to significantly alter the flow characteristics at the location of the outfall. The in-combination effect of the thermal plume and the capital dredging scheme is therefore expected to be imperceptible/

The potential for cumulative air quality impacts from the shipping operations in combination with emissions from the Waste to Energy Plant were also examined. The maximum in combination emissions were predicted to be below the relevant limits for the protection of human health and the cumulative impact is therefore not expected to be significant.

ESB 220kV replacement cable crossing of the River X Liffey

The ABR Project requires the demolition of the end of the North Wall Quay Extension. This in turn will require the diversion of existing services from the area of the quay to be demolished including a 220kV cable crossing of the River Liffey. Discussions among ESB, Eirgrid and Dublin Port Company concluded that the laying of the replacement 220kV cable will be a separate ESB Project.

A detailed assessment of the cumulative impact of the replacement cable is provided in the Revisions to Environmental Impact Statement (April 2015) and Revisions to Natura Impact Statement (April 2015) which were submitted to An Bord Pleanála in response to the Board’s second request for Further Information.

The detailed assessment shows that the in-combination effect of the ESB 220kV replacement cable and the ABR Project is expected to be imperceptible.

Environmental Considerations Yes No R

5.5 Will the proposal have any potential environmental impacts? If yes, please describe

An environment appraisal was undertaken of the potential X X impact of the ABR Project on the following:

 Flora & Fauna (Birds, Marine Mammals, Terrestrial Ecology, Benthic Ecology & Fisheries)  Landscape & Visual  Air & Climate (Noise & Vibration, air quality & climate)  Material Assets (Transportation, Services  Coastal Processes  Water (including Flood Risk)  Geology & Soils  Cultural Heritage (Underwater Archaeology, Industrial Heritage)  Human Beings

The environmental appraisals are documented in the accompanying EIS and NIS.

5.6 Are you proposing any measures to mitigate the potential environmental impacts? If yes, please describe

Mitigation Measures are proposed within the EIS and NIS. X X The mitigation measures are summarised in Table 2.1 of the Draft High Level Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) which accompanies this application.

Mitigation Measures with respect to Marine Mammals were agreed by NPWS at the Oral Hearing. These mitigation measures are also appended (refer to item 21 in the Document, Oral Hearing – Relevant Information).

5.7 Are there public health/safety implications arising from the proposed works? (e.g. effluent disposal, removal of derelict or dangerous structures etc.) If yes, please describe

In order to facilitate the Alexandra Basin Redevelopment, X X the dismantling and removal of some infrastructure is required. The type and location of the infrastructure to be removed is provided in Figures 4.8 and 4.9 of Chapter 4 of Volume 1 of the EIS. An Asbestos Survey was undertaken of the buildings and structures to be demolished. The report on this survey is provided in Appendix 4 of Volume 2 of the EIS.

There will be a requirement to reconfigure the stormwater drainage systems within the area of redevelopment. Details of this are provided in Section 4.1.5 of Chapter 4 of Volume 1 of the EIS.

There will be effluent (latent water) arising during the stabilisation and treatment of contaminated dredged material from Alexandra Basin West. The latent water will be treated appropriately and discharged via a designated discharge point in accordance with the appropriate consents. The treatment and stabilisation of the dredged material from Alexandra Basin West will be subject to conditions of an EPA IED License. Details on the water treatment processes involved for latent water are provided in 11.2.4 of Chapter 11 of Volume 1 of the EIS.

5.8 Will the works involve the storage and/or disposal of waste? If “Yes” please give details of the type of waste and the proposed method of storage and/or disposal (including location)

The redevelopment of Alexandra Basin West will include X X construction of new quays and jetties and capital dredging to deepen the basin to achieve a depth of -10m CD. The dredging will involve removal of circa 0.47 million cubic metres of mainly silty material from the Alexandra Basin West.

A suite of sampling and environmental testing has been undertaken to quantify and identify the nature of the contamination within the bed materials of Alexandra Basin West. The location of the sediment samples and the determinants to be tested were specified by the Marine Institute. This material is unsuitable for disposal at sea.

Dredging operations have been designed to minimise the disturbance and escape of this material at the seabed and during removal through the water column. A floating pontoon with an excavator mounted clamshell bucket adapted for environmental dredging will be used. A silt curtain will also be placed around the dredger as a further measure to contain the marine sediments. This method of dredging will serve to minimize the spread of suspended contaminated sediments beyond the dredge foot print. A contingency bubble curtain will also be installed across the entrance to Alexandra Basin West. This bubble curtain will be utilised in the event of a breach of the silt curtain around the dredger.

The dredged material recovered from Alexandra Basin West will be transported by barge to a treatment facility adjacent to Berth 52/53. It will be stabilised and modified to improve the engineering properties of the material to allow its re-use as fill material. In order to minimise the stockpiling of dredged material, the rate of dredging will be determined by the rate of treatment of the dredged material.

The treatment and recovery of the dredging spoil on site will take place in accordance with the conditions of an Industrial Emissions Licence (IED) to be obtained from the EPA. Following treatment the material will be placed in Graving Dock #2 and Berths 52/53 as a recovery activity, replacing the need to use virgin materials that would otherwise be required for the development.

The treatment process is addressed in Section 11.2.4 of Volume 1 of the EIS and in Appendix 11 of Volume 2 of the EIS.

5.9 Other Environmental Considerations? If yes, please specify.

All relevant environmental considerations have been X X assessed in the EIS and NIS produced for the ABR project.

The EIS and NIS are included as part of this application.

Yes No R Built Heritage Considerations

5.10 Does the area contain an archaeological site or feature? If yes, please specify.

Dublin Port is of cultural significance as a deep water port. A X X full list of archaeological, architectural and industrial heritage sites within and in proximity to the ABR Project is presented in Chapter 12 of Volume 1 of the EIS (Table 12.3).

There are two features which are of industrial heritage importance which lie within the footprint of the ABR Project:

 North Wall Quay Extension  Graving Dock #1

5.11 Does the area contain or adjoin a listed archaeological site or monument? If yes, please specify.

There are no recorded monuments in the RMP (Record of X Monument and Places) or in the Dublin City Record of Protected Structures within the Study Area.

5.12 Will the proposal have any potential impacts on the archaeological integrity of the site? If yes please describe

The potential impacts on the archaeological integrity of the X X site are described in detail in Chapter 12 of Volume 1 of the EIS (Table 12.6).

Alterations are required to the North Wall Quay Extension comprising the construction of a new quay wall outside the existing wall on the Liffey frontage, the shortening of the overall length and a reconfiguration to provide accommodation for larger ships on the Alexandra Basin side by narrowing the quay.

5.13 Are you proposing any measures to mitigate potential archaeological impacts? If yes, please describe?

A Conservation Strategy, including mitigation measures, has X X been developed for the ABR Project and accompanies this application. Mitigation measures with respect to the North Wall Quay Extension include:

 Best practice recording using 3D laser technology;

 A policy of penetration by conservation zones ensuring legibility of the original construction;

 Mitigation measures for interpreting the achievement in construction of Stoney’s original 1875 quay rather than the artefact of the concrete foundation blocks through an Architecturally innovative interpretation scheme; and

 A salvage policy for the large stock of Dalkey granite not only for the ABR Project but also for other worthy conservation projects as advised by the conservation authorities.

Graving Dock #1 will be reopened as part of a heritage gain.

Part 6: Navigational Safety Considerations. (Your consultations with relevant stakeholders may inform your answers. Attach additional documents as required and mark under the R column)

Navigational Safety Considerations. Yes No R

6.1 Are there public navigational safety implications arising from the proposed works?

Dublin Bay, the approaches to the port and the shipping X channel are monitored at all times by Vessel Traffic Services (VTS). All vessels are advised regarding works, developments or issues that are ongoing in the Dublin Port area of jurisdiction. Prior to any dredging a DPC “Notice to Mariners” is sent out to all shipping informing them about the planned work and dates. During the dredging operation the traffic is supervised and controlled.

6.2 What marine activity is there in the area?

Dublin Bay is very busy with marine leisure events and small craft movements especially during the summer months. Agreement was reached with all the sailing and motor clubs how best to co-exist. To that end the commercial shipping channels, access routes and anchorage areas are well defined and kept clear. The organised leisure industry operates within the confines of the areas agreed for their events. Individual craft must operate within the international maritime legislation governing all vessels big and small.

6.3 How will the marine activity be affected by the proposed works?

Marine activity will be able to operate with little or no disruption as the dredging operation will be subservient to the demands of commercial movements. The leisure craft are not normally allowed to operate within the confines of the main approach channel. As the dredging only happens within the channel there should be no effect. When small craft are entering or leaving the port they must do so under the control of VTS. Therefore they will be well informed and aware of any dredging operations and of their requirements to stay clear. Again this is in compliance with International Legislation.

6.4 What mitigating measures will be put in place?

As discussed in the response to question 6.3, the Harbour Master will issue a Notice to Mariners specifying in detail the areas to be dredged and the requirements for all craft, not directly involved with the dredging operation to keep clear. In relation to commercial traffic they will be coordinated and controlled by VTS who will be in communication with all involved.

6.5 How will the proposed works affect Marine Navigation in the future?

Dredging ensures that the access into the port is maintained and therefore ensures the safe passage of vessels into and from the port. When the channel is deepened it opens up the times at which ships with deeper draft may or may not enter, (tidal dependency). The buoyage defining the navigation routes will remain substantially the same. The efficiency of the channel would be greatly increased.

Part 7: Fishing/Aquaculture considerations (your consultations with IFI, SFPA, DAFM may inform your answers. Attach additional documents as required and mark under the R column)

Fishing/Aquaculture considerations Yes No R

7.1 Is the proposal located in proximity to any of the following:  aquaculture operation  designated Shellfish Growing Waters  fish spawning ground  other sensitive fisheries location

Please Illustrate on appropriate chart including distance in Km.

A detailed assessment of fishing/aquaculture considerations X X is presented in Section 5.4.5 of Chapter 5, Volume 1 of the EIS

There are no aquaculture operations or designated shellfish growing waters in the vicinity of the proposed works.

The western Irish Sea including the waters off Dublin Bay contain spawning and nursery grounds for a number of commercial and conservation species. The River Liffey has large stretches of salmonid habitat throughout its course including spawning, feeding and holding areas for salmon, brown trout and sea trout. Two other rivers which flow through Dublin and drain into Dublin Bay also have populations of salmon and sea trout, although much smaller than the Liffey. Sea lamprey were recorded in the Liffey in the past, but there do not appear to be any recent records. Juvenile lamprey (brook or river) have been observed in recent surveys of the Liffey and its tributaries.

7.2 Are there other potential impacts of the proposal on fishing/aquaculture in the area? If yes, please describe.

As set out in detail in the EIS (see, for example, Section 5.4.8), X X the ABR Project will result in the loss of a relatively small area of subtidal benthos from the inner parts of Dublin Bay. These areas consist primarily of sandy muds and muds dominated by highly opportunistic fauna. The net loss is circa 1.5ha which is considered negligible in the context of the Lower Estuary of the Liffey.

The 6-year dredging operation will result in the removal of macroinvertebrate infauna within the surface sediments of the channel areas being dredged as well as a sizeable portion of the mobile epifauna, including juvenile fish, within the dredge footprint and immediate adjacent areas. In addition, increased rates of sedimentation in areas immediately adjoining the dredged footprint will lead to a localised reduction in macroinvertebrate diversity and biomass. However, re- colonisation in these areas is expected to be rapid, as the areas will not have been subjected to actual sediment removal. The fact that the area to be dredged will be apportioned more or less evenly over a 6-year period will ensure that the impact on the wider populations of benthic invertebrates and fish species affected will not be significant. Recovery of each annual dredge area will begin as soon as the dredging will have ceased in that section and be expected to have largely been reached within 2 to 3 years. The disturbance through dredging of 0.25% of the cSAC at the very outer end of the shipping channel is considered to be minor, as it is expected that recovery of the benthic community to pre-dredge levels will occur rapidly after cessation of dredging. Furthermore, given the temporary nature of this impact affecting 0.25% of the area of the cSAC, the designated site will be maintained at a favourable conservation status in circumstances where the constitutive characteristics of the cSAC will be preserved. It is also important to point out that the small area of benthic habitat within the cSAC that will be affected by the dredging is not listed in the Conservation Objectives of the cSAC. The only benthic habitat listed is Reefs (an Annex 1 habitat), and the nearest one to the dredged channel is the intertidal rocky shore along the southern side of Howth Head, i.e. more than 2km to the north. This latter area will not be impacted by the dredging. All species identified as occurring in the area to be dredged are typical of Irish coastal waters. No rare or protected species were identified in the present survey.

As part of the mitigation measures to reduce the evolution of solids from the inner part of the shipping channel where there are some slightly to moderately contaminated sediments present, it has been decided to use a back-hoe dredger rather than a trailer suction dredger. This will therefore eliminate the possibility of entrainment of outward migrating smolts or inward migrating river lamprey by the dredging process in this narrower section of the channel. Some returning adult salmon will overlap with the dredging (i.e. during October), however their larger size and strong homing instinct will take them through the active dredging areas, regardless of the timing of operations.

7.2 contd It is expected that the main impacts associated with the deposition of approximately 1,000,000m3 of sediment annually over a six year period will be mainly confined to the footprint of the disposal area. The nature of the sediment to remain (primarily sands) will mean recovery of the sediments will commence immediately and occur rapidly. The disposal area is an active disposal site, and as such the benthic communities are adapted to periodic disturbance and contain communities in a continuous state of recovery. Full recovery at the site is not expected to occur until the full six year campaign is completed. The residual impacts associated with this campaign are considered to be moderate, but localised and typified by reduced diversity and biomass of benthic macroinvertebrates and to a lesser extent mobile epibenthos including crustaceans and fish. The far- field deposition of up to 0.3 g m-2 of fine sediments within Dublin Bay is expected to have no residual impact.

Provided the recommendations for non-piling windows indicated in the EIS are adopted, then no significant impacts will occur to Annex II fish species from pile driving noise.

7.3 Are there any measures proposed to mitigate potential impacts on fisheries or aquaculture? If yes, please describe.

Mitigation Measures are proposed within the EIS with respect to X X fisheries, see Section 5.4.7 of Chapter 5 of Volume 1 of the EIS.

The overarching consideration to minimize the environmental impact on the marine environment, notably smolt migration, tern feeding and the recovery of benthic is to undertake the capital dredging works over a six year period during the winter months only (October to March).

Furthermore, no piling will take place along the Liffey channel during the three months of the year when smolts are likely to run in their highest numbers (March to May inclusive)

Part 8 – Additional information

8.1 Please detail any additional relevant information.

The following documents are submitted with the foreshore application for the ABR Project:

 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (4 Volumes)  Habitats Directive Assessment Natura Impact Statement (NIS)  Planning Report and Appendices (including Conservation Strategy)  Summary of Consultation Responses  Response to Request for Further Information (  Draft High Level Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)  Oral Hearing - Witness Statements  Oral Hearing – other relevant information  Further Information in accordance with Section 37F (1) Revisions to Environmental Impact Statement (April 2015)  Further Information in accordance with Section 37F (1) Revisions to Natura Impact Statement (April 2015)  An Bord Pleanála Planning Consent including Conditions and Inspector’s Report

Declaration and Consent:

The details provided here are correct to the best of my knowledge.

I understand that no works will be commenced, by me or my agents on the proposed site, without the prior written consent of the Minister.

I agree that on completion of the works, all environmental data that is not commercially-sensitive shall be provided within a reasonable timeframe to the Marine Institute; the format and timeframe to be agreed with the Marine Institute. I understand that the Marine Institute may make this information available to individuals and organisations in line with its data access policy.

I give consent to the Minister and his servants to copy this application and to make it available for inspection and copying by the public. This consent relates to this application, to any further information, or submission provided by me or on my behalf and to the publication of the licence document.

Signed for and on behalf of the applicant:

______

Name of above Signatory (block letters):

__Ruth Barr______

Position Held:

__Senior Associate Director______

Date 01/07/15______

Return completed applications to:

Foreshore Unit Marine Planning and Foreshore Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government Newtown Road Wexford

Enquiries to: [email protected] (Other contact details to be included in Guidance materials) Email a copy of application documents: [email protected]

Enclosures Checklist

One hard copy of every document is required unless otherwise stated. Electronic versions of documentation must also be provided in searchable PDF format (no single file to be greater than 30mb) so that the Department can make them available on its website.

Item Description No. of copies No. Required 1 Application Form. 4 With original signature

2 Mapping (see guidelines document) (i) Site Location map 4 (ii)Foreshore Lease/licence map 4

3 British Admiralty Chart (largest available scale) 1

4 Drawings of the structures to be used and/or layout 4

5 Pre-application correspondence with stakeholders. 1

6 Other statutory permissions: (i) Planning permission 1 (ii) Effluent Discharge Licence 1 (iii) Other consent (Please specify) 1

7 Company documentation (1): 1 Certified copy of the Company’s Memorandum and Articles of Association

8 Company documentation (2) 1 Certificate of Incorporation of a Limited Liability, or Company/Rule Book/Constitution for a Club or Co- Operative Society as appropriate

9 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). (i) Hard copy 5 (ii) CDs 50

10 Natura Impact Statement (NIS) 5 11 Property-related owner permissions/wayleaves (i) Folio – (or other evidence of private ownership) 2 (ii) Wayleave/consent from other property owners 1 (iii) Other (Please specify) 1

12 Other – Please specify

Planning Report and Appendices (including Conservation 1 Strategy) 1 Summary of Consultation Responses

Response to Request for Further Information 1

Draft High Level Construction Environmental Management 1 Plan (CEMP)

Oral Hearing - Witness Statements 1

Oral Hearing – other relevant information 1

Further Information in accordance with Section 37F(1) – 1 Revisions to Environmental Impact Statement (April 2015)

Further Information in accordance with Section 37F(1) – 1 Revisions to Natura Impact Statement (April 2015)

An Bord Pleanála Planning Consent including Conditions 1 and Inspector’s Report