Aer Lingus is looking to stall plans by rival Ryanair to construct its permitted €40 million state-of-the-art four bay aircraft maintenance hangar at Dublin airport.
This follows Aer Lingus seeking leave from An Bord Pleanála to lodge a third party appeal against last month’s decision by Fingal Co Council to grant planning permission for the major investment by Ryanair which is to create over 200 jobs for engineers and mechanics.
In a separate but connected move, Aer Lingus is also seeking leave to appeal against a grant of permission by Fingal Co Council to Daa for an extension to the north apron at Dublin Airport.
Aer Lingus did not make a submission on either application when the cases were before Fingal Co Council disallowing the airline to lodge third party appeals in the usual way. Instead, Aer Lingus is applying under Section 37(6) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 to lodge appeals.
Hangar
In a three-page submission concerning the Ryanair permission, Director of Corporate Affairs at Aer Lingus, Niall Timlin has told the appeals board that the Ryanair permission results “in a material effect on the enjoyment" of Aer Lingus of its land and its value adjacent to the permitted Ryanair hangar.
Aer Lingus operates Hangar 6 at Dublin Airport and Ryanair has obtained planning permission for the nearby Hangar 7.
Mr Timlin states that if Ryanair proceed with the planning permission “Aer Lingus will be restricted in terms of aircraft leaving and entering Hangar 6 and aircraft parking on the Hangar 6 apron before and after they undergo maintenance service”.
Mr Timlin states: “This will have a profound negative impact."
Mr Timlin has told the appeals board that the roof of Hangar 7 is reduced in size in the permission granted. He states that the reduction in the roof may have a material impact on how Hangar 7 can accommodate the Boeing 737W, Max and the larger Boeing 737 Max 10 Aircraft.
Mr Timlin said that any changes in how aircraft are parked within the hangar could result in the aircraft taking longer passing to and from the new hangar and thereby increasing the bottleneck at entry to the North Apron which also serves Aer Lingus’s Hangar 6. Mr Timlin states that the neck of the narrow entrance between Hangar 6 and Hangar 7 “is a sensitive pinch point between our existing hangar and that now proposed”.
Mr Timlin states that “the use of the apron for access is critical to the orderly and efficient use of the hangar”.
He said: “The increased risk of congestion and conflict means this must be considered a material change.”
He points out that the Board under the Act must grant leave to appeal where it can be shown that a development granted planning permission differs materially from the application as set out in the original planning application due to a condition in the grant of permission and that the conditions materially affect the applicant’s enjoyment of land or reduce the value of the land.
