Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

16/34 cannot be used in combination with the parallels for exactly the same reason I set out above.

Also, 05/23 closed in 1989, when the (now) 28L/10R opened and annual passenger numbers were around 5m. (It takes around 6 weeks in summer to exceed 5m now). 29/11 closed in 2007. That’s what happens in airport development, and was envisaged in 1969. All the land for the north parallel runway was owned by the airport. That’s Long Range planning. There’s no hankering back to the old layout of a triangle of grass runways from the 1930s Those days are long gone.

only if it has a rail link to go with it

All of North County Dublin is very good soil, yet there are massive housing projects still being built. Its historically the vegetable garden for Dublin.

Corballis house wasn't as historic as they thought, once they took it apart. I'm sure the Boot Inn will get preserved.

Also what is the point of posting on a discussion forum if you just want a one way dialogue? It's not discussion, it's just talking to yourself.

Correctly? It’s part of our heritage.

I apologise if I seem passionate about this, but I do have an interest in archaeology and conservation of historic structures, and I know it’s a slippery slope if you condemn one historic building just because of infrastructure needs.

Where do you stop? Demolish the GPO to build apartments? Bulldoze Newgrange to build a housing estate?

Hence why the Boot Inn which is a very old and important building should be preserved at all costs.

The public good outweighs your desire to maintain old buildings. The old terminal should have been torn down, if need be rebuilt block by block elsewhere because where it is at present causes millions of passengers a kilometre or more on each trip through the airport. That parcel of land on which the airport sits is Ireland's path to the world outside.

You need to write to Fingal CoCo, then.

You are just interested in what pleases you aesthetically without regard to practicalities...An an Taisce adherent.

To be clear, and to avoid any confusion, this is where T2 should be

Just to clarify before I reply, do you mean T1 or the original 1940s building called the Old Central Terminal Building?

I'm afraid that's a worse location. You could only get a single sided pier associated with that location. In fact, if you were hellbent on building a terminal there, you'd try to associate it with Pier 1 (aka Pier D) which would require the demolition of numerous hangars (which you would put where?) including the ones to the west (left) of those you have ringed. Take a look at this instead. You'd loose all the southside stands that currently support Pier 4.

Airport planning is not a simple "plonk it here" exercise

@dublincc2 , please tell me where the 5 storey shopping area is in T2? I've travelled through T2 numerous times and have only encountered a single storey of shopping, with a few eateries up on a mezzanine….are there another 3 storeys above that again that I have been somehow missing all this time?

To just round this up instead of repeating myself, T2 should’ve been built on the north apron, Pier C (which iirc was relatively new) should never have been demolished and Pier D never extended to make 05/23 unusable.

This is water under the bridge now, I am simply trying to highlight how shortsighted the DAA have been with regards to infrastructure development.

Like I have said, it’s water under the bridge and T2 is where it is, but it would simply have been better placed on the north apron. I fail to see how any issues with location couldn’t be remedied. It very clearly has a shorter taxiway to 10/28R and 05/23.

Would there ever be consideration for a parallel 05/23?

On a different note, passenger numbers up 9% in March to 2.6m. Boosted by an Early Easter. Cap severely under pressure now!