Boarding kennel challenges Heathrow’s proposed Terminal 5

News

Roger Pearson

09 May 2002

Outline planning permission for the new terminal was granted following a 525-day public inquiry costing £80m, £16m of which was funded by the taxpayer.

Willowslea Farm Kennels Ltd, of Spout Lane North, Stanwell Moor, Staines, which provides quarantine, boarding and grooming services as well as all-year-round veterinary care, claims that, although conditions were imposed requiring the regulation of dust and larger air pollutants known as PM10, similar conditions should also have been imposed on smaller pollutants known as PM2.5.

The pollutants take their name from the size of the particles involved; PM10 are particles not exceeding 10 microns in diameter, and PM2.5 are particles not exceeding 2.5 microns in diameter.

Opening the case for Willowslea, Anthony Dinkin QC said: “The claimants concern arose from the possible adverse health effects that PM2.5, in particular, might have on its staff and the animals housed in its boarding kennels, which are located on land close to the airport and close to a site known as Robbs Nurseries, which Heathrow proposes to use as a forward lorry park during the 10-year period of construction of Terminal 5.”

He is asking Sullivan J to quash the decision of the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions to award outline planning permission for the construction of the terminal and for the use of Robbs Nurseries as a lorry park without imposing conditions requiring the monitoring of PM2.5.

Mr Dinkin said that the “same failure to recommend the imposition of appropriate conditions” also applied to the need to monitor nitrogen dioxide (NO₂).

BAA plc and Heathrow Airport Ltd are opposing the proceedings.

The hearing continues.

Willowslea Farm Kennels Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions Queen’s Bench Division (Sullivan J) 9 May 2002.

PLS News 9/5/02

The owner of a boarding kennel close to Heathrow airport is claiming that anti-pollution conditions imposed upon the proposed new fifth terminal were not sufficient to protect the animals it cares for. Outline planning permission for the new terminal was granted following a 525-day public inquiry costing £80m, £16m of which was funded by the taxpayer. Willowslea Farm Kennels Ltd, of Spout Lane North, Stanwell Moor, Staines, which provides quarantine, boarding and grooming services as well as all-year-round veterinary care, claims that, although conditions were imposed requiring the regulation of dust and larger air pollutants known as PM10, similar conditions should also have been imposed on smaller pollutants known as PM2.5. The pollutants take their name from the size of the particles involved; PM10 are particles not exceeding 10 microns in diameter, and PM2.5 are particles not exceeding 2.5 microns in diameter. Opening the case for Willowslea, Anthony Dinkin QC said: “The claimants concern arose from the possible adverse health effects that PM2.5, in particular, might have on its staff and the animals housed in its boarding kennels, which are located on land close to the airport and close to a site known as Robbs Nurseries, which Heathrow proposes to use as a forward lorry park during the 10-year period of construction of Terminal 5.” He is asking Sullivan J to quash the decision of the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions to award outline planning permission for the construction of the terminal and for the use of Robbs Nurseries as a lorry park without imposing conditions requiring the monitoring of PM2.5. Mr Dinkin said that the “same failure to recommend the imposition of appropriate conditions” also applied to the need to monitor nitrogen dioxide (NO2). BAA plc and Heathrow Airport Ltd are opposing the proceedings. The hearing continues. Willowslea Farm Kennels Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions Queen’s Bench Division (Sullivan J) 9 May 2002. PLS News 9/5/02