An Bord Pleanála

Inspector’s Report

Board Reference: 09.JP0008 Proposed Development: Works at the North Leixlip Sewerage Scheme comprising the laying of 4.2km of new sewerage pipeline and provision of special tunnel crossings at certain points. Location: Leixlip, County Kildare. Local Authority: Kildare County Council Type of Case: Application for approval under Section 177AE(2) of the Planning and Development Act 2010 Prescribed Bodies: NRA, Irish Aviation Authority, Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Iarnród Éireann, Inland Fisheries Ireland, Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht. Observers: Thomas Reid

Date of Site Inspection: 30 th May 2012 Inspector: D. MacGabhann

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 1 of 23

1 INTRODUCTION Background 1.1 Kildare County Council is seeking approval from the Board for the laying of a 4.2km new sewerage pipeline between Collinstown and Leixlip Wastewater Treatment Plant with provision for tunnel crossings under the Rye Water River, the R149 regional road and under the Dublin-Sligo railway line. The sewerage pipeline crosses the Rye Water Valley/Carton Special Area of Conservation and part of the route is adjacent to the protected site. The application for approval includes a Natura Impact Statement. 1.2 Section 177AE of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) requires that, where an appropriate assessment is required in respect of a local authority development, the proposed development shall not be carried out unless the Board has approved it with or without modifications. (As the competent authority for local authority development the Board is also required to carry out the appropriate assessment and to determine whether or not the proposed development would adversely affect the integrity of a European site). 1.3 Further, under Section 177AE(6) the Board, prior to making its decision, the Board is required to consider the Natura Impact Statement submitted, any submissions or observations in respect of the proposed development and other information furnished in accordance with Section 177AE(5) of the Act relating to: • The likely effects of the proposed development on the environment. • The likely consequences for the proper planning and sustainable development of the area, and • The likely significant effects of the proposed development on European site(s). 1.4 This report therefore considers the NIS submitted, the submissions and observations made in respect of the development and other information that has been submitted in respect of it and comprises: • An assessment of the likely effects of the development on the environment, • A planning assessment of the proposed development, and • An appropriate assessment of the proposed development. 1.5 On the basis of the above, the report recommends whether or not the Board should grant approval to the local authority for the proposed development, with or without modifications.

Site Location 1.6 The proposed development is situated in Leixlip, County Kildare. The proposed pipeline runs from the Intel Plant in Collinstown (west of Leixlip) along the northern bank of the Rye Water to Louisa Bridge. It then turns north east to follow the route of the Royal Canal and Dublin-Sligo Railway line. At the eastern edge of Leixlip town it turns south and runs through St. Catherine’s Park approximately parallel to, but removed from the Kildare County boundary, to the Leixlip Wastewater Treatment Plant.

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 2 of 23

Site Description 1.7 The site of the proposed pipeline commences on the western bank of the Rye River, north of the Intel plant at Collinstown. The western bank of the river is flat immediately west of the River for c.15 metres, and then rises sharply. There a small number of trees on the western bank of the River. 1.8 The pipeline route then crosses under the Rye Water River and runs across the northern side of a flat grassland field lying to the north of the River. To the north of this field the topography rises sharply and the steep bank is covered in trees. The Rye River meanders along the southern boundary of the riverside field and there are a number of mature trees along the river bank and in a small copse within the field. To the south of the River the topography rises again towards the Intel plant. 1.9 At the eastern end of the field the pipeline route turns north east and rises with the topography through a gorse filled gap in a small coniferous plantation to agricultural land. It then crosses through a number of agricultural fields following the route of the Royal Canal, until it reaches Cope Bridge/the R149. At Cope Bridge the pipeline turns north for a short length then crosses under the R149 and then travels in a north easterly direction through the grounds of the Confey GAA club. North east of the club house the pipeline turns south east, crosses into an adjoining agricultural field and runs parallel to the western boundary of the field. It then turns east and runs along the southern boundary of the field, north of the Royal Canal. At the eastern end of the field the pipeline crosses into the Royal Canal Amenity Group’s property (an amenity area) beside the Royal Canal and then, at the eastern edge of the built up area of Leixlip, turns south and runs under the Royal Canal and Dublin – Sligo Railway line to St. Catherine’s Park. 1.10 The pipeline runs along the western side of St. Catherine’s Park, through managed grassland, broadly following the line of an existing path within the park. The southern boundary of St. Catherine’s Park is marked by a line of mature trees and the pipeline then crosses through these and runs along the eastern side of an agricultural field. At the southern end of this field, the pipeline crosses into an adjoining field, and runs along its western side, which slopes in a southerly direction towards the Leixlip wastewater treatment works. 1.11 The pipeline then crosses under Black Avenue to the Leixlip Waste Water Treatment Works.

Proposed Development 1.12 The proposed development comprises the construction of a 450mm internal diameter rising main and a 750mm internal diameter gravity sewer. 1.13 The 450mm internal diameter rising main is approximately 1.9km in length and is routed in a west to east direction in parallel with the Rye Water for a distance of 780m (minimum setback 60m from the northern bank of the River). The rising main then turns north easterly and continues easterly parallel with the Royal Canal and Dublin-Sligo Railway line (minimum setback 30m). The rising main follows the ground topography with the average depth to invert level of less than 2m. The rising main terminates at the gravity sewer c.400m west of the R149/Cope Bridge.

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 3 of 23

1.14 There is a 40bar high pressure gas main with a 15m wayleave running from Collinstown to the R149/Cope Bridge. The proposed rising main and gravity sewer will be laid outside of the wayleave area, south of it from Collinstown to Louisa Bridge, and thereafter north of it. 1.15 The gravity sewer will run parallel to the Royal Canal for a short distance and then turn north east across Confey GAA grounds, then re-join the northern bank of the Royal Canal as far as St. Catherine’s park. Here it turns south and will cross underneath the Royal Canal and Railway line in a tunnel and run through the park to the Leixlip Wastewater Treatment Plant. The gravity sewer will be laid at a gradient resulting in excavation depths of up to 6.0m. 1.16 Along the route of the pipeline there are a number of river, road, railway, drains and stream crossings. The following will be progressed by no-dig micro- tunnelling: • Crossing of the Rye Water River. • Crossing of the R149 and GAA Confey Sports Ground. • Crossing north and north east of the Confey GAA club house, including the Silleachain Stream. • Crossing of the Royal Canal and the Dublin – Sligo Railway line. 1.17 The rest of the route will be constructed by open trench excavations.

2 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT

EU Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC 2.1 The Habitats Directive (as amended) deals with the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora throughout the European Union. Article 6(3) of the Directive requires the competent authority to carry out an appropriate assessment of any plan or project, on its own and in combination with other plans and programmes, which is likely to have a significant effect on a Natura 2000 site, prior to any decision being made to allow the project to proceed. The Directive requires that a competent authority shall only agree to the plan or project having ascertained that the development will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerned. 2.2 Natura 2000 sites in Ireland comprise Special Areas of Conservation (including candidate SACs) and Special Protection Areas. SACs are selected for the conservation and protection of habitats listed in Annex I and species (other than birds) listed in Annex II of the Habitats Directive and their habitats. SPAs are sites which have been selected for the conservation and protection of bird species listed on Annex I of the Birds Directive and regularly occurring migratory species and their habitats.

Local Nature Conservation Designations 2.3 Within the vicinity of the proposed pipeline the Rye Water River is designated as an SAC, the Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC site code 001398. The designated area includes the Rye Water River and its banks from a point c.4.5km north west of the proposed start point of the proposed pipeline to where the Rye Water joins the River Liffey in Leixlip

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 4 of 23

Town. At Louisa Bridge, c.0.7km to the south east of the start point of the pipeline a wider area both north and south of the river is included in the SAC designation. 2.4 In addition, the Royal Canal and the River Liffey, south of Leixlip Bridge, are both designated as proposed Natural Heritage Areas (Royal Canal pNHA site code 002103 and Liffey Valley pNHA site code 000128 respectively). Planning and Development Acts 2000-2010 2.5 Section 177AE of the Planning and Development Acts 2000-2010 deals with appropriate assessment for development carried out by or on behalf of local authorities. • Section 177AE(2) requires that any proposed development in which an appropriate assessment is required, shall not be carried out unless it has been approved by the Board with or without modifications. • Section 177V(3) requires that a competent authority may only give consent for a proposed development (or land use plan) only after having determined that the proposed development (or land use plan) shall not adversely affect the integrity of the European site. • Section 177AE(5) enables the Board to seek further information from the local authority or to make alterations to a proposed development. • Prior to making any decision, Section 177AE(6) requires the Board to consider the NIS submitted, any observations in respect of the proposed development and any other information furnished in respect of it relating to (a) the likely effects of the development on the environment, (b) the likely consequences for the proper planning and sustainable development of the area and (c) the likely significant effects of the proposed development on a European site. • Section 177AE(8) enables the Board to approve the proposed development, approve the development with modifications, attach conditions to an approval or refuse to approve the development. 2.6 In addition to the above it is important to note that under Section 177AE(10) the Board cannot subject a proposed development, for which an integrated pollution control licences or waste licence is required, to conditions which are for the purposes of controlling emissions from the operation or cessation of the activity.

Guidance on Appropriate Assessment 2.7 Guidance on appropriate assessment is set out in the European Commission’s ‘Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites: Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC’ and in the Department of Environment’s ‘ Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland. Guidance for Planning Authorities’ .

Environmental Impact Assessment

Mandatory Development

2.8 The Planning and Development Regulations 2001 (as amended) require that development falling within Schedule 5 (Parts 1 and 2) of the regulations be subject to an environmental impact assessment. The proposed development does not fall within any of the categories listed in Schedule 5 (Parts 1 or 2). ______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 5 of 23

Sub-Threshold Development 2.9 Article 120(2) of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 (as amended) requires that where a planning application for a sub-threshold development is made and has the potential to impact on a European site or a site designated as a Natural Heritage Area or proposed NHA (amongst other things) the local authority, in determining whether the development would or would not have a significant effect on the environment, shall have regard to the likely significant effects of the development on the European site, NHA or proposed NHA. 2.10 Article 120(3) of the Regulations requires the Board, where it considers that sub- threshold development ‘ would be likely to have significant effects on the environment’ to require the local authority to prepare and EIS in respect of the development. 2.11 Article 120(4) of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 (as amended) requires the Board, in deciding whether a proposed development would or would not be likely to have significant effects on the environment, to have regard to the criteria set out in Schedule 7 of the Regulations i.e. whether a development would or would not be likely to have significant effects on the environment having regard to: • Characteristics of the proposed development. • Location of proposed development. • Characteristics of potential impacts. 2.12 In 2003 the government published guidance ‘ Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Guidance for Consent Authorities regarding Sub-Threshold Development’ .

Planning Policy Framework

2.13 The proposed development falls within the administrative area of Kildare County Development Plan 2011-2017 and the Leixlip Local Area Plan 2010. I refer to relevant policies in my assessment below.

3 PLANNING AUTHORITY’S SUBMISSION Report on Proposed Development 3.1 The planning authority’s application for approval includes two documents: • North Leixlip Sewerage Scheme, Particulars of Proposed Development, February 2012 – This report describes the proposed development, legislative requirements, the method by which the development will be constructed and proposed mitigation measures (including to address potential impacts on Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC). It also considers other impacts (noise, construction vibration impact, air quality, visual impact, flooding and archaeology) and mitigation measures for these. • North Leixlip Sewerage Scheme, Natura Impact Statement, February 2012 – This report describes the four wastewater disposal options for the North Leixlip Sewerage Scheme (routes and a combination of pumped and gravitational systems options) and sets out the rationale for the preferred route in a Route Selection Assessment Criteria report. It also includes a Stage 1 Screening report and a Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment report for the preferred route. The Stage 1 ______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 6 of 23

Screening Report concludes that the development is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of Natura 2000 sites and may have significant impacts on the Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC and Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment). The Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment report concludes that no significant impacts will arise to the European site and that the development will not adversely affect the integrity of any European site if the proposed mitigation measures are carried out.

4 OBSERVATIONS Prescribed Bodies 4.1 The local authority notified 24 prescribed bodies regarding the proposed development (see file). 4.2 Observations on the proposed development were made by the following bodies. • NRA – No comments. • Irish Aviation Authority – No comments. • Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources – Refer to comments by IFI (below). • Iarnród Éireann – States that as the proposed development will cross the Dublin- Sligo Railway line will require a wayleave agreement and provides detailed requirements on the trenchless method to be used to undertake the crossing. • Inland Fisheries Ireland – No objective to development subject to compliance with the mitigation measures outlined in section 3 of both the Project Description Report and Appropriate Assessment. • Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht: o Archaeology – Mitigation measures detail in the Project Description Report (Section 4.6) should be implemented in full. o Nature Conservation – Refers to the location of the proposed development partly in the candidate Rye Valley Water/Carton SAC and to the conservation objectives for the site and states that all three of the site’s qualifying interests are groundwater dependent. States that the Board should satisfy themselves that:
Hydrogeological information supplied with the application is adequate to ensure that the proposed development will not have a significant impact on these groundwater dependent qualifying interests i.e. whether there are any conduits or flow paths underlying the construction site that supply the habitats.
Adequate measures are put in place to ensure that no runoff containing pollutants or silt enters the SAC during construction. o They also state make recommendations regarding scrub, hedge and tree removal (bird nesting season, bat roosts).

Observations 4.2 The following observations are made by Thomas Reid:
Pipeline is for Intel Ireland and has been imposed on Kildare County Council by the IDA (i.e. more parties are involved than the application suggests). IDA is ______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 7 of 23

seeking to acquire Reid Farm, Headsor House, Maynooth directly or by compulsory purchase and it is not for sale.
Pipeline will be used to discharge of chemical waste from Intel plant via Leixlip Treatment Plant to River Liffey.

5 FURTHER INFORMATION Local Authority 5.1 On the 4 th May 2102 the Board requested further information from the local authority regarding the effect of the proposed development on the Rye Water/ Carton SAC, in particular whether or not there are any conduits or flowpaths underlying the proposed construction site that supply the habitats near Louisa Bridge and if such connections exist ecological advice in assessing potential impacts. The local authority’s response to the request was made in their report ‘North Leixlip Sewerage Scheme, Response to Request for Further Information from An Bord Pleanála, May 2012’. I refer to this response in my assessment below.

6 ASSESSMENT Need for EIA 6.1 The proposed development does not fall within any of the classes listed in Schedule 5 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 (as amended), which require mandatory EIA. However, the development is located close to a European site (Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC) and two proposed Natural Heritage Areas (Royal Canal and Liffey Valley). 6.2 The likelihood of significant environmental effects of the proposed development on the Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC is dealt with below in my Appropriate Assessment. As these are given detailed consideration I do not consider that an EIA of the likely significant effects of the development on the SAC is warranted. 6.3 With regard to the Liffey Valley pNHA, the proposed site of the pipeline is, at its nearest over 1km from the pNHA and neither the construction nor operational phases of the pipeline are likely to give rise to any significant environmental effects that could impact on the pNHA i.e. no discharges to air, water or land that could be conveyed to the River. 6.4 The Royal Canal is a man-made waterway linking the River Liffey at Dublin to the River Shannon near Tarmonbarry. The canal NHA comprises the central channel and the banks on either side of it, with a number of different habitats found within the canal boundaries including hedgerow, tall herbs, calcareous grassland, reed fringe, open water, scrub and woodland. The NPWS’s site synopsis states that the ecological value of the canal lies more in the diversity of species it supports along its linear habitats than in the presence of rare species. It also states that as it crosses through agricultural land it provides a refuge for species threatened by modern farming methods. 6.5 From just west of the Louisa Bridge the rising main section of the proposed pipeline follows the route of the Royal Canal to a point c.400m west of Cope Bridge/R149. From this point a gravity sewer follows the route of the Canal to the Confey GAA grounds,

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 8 of 23

crosses these grounds and returns to the route of the Canal to St. Catherine’s Park where it turns south and crosses under the Canal, runs through the Park to the Leixlip Waste Water Treatment Plant. 6.6 The plans for the proposed pipeline indicate that it will be located outside of the area of the pNHA and a minimum of 30 metres from the Canal itself (not the designated area which around Louisa Bridge extends outwards from the Canal to the woodland area alongside the Canal). The route of the pipeline lies outside of the pNHA and is generally through agricultural land to the north of the Canal. At St. Catherine’s Park the pipeline will cross under the canal at a depth of 4.5 metres using non-dig micro-tunnelling (2.5m more than the depth specified by Waterways Ireland). 6.7 The main risks to the pNHA therefore would lie in accidental damage or pollution during construction, for example, damage to vegetation if the construction strayed into the designated area, accidental fuel spills, silt laden runoff entering the Royal Canal. 6.8 The local authority’s Project Description Report sets out mitigation measures to be used for open excavations to construct the pipeline and river crossing works (pages 6 and 7). The proposed mitigation measures include compliance with Inland Fisheries Irelands document Requirements for the Protection of Fisheries Habitats during Construction and Development Works at River Sites (with the appointed contractor to submit a detailed method statement to Inland Fisheries Ireland for assessment and approval prior to any works commencing on any water course crossing or riparian habitat via open cut or non- dig methods). Section 3.5 of the document sets out other construction mitigation measures, for example, including location of re-fuelling points, control of run off, means to prevent invasive species being spread, avoiding vegetation clearance during bird breeding season. 6.9 The local authority’s plans for the proposed development do not indicate the extent of the construction site along the route of the proposed pipeline i.e. width of temporary land take, proximity to pNHA in vicinity of Louisa Bridge. However, if the proposed pipeline is constructed on agricultural land outside of the pNHA area and if the proposed means of mitigation are implemented in full, I consider therefore that the risk of accidental damage to or pollution of the Royal Canal is very small. I do not consider that the proposed development would be likely to give rise to significant effects on the pNHA or, therefore, to warrant an environmental impact assessment. (If the Board are minded to approve the development I would recommend that they require that the construction site is restricted to the area outside of the pNHA). Likely Effects on the Environment 6.10 The proposed development is likely to give rise to environmental effects by virtue of the activities carried out during the different phases of the development i.e. construction and operation of the pipeline, and the interaction of these effects with various receptors. I summarise the likely effects below.

Receptor Environmental Effect

Human Beings • Short term increase in localised noise, dust, air pollution, vibration (near tunnelling works) and disruption during construction phase of project.

• No impacts during operation of the pipeline.

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 9 of 23

Flora, Fauna • Loss of, and disturbance to, habitats along the route of the pipeline.

• Impact on riverine flora and fauna if construction works give rise to pollution of water bodies, or disturb the hydrological regime of the water bodies.

• No impacts during operation of the pipeline.

Soils • Temporary disturbance during construction.

Water • Risk of accidental pollution of adjoining water bodies during construction.

• Possible alteration of hydrological regime of water bodies.

Air, Climate, • Noise, dust, air pollution, vibration (from tunnelling) during construction Noise phase of project.

Landscape • Temporary interference with local landscape character during construction.

• Loss of trees to facilitate construction of pipeline.

Material Assets • Possible increase in traffic congestion during construction.

Cultural Heritage • Possible impact on sub-surface archaeology.

Interactions • Human beings/Air/Climate/Noise/Material Assets – General localised disruption during construction phase.

• Flora and Fauna/Water – Possible adverse impact on flora and fauna due to accidental pollution of water bodies arising during construction and possible alteration to hydrological regime of the water body.

6.11 Many of the potential impacts identified above will be minor, localised impacts occurring for a short duration over the construction phase of the project i.e. to human beings and soils. I deal with more significant impacts below:

Noise

6.12 The Project Description Report states that whilst there is no published guidelines relating to the maximum permissible noise level that may be generated during the construction phase of the project, the construction contractor will be required to comply with the requirements of the European Communities (Construction Plan and Equipment) (Permissible Noise Levels) Regulations 1988 (as amended) and the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (Control of Noise at Work) Regulations, 2006. Further it states that it is proposed to incorporate these and other British standards and the National Road’s Authority guidelines (see page 11 of Project Description Report) into the Works Requirements for the construction works. 6.13 The proposed development is relatively small in scale, relatively removed from nearby properties and will progress along the length of the route of the pipeline (such that

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 10 of 23

noise is unlikely to occur at any one location for the duration of construction), significant noise impacts are unlikely and the planning authority’s approach seems reasonable.

Construction Vibration Impact

6.14 In addition to the open excavations, the local authority proposes no-dig micro- tunnelling at four locations, to construct the proposed pipeline: • The Rye Water River. • The R149 and GAA Confey Sports Ground. • To the north and north east of the Confey GAA club house, including under the Silleachain Stream. • The Royal Canal and the Dublin – Sligo Railway line. 6.15 The Project Description Report states that vibrations will be limited to a Peak Particle Velocity (Total Vector Sum) of 3mm per second when measured at the nearest building and that it is proposed to incorporate industry standards into the Works Requirements for the construction works. 6.16 The four tunnel locations are generally quite removed from nearby sensitive receptors and the proposed maximum vibration is consistent with the government’s guidelines (as set out in the NRA’s Guidelines for the Treatment of Noise and Vibration in National Road Schemes’ – see attached extract) and I consider is acceptable in principle and unlikely to result in a significant environmental impact.

Air quality (including dust)

6.17 The Project Description Report states that air quality impacts are likely to be short term and localised during construction, arising from heavy construction equipment. Standard mitigation measures for dust control are proposed to be incorporated into the Works Requirements for the construction works and include the regular cleaning of access roads, dampening off the working area in windy conditions etc. (see page 12 of report). This approach seems reasonable and again having regard to the relatively modest scale of the development, its general distance from likely sensitive receptors and the proposed mitigation measures I do not consider that the proposed development would give rise to significant environmental effects on air quality.

Visual Impact

6.18 The local authority’s Report states during construction visual impact will be temporary and minimal. The proposed works will be progressed over a period of a year and involve tunnelling under the indicated River, road, sports ground, stream and railway and the opening up of a trench excavation. The works will require temporary construction sites at the launch and receiving ends of the tunnel works and a temporary and evolving construction site along the length of the pipeline. Most works will progress through agricultural land but there will be some loss of trees from within the following locations: • Rising main through densely forested route, north of Intel site (800m 2) – Trees to be replanted over wayleave area (bareroot conifers), one per square metre.

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 11 of 23

• Chainage 1,254m (point C, drawing No. 5994-6602) – Trees will be felled over permanent wayleave width and replanted with 10 no. semi-mature ash with girth of 10cm. • Within St. Catherine’s Park – Any trees that will be removed will be replaced with the same species and size as exist (see page 23 of NIS for details). • At the southern end of St. Catherine’s Park (between MH26 and MH27) – The pipeline will run through a mature hedgerow. This comprises mature trees some of which are significant in height. The NIS (page 23) states that the pipeline will require the felling of mature trees over the acquired wayleave width and upon completion will be replanted with 5 no. semi-mature ash trees with a girth of c.20cm. The width of the way leave is not indicated and the local authority has not indicated the trees to be felled at the southern end of the park. 6.19 In view of the short term nature of the proposed construction works and the below ground nature of the completed development, I do not consider that the proposed development would give rise to a significant visual impact. My one concern would be the extent of felling of mature trees along the southern boundary of St. Catherine’s Park. However this issue could be dealt with by condition to the proposed development i.e. that the construction of the pipeline should minimise the number of mature trees to be felled along the southern boundary of St. Catherine’s Park.

Flooding

6.20 The local authority’s Project Description Report indicates the incidents of flooding in the area of the proposed development, one to the south of the proposed crossing of the Rye Water River and two to the north and east of the Confey GAA clubhouse. The report states that a flood alleviation scheme was completed at Confey in 2011. 6.21 The proposed pipeline will be constructed below ground i.e. within 2-6m below ground level. As such they will not physically impact on the flood plain or restrict flows in water courses which they are routed under. I do not consider therefore that the development will adversely impact on flooding in the area.

Archaeology

6.22 The Project Description Report refers to an archaeological monitoring programme that was carried out in conjunction with the site investigation works for the pipeline and an Archaeological Monitoring Report that was submitted to the National Monuments Division of the DoECLG and the National Museum of Ireland (not on file). The monitoring programme included trial pits which covered a small fraction of the pipeline route and, whilst no sub-surface features were found, the local authority recommends that an archaeologist be retained during construction to oversee the monitoring of the works, particularly for areas which were not previously investigated. The proposed approach is consistent with good practice and has been accepted by the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht in their observations on the proposed development. If the proposed arrangements are put in place I do not consider that there would be any adverse on the archaeological heritage.

Flora, Fauna and Water Quality

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 12 of 23

6.23 The proposed development has the potential to destroy or disturb the natural habitat over which the route is constructed. Further there is a risk that the construction works give rise to pollution which affects water quality and the habitats and species of the Rye Water (I have dealt with Royal Canal is section 6.4 to 6.9 above). There is also the possibility that the construction of the pipeline will affect the underlying flow paths which influence the hydrology of Louisa Springs and the associated terraced wetland area. I deal with the likely impact of the development on the flora, fauna and water quality of the Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC in the appropriate assessment below (paragraph 6.35). 6.24 The proposed pipeline route travels through a large field north of the Rye Water (part of the floodplain of the Rye Water River), up a steep incline of gorse scrub, through agricultural fields, amenity grassland, the Confey GAA grounds, further amenity land and agricultural land to the Leixlip WWTWs. The NIS report states that each of these habitats is of low conservation significance and that the ecological survey found no significant flora, bird or protected fauna in the works footprint. For the open excavation works in the field north of the Rye Water River (the flood plain of the river) the NIS proposes a range of mitigation measures including minimising tracking along the acquired wayleave, low ground pressure machinery, minimal topsoil stripping and reinstatement of stored topsoil which will be allowed to re-vegetation naturally. 6.25 The findings of the ecological survey appear consistent with the managed nature of the land through which the proposed pipeline will run. Having regard to these findings and the proposed mitigation measures in the vicinity of the Rye Water River, I do not consider that the proposed development will give rise to significant environmental effects on the fauna and flora for the area. Likely Consequences for the Proper Planning and Development of the Area 6.26 The proposed development falls within the administrative area of the Kildare County Development Plan 2011-2017. 6.27 The core strategy of the Plan seeks to consolidate new development within the existing urban footprint, in particular in the Metropolitan towns. Leixlip is identified as a Large Growth Town 1 within the Metropolitan area. Policy CS5 of the Plan states that it is a policy of the Council ‘ To support the development of the identified strategic growth centres of Maynooth, Leixlip and Naas as focal points for regional critical massing and employment growth’. 6.28 Chapter 7 of the Plan deals with Water, Drainage and Environmental Services. It states that the capacity of the county to accommodate future development is partly dependent on constraint and limits in the provision of adequate supplies of water and drainage facilities. Policy WW1 states that it is a policy of the Council to secure priorities outlined in the Water Services Investment Programme – Assessment of Needs 2010-2012, subject to availability of finance. (The proposed scheme is not listed in the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government’s Water Services Investment Programme 2010-2012). 6.29 The Leixlip Local Area Plan 2010 seeks to facilitate the development of commercial and industrial development on zoned land within the town and to facilitate the expansion

1 Tier II, having a smaller population base than larger level I towns.

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 13 of 23

of multi-national industries. Objectives regarding wastewater include to maintain and improve existing sewerage services (WW6). 6.30 The Plan zones land across which the proposed sewer crosses. From its starting point the proposed sewer: • Crosses the Rye Water from the Intel site, zoned for Industry and Warehousing, • To agricultural land on the northern side of the Rye Water, zoned for agriculture, • Travels through agricultural land and woodland on the northern side of the Royal Canal, zoned for agriculture and open space and amenity, • To St. Catherine’s Park, zoned for Open Space and Amenity, where it travels south to the Leixlip WWTP. 6.31 Utility structures are open for consideration or permitted in principal in these zones. 6.32 The proposed development is therefore consistent with the strategic policies of the County Development Plan and the Leixlip LAP and also with the detailed zoning objectives of the LAP. 6.33 Policies of the Plan afford protection to all designated wildlife sites including the Royal Canal proposed Natural Heritage Area and the Rye Water Valley Carton cSAC. I deal with these matters elsewhere in my report. 6.34 It also affords protection of built heritage items of significance in the Town, archaeological heritage, specified trees or groups of trees of special amenity value and seeks to provide walkways along the Rye River. The proposed sewer will not directly affect any of the items of built heritage, zones of archaeological potential or trees identified in the plan, and subject to archaeological monitoring, would not conflict with any of the detailed policies or objectives of the LAP.

Likely Significant Effects on a European Site – Appropriate Assessment

Description of the Project

6.35 The proposed development comprises the construction of a 4.2km sewer pipeline from the Intel site to the north west of Leixlip to the wastewater treatment plant to the south east of the town. The project has been described in section 1.7 of my report. 6.36 In essence in the vicinity of the Rye Valley/Carton SAC the pipeline will be constructed by a combination of non-dig constructed pipework i.e. micro-tunnelling crossing of the Rye Water River and open excavations. The non-dig technique comprises directional drilling i.e. a steerable trenchless method of installing underground pipes in a shallow arc along a prescribed bore path by using a surface launched drilling rig. The NIS states that the site investigation data shows that directional drilling would be carried out above bedrock. The launch pit for the tunnel is proposed on the eastern side of the River, with a launch pit constructed a minimum of 30m from the eastern bank, and a reception pit a minimum of 15m from the western bank (Intel site). The NIS states that these launch pints are outside of the SAC area but no detailed plans are submitted to reflect this. 6.37 Open excavation works comprise the excavation of soils and rock, installation of the proposed pipeline and backfilling the excavated trench. Excavated material will be re- used to backfill where suitable. Open trenches will be backfilled as pipe laying progresses. The land take associated with the construction works (i.e. physical extent of construction site over route of pipeline) is not indicated in the local authority’s submission. However, the NIS states that in general the trench excavation widths will be ______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 14 of 23

narrow and battered sides will not be permitted. After the excavation works the pipeline trench will be reinstated to the original ground level. 6.38 Construction is estimated to take place over a 12 month period. 6.39 The local authority’s submission refers to other planned developments at the Intel site in Collinstown. These include the proposed pumping station to be constructed adjacent to the Rye Water Valley and to be connected to the proposed North Leixlip Sewerage Scheme. In addition, an application for alterations to the approved upgrade of the Leixlip WWTWs (board file PL09.JD0018) is currently with the Board for approval. Description of the Natura 2000 Sites 6.40 The Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC extends along the Rye Water River between Leixlip and Maynooth. It joins the River Liffey downstream of the proposed start point of the pipeline at Leixlip Bridge in Leixlip town. Upstream, the River passes through the Carton Estate north west of Leixlip and, in the Estate, the river is dammed at intervals to create a series of lakes. The SAC has a number of important plant species within the estate and within the woodland on the estate. 6.41 The NPWS’s site synopsis states that at Louisa Bridge (c.0.7km east and downstream of the start point of the pipeline) a marsh, mineral spring and seepage area supports a good diversity of plant species and the spring is a type considered to be rare in Europe and is a habitat listed on Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive. The site synopsis identifies four important species with the habitat: • A Red Data Book species Blue Fleabane ( Erigeron acer) is found growing on the wall at Louisa Bridge. • The semi-aquatic snails Vertigo angustior and Vertigo moulinsiana occur in the marsh vegetation near the Bridge, both Annex II species. • The scarce Dragonfly (Orthetrum coerulescens) has been recorded at the bridge. 6.42 The site synopsis also states that Rye Water is also a spawning ground for Trout and Salmon and the rare White Clawed Crayfish 2 ( Austropotamobius pallipes) has been recorded at Leixlip. Both Salmon and White Clawed Crayfish are Annex II species. 6.43 The conservation objectives for the site are ‘to maintain or restore the favourable conservation condition of the Annex I habitats and/or the Annex II species for which the site has been selected Vertigo angustior and Vertigo moulinsiana and the petrifying springs with tufa formation ( Cratoneurion). 6.44 The Natura 2000 standard data form for the site states that the Rye Water is vulnerable to pollution ‘ – much of the surrounding land is agricultural. The petrifying spring and Vertigo species are particularly vulnerable to urban development and dumping’. 6.45 A report by Hydro-G ‘ Hydrological Report for Leixlip Spa, Co. Kildare’ was commissioned to determine the movement of water through the Leixlip Spa site (at Louisa Bridge) and to determine how this water can be used most efficiently to maintain the conservation status of the site including the semi aquatic snail species Vertigo Angustior and Vertigo moulinsiana. (The report states that ecological monitoring of the

2 The local authority’s NIS refers to a Scott Cawley study in 2011 of a bridge over the Rye Water within Intel lands (south of the proposed pipeline crossing) and states that during the survey several White-clawed crayfish were seen in the substrate of the River and in crevices in the banksides. Based on site observations and the nature of substrates the species was deemed to be abundant in this stretch of the River.

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 15 of 23

wetland suggests that the site has been drying out for the past two decades and the report was commissioned to explain these ecological changes and to construct a conceptual model of water movement throughout the site for future conservation of the site site). The Spa site includes a series of five terraced, stepped down from south to north towards the Rye Water River. The Spa well is situated at the southern end of the first (southern- most) terrace. At the northern end of this terrace is a Roman Bath and between the Spa and Roman Bath are ‘two filtering ponds’. The report concludes that the water at Leixlip Spa site originates from a complex groundwater system combining two sources. The main source of water comes from a deep, old and warm groundwater system, discharging through the Spa well at the top of the first, most elevated southern terrace. And the second a more recent shallow groundwater that flows through the karstified limestone bedrock with the main groundwater discharge located in the vicinity of two ‘filtering ponds’ (also on the first terrace). 6.46 The EPA’s water quality data shows monitoring results at Sandford Bridge (upstream of the proposed Rye Water River crossing) and at Leixlip Bridge (downstream of the proposed crossing), with respective Q values of 3-4 (Moderate Status) and 2-3, or 3 (Poor Status) and the river has been assigned a ‘Poor Status’ under the Water Framework Directive.

Prediction of Impacts

6.47 The proposed development has the potential to affect the Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC as a result of the main phases of the development i.e. construction and operation, the main activities carried out during these phases and the methods use. I summarise the potential impacts of the project below under these headings and consider the likelihood of significant impact in the following section of my report.

Phase Potential Impact

Construction

• River crossing • Temporary loss of habitat during construction (launch and reception pit).

• Impact on ground conditions from heavy machinery.

• Risk of pollution of watercourse e.g. accidental spills of oils, drilling fluids, silt laden runoff from stockpiled materials. Short term impact on water quality, riverine habitats and species.

• Introduction of non-native invasive species with transportation of plant, imported materials and excavated materials. Long term impact on riverine species.

• Disruption of flora and fauna (noise, dust, light). Short term impact during construction.

• Risk of changes to the hydrology of the site with possible consequences for Louisa Springs.

• Open • Temporary loss of habitat/trampling and damage to habitat. excavations

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 16 of 23

• Long term impact on ground conditions from heavy machinery.

• Accidental damage to watercourses by heavy machinery working close to watercourse.

• Risk of pollution of watercourse e.g. accidental spills. Short term direct impact on water quality, riverine habitats and species.

• Runoff from excavated trenches or temporary stockpiles could cause pollution of water course. Short term impact on water quality, riverine habitats and species.

• Introduction of non-native invasive species with transportation of plant, imported materials and excavated materials. Long term impact on riverine habitat/species.

• Dust, noise, disturbance from plant and equipment. Short term impact on plants and species.

• Possible impact on floodplain if increase/decrease in soils.

• Risk of changes to the hydrology of the site with possible consequences for Louisa Springs.

Operation

• River crossing • Normal operating of the rising main and gravity sewer will not and open impact on the Rye Water River. excavations • Risk of uncontrolled burst of pipeline under River or in vicinity of River

Decommissioning • Not applicable.

Likelihood of Significant Effects/Impact on Conservation Objectives/Integrity of Site a. Construction - River Crossing and Open Trench Excavation

6.48 The applicant proposes a no-dig technique to construct the pipeline across the Rye Water River with the subsequent route of the pipeline in open excavation along the northern part of the field which forms a floodplain to the Rye Water. Both tunnel launch and reception pits and the construction site for the open trench excavation are stated to be outside of the designated area of the Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC. There will therefore be no direct fragmentation or disturbance of the Annex I habitat or Annex II protected species by virtue of construction or operation of the proposed pipeline. 6.49 However, there is the potential for the installation of the pipeline and its construction in open excavation to the north of the Rye Water to impact on the underlying hydrological flow paths which feed the Louisa Springs marsh area i.e. to disrupt factors which help maintain the favourable conditions of the site. This issue was examined by the local authority in their response to the Board’s request for further information ‘ North Leixlip Sewerage Scheme. Response to Request for Further Information from An Bord Pleanála, May 2012’. The report refers to two geological logs (PS1 and PS2) and a borehole (BH1) at the site of the proposed crossing indicating depths to bedrock of 10 to ______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 17 of 23

12 metres on the west side of the river and to 5 metres on the east side and no cavernous zones or major discontinuities or highly fractured weathered zones within the bedrock. No data is presented for the geological logs or boreholes and the location of only PS 1 is marked on Figure 2. Based on the data the report presents a cross section of the river crossing indicating that the pipeline will be laid in sand and gravel layer, above bedrock. The documentation provided by the local authority does not indicate the depth below the river that the pipeline will be laid at. However, from the Cross Section drawing provided in the response to further information, the bottom of the proposed pipeline would appear to be at a level of c.31.50m with the base of the river shown as 33.0m and ground level c.34.87m i.e. c.3.3m below ground level. 6.50 The report considers that based on the groundwater monitoring wells (no data is supplied for these) and the site investigation boreholes (no data supplied) for the pipeline crossing, groundwater direction is towards the Rye Water River, groundwater levels adjacent to the Rye River are within the gravel layer and that the river is in full hydraulic connection with the groundwater along the Rye Water River. Further, it considers that the pipe crossing the Rye Water is within the groundwater discharge zone and in the base of the River valley, the lowermost portion of the landscape to which groundwater is discharging. It states that groundwater levels indicate that the water table mirrors topography strongly in the area as expected from the general hydrogeology and landscape. It considers that the main recharge area for the Spa well and any discharges along the terraces, from either deep or shallow groundwater, are most likely to be topographically higher areas to the south and south west of the Spa well. Further, it considers it unlikely that the Spa well be fed by deep and shallow groundwater from areas to the northwest (site of crossing), north or west (site of pipeline in floodplain) particularly areas in the lowermost portion of the river valley or to the other side of the Rye Water River. The report concludes that the proposed pipeline and crossing of the Rye Water River does not intersect any conduits or flow paths underlying the proposed construction site that supply habitats near Louisa Bridge and that there is no risk to the qualifying species/habitat in the Rye Water SAC. 6.51 Whilst the local authority’s response to the request for further information does not provide supporting information, the conclusions that are drawn seem reasonable essentially given the proposal to locate the pipeline within the gravel layer under the Rye Water River within the groundwater discharge zone, above bedrock, physically removed from and topographically and hydraulically lower than the Spa well. Within this context it is difficult to see how the proposed pipeline under the Rye Water or north of it would impact on the hydrological regime supporting the mineral spring. Notwithstanding this, guidance on appropriate assessment requires conclusion drawn to be supported by evidence and the Board may therefore wish to request the data on which the local authority’s conclusions are based. Further, the Board may wish to seek the opinion of the Department of Arts Heritage and the Gaeltacht on the local authority’s response. 6.52 The proposed launch and reception pits for the directional drilling of the proposed Rye Water River crossing are stated to be located outside of the SAC area and the pipeline is to be routed along the northern side of the floodplain, removed from the SAC. There are no detailed plans showing the construction site in relation to the SAC boundary. However, if construction takes place outside of the SAC boundary there will be no direct impact on riverbank habitat by way of loss of or damage to habitat or underlying soils (e.g. by heavy machinery). The Board may wish to deal with this issue by way of condition i.e. prior to the commencement of development detailed plans showing the ______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 18 of 23

location of the proposed launch and reception pits, and construction footprint for the entire pipeline route, in relation to the protected sites in the vicinity of the pipeline, to be submitted to the NPWS for written agreement. 6.53 Water quality in the Rye Water River is at risk from accidental spillages of pollutants from on-site machinery/equipment or the uncontrolled run off of silt laden surface water if either make their way into the River. Hydrocarbons and suspended solids can all seriously impact on riverine habitats and protected species. In the absence of mitigation to reduce the risk of accidental damage, the proposed development has the potential to significantly impact on the Rye Water River, in particular from the construction sites which are located closer to the river than the main pipeline route. Similarly, in the absence of mitigation there is a risk that non-native invasive species will be introduced to the area during construction transported onto the site by plant or machinery. 6.54 Correspondence from the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht states that rivers, such as the Rye Water, and their associated riparian zones and floodplains are very important habitats for biodiversity, providing a refuge for flora and fauna and potentially containing protected plans and animals. The NIS includes a report on a survey of the Rye Water River in the vicinity of the proposed crossing and the floodplain to the north of the River through which the pipeline is routed. The survey found no evidence of breeding sites for kingfishers or otters, no evidence of bats at the bridge c50m downstream of the proposed works area, no significant flora, bird or protected species within the footprint of the works, no badger setts within 30m of the proposed works and no breeding birds of significant conservation concern. Whilst it is unlikely therefore that the proposed development will directly impact on protected species, it is possible that without mitigation it will disturb any using the wider floodplain area (a Kingfisher was observed during the site inspection). 6.55 The proposed development involves sub-surface works with the profile of land restored to the original condition. Whilst the proposed pipeline will not impact on the functioning of the floodplain in this way, without mitigation heavy machinery may compact the soils on site and influence the infiltration capacity of soils.

b. Operation

6.56 Upon completion, the operation the rising main and gravity sewer will take place underground within a sealed pipeline and will not impact on the sub-surface or surface environment. The local authority’s submission does not deal with the potential impacts arising from leakage or a burst in the pipeline. Whilst this scenario is unlikely the Board may wish to impose a condition requiring monitoring of the pipeline and contingency plans in the event of failure.

c. In combination Impacts

6.57 The local authority refer to a number of other planned developments at the Intel site in Collinstown, however, they only refer to one particular project, the construction of a pumping station adjacent to the Rye Water River and it connection to the proposed North Leixlip Sewerage Scheme. 6.58 They state that any such developments, including the pumping station, have the potential to give rise to impacts on the Rye Water and that mitigation measures for the proposed pumping station are set out in a separate NIS. ______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 19 of 23

6.59 The construction of two linked projects in close proximity to the Rye Water has the potential to increase the risk to the water body e.g. from accidental damage. Further, in close proximity the developments have the potential to give rise to in-combination impacts, for example, excessive disturbance to the unprotected margins of the SAC impacting on protected species using the wider area such as the floodplain. The local authority’s NIS has not considered these types of impacts and there is no information on file which allows such an assessment. However, having regard to the nature of the proposed development, its location outside of any protected site and the absence of significant environmental effects likely to be generated, I do not consider that there are additional particular in-combination impacts which will arise due to the two projects being progressed on nearby sites (I understand that the pumping station project is within Intel site).

Mitigation 6.60 Section 3.7 of the NIS details the mitigation measures to be employed during the non- dig construction of the river crossing and open excavation trenches. Mitigation measures are specifically targeted to address the main potential impacts arising from the development as identified above: • Temporary loss/damage to habitat (outside SAC). • Impact on natural ground conditions. • Pollution of Rye Water (accidental spills, run-off). • Introduction of non-native invasive species. • Disruption of flora and fauna. 6.61 The proposed measures are comprehensive and include for example, fencing of site works area to avoid damage outside of the works area along the course of the Rye Water, the timing of works to avoid the bird breeding season, impact on Salmonids, that a works method statement is drawn up in consultation with the Eastern Regional Fisheries Board to detail all necessary measures to prevent the release of pollutants in the Rye Water River, employment of an Ecological Clerk of works during construction to monitor the works and to confirm the adequacy of the mitigation detailed and to recommend further appropriate actions if required. 6.62 The mitigation measures have been accepted by Inland Fisheries Ireland and I consider that the proposed means are reasonable, practical and enforceable and are likely to be successful in avoiding the potential adverse effects of the development. Residual Impacts 6.63 In view of my assessment above, I am of the opinion that (a) if the construction site for the proposed development lies strictly outside of the boundary of any protected sites, and (b) the mitigation measures proposed by the local authority are implemented in full, I do not consider that the proposed development will give rise to any residual adverse effects on the integrity of the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. AA Conclusion 6.64 Having regard to the foregoing in particular to:

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 20 of 23

• The location of the proposed development outside of Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC, • The detailed means by which the proposed pipeline will be constructed, • The submission made by the local authority in connection with the impact of the proposed development on conduits or flowpaths underlying the construction site that supply habitats at Louisa Bridge, and • The mitigation measures set out in the Natura Impact Statement and Project Description Report, 6.65 I consider that it is reasonable to conclude on the basis of the information available that the proposed development, individually and in combination with other plans or projects would not adversely affect the integrity of the European Site No. 001398, Rye River Valley/Carton SAC in view of the site’s conservation objectives. Other Matters Rational for the Development and Impact on Water Quality 6.66 The proposed development is brought forward by Kildare County Council, within the framework of strategic policies of the County Development Plan, and must be assessed on this basis and on its merits. 6.67 Discharges from the sewerage pipeline, via the Leixlip WWTWs, will be subject to a licence from the EPA who is required to ensure compliance with the EU Water Framework Directive which requires member states to achieve good status in all waters by 2015.

7 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

7.1 Having regard to my assessment above, in summary, I am of the view that: • Environmental impact assessment of the sub-threshold development is not warranted as the proposed development is unlikely to give rise to significant effects on the environment, in particular the Royal Canal pNHA and the Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC, having regard to the location of the proposed development outside of the protected sites, the detailed means by which the proposed pipeline will be constructed, the mitigation measures set out in the local authority’s application for approval and subject to compliance with the following conditions: o Construction to take place strictly outside of the boundary of the protected areas. o Details of location and extent of construction site in relation to protected sites to be agreed with DAHG (NPWS) prior to commencement of development. o Construction of the pipeline to minimise the number of mature trees felled along the southern boundary of St. Catherine’s Park. o Archaeological monitoring of construction works. o Details of arrangements for monitoring of the operation of the pipeline and contingency plans in the event of failure, to be submitted to agreed with DAHG (NPWS) prior to the commencement of development.

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 21 of 23

• The proposed development is in accordance with the strategic policies of the Kildare County development Plan 2011-2017 and the detailed policies of the Leixlip Local Area Plan. • Subject to the conditions set out above and full implementation of the mitigation measures set out in the local authority’s application for approval, the proposed development, individually and in combination with other plans or projects, would not adversely affect the integrity of European Site no. 001398, Rye River Valley/Carton SAC. 7.2 On this basis I recommend that the Board approve the application for the proposed pipeline, subject to conditions. 7.3 As stated, whilst the conclusions drawn by the local authority in their response to the Board’s request for further information in respect of the impact of the proposed development on conduits or flowpaths underlying the construction site that supply the habitats at Louisa Bridge, seem reasonable, the local authority’s response to the request for further information is not supported by evidence and the Board may therefore wish to request this prior to deciding on the proposed development. Similarly, the Board may also wish to seek the views of the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht (NPWS) on the submission by the local authority.

REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS Having regard to:

a) The location of the proposed development outside of Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC and the Royal Canal pNHA, b) The detailed means by which the proposed pipeline will be constructed, c) The submission made by the local authority in connection with the impact of the proposed development on conduits or flowpaths underlying the construction site that supply habitats at Louisa Bridge, and d) The mitigation measures set out in the Natura Impact Statement and Project Description Report, and subject to compliance with the conditions set out below, it is considered that the proposed development would not give rise of any serious environmental effects, injure or interfere with the archaeology of the area or give rise to any significant impacts on the natural heritage of the area or affect the integrity of any European site or any protected species and would be in accordance with the proper planning and development of the area. CONDITIONS

1. Construction of the proposed development shall take place strictly outside the boundary of any protected site (Rye Water Valley/Carton SAC and Royal Canal pNHA). Details of location and extent of construction sites in relation to such sites shall be submitted to Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht (NPWS) for written agreement prior to the commencement of development. ______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 22 of 23

Reason: To ensure the protection of riverine habitat and species and the integrity of European sites. 2. The detailed mitigation measures as set out in the Natura Impact Statement and the technical report ‘Project Description Report’ shall be implemented in full. Reason: To ensure the protection of riverine habitat and species and the integrity of European sites. 3. The developer shall facilitate the preservation, recording and protection of archaeological materials or features that may exist within the site. In this regard, the developer shall – i. notify the planning authority in writing at least four weeks prior to the commencement of any site operation (including hydrological and geotechnical investigations) relating to the proposed development, ii. employ a suitably-qualified archaeologist who shall monitor all site investigations and other excavation works, and iii. provide arrangements, acceptable to the planning authority, for the recording and for the removal of any archaeological material which the authority considers appropriate to remove. In default of agreement on any of these requirements, the matter shall be referred to An Bord Pleanála for determination. Reason: In order to conserve the archaeological heritage of the site and to secure the preservation and protection of any remains that may exist within the site.

4. In the construction of the pipeline through St. Catherine’s Park, the local authority shall minimise the number of mature trees felled along the southern boundary of St. Catherine’s Park. Reason: In the interest of visual amenity. 5. Details of arrangements for monitoring of the operation of the pipeline and contingency plans in the event of failure shall be submitted to and agreed with Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht (NPWS) prior to the commencement of development. Reason: To ensure the protection of riverine habitat and species and the integrity of European sites.

______Planning Inspector 12 th June 2012

______

09.JP0008 An Bord Pleanála Page 23 of 23