An Bord Pleanála

Inspector’s Report

Development : Wind farm of 32 no. turbines (96MW output) at Yellow River, north of Rhode, Co. Offaly.

Application under Section 37E of Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended)

Planning Authority : Offaly County Council

Applicant : Green Wind Energy (Wexford) Ltd.

Type of Application : Strategic Infrastructure Development

Submissions & observations

Offaly County Council : Yes Prescribed Bodies x. 7 : Yes Observers x. 85 + 2 : Yes

Dates of site inspection : 18 th December 2013, 21 st February, 26 th February, & 30 th April 2014.

Inspector: Michael Dillon

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 1 of 114 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1.0 PRE-PLANNING CONSULTATION - AN BORD PLEANALA 8

2.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 8

3.0 THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 10

4.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND OTHER GUIDANCE 12

4.1 National Energy Policy 12 4.1.1 Delivering a Sustainable Energy Future for Ireland 4.1.2 National Renewable Energy Action Plan 4.1.3 Strategy for Renewable Energy 4.1.4 Ireland’s Second National Energy Efficiency Action Plan 4.1.5 Government Policy Statement on Strategic Importance of Transmission and Other Energy Infrastructure 4.1.6 Grid 25 – A Strategy for the Development of Electricity Grid 4.2 National Economic Policy 14 4.2.1 Delivering our Green Potential 4.3 National Planning Policy & Guidance 14 4.3.1 National Spatial Strategy 4.3.2 Wind Farm Guidelines 2006 4.3.3 Proposed Revisions to Wind Farm Guidelines 2006 4.4 Regional Policy 15 4.4.1 Regional Planning Guidelines for the Midlands Region 4.5 Local Planning Policy 16 4.5.1 County Offaly Development Plan 2009-2015 4.5.2 County Offaly Wind Strategy to 2015 4.5.3 Draft County Offaly Development Plan 2014-2020 4.5.4 Kildare County Development Plan 2011-2017 4.5.5 Meath County Development Plan 2013-2019 4.5.6 Westmeath County Development Plan 2008-2014

5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 18

6.0 OFFALY COUNTY COUNCIL SUBMISSION 19

6.1 County Manager’s Report 19 6.2 Proceedings of Meeting of Offaly Co. Co. on 17 th Feb. 2014 22

7.0 PRESCRIBED BODIES 23

7.1 Bodies Notified by the Applicant 23 7.2 Responses Received 23 7.2.1 Irish Aviation Authority

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 2 of 114 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

7.2.2 National Roads Authority 7.2.3 An Taisce 7.2.4 Department of Arts, Heritage & Gaeltacht 7.2.5 Health Service Executive 7.2.6 Inland Fisheries Ireland 7.2.7 Kildare County Council

8.0 OBSERVATIONS OBJECTING TO DEVELOPMENT 25

8.1 Parties Objecting to Development 25 8.2 Grounds of Objection 28 8.2.1 Archaeology & Built Heritage 8.2.2 Visual Amenity 8.2.3 Access & Roads 8.2.4 Noise 8.2.5 Ecology 8.2.6 Livestock & Bloodstock Farming 8.2.7 Shadow Flicker 8.2.8 Drainage 8.2.9 Human Health 8.2.10 Energy Generation & Transmission 8.2.11 Property Values 8.2.12 General Considerations 8.2.13 Site-specific Considerations 8.3 Accompanying Documentation 37

9.0 OBSERVATIONS IN FAVOUR OF DEVELOPMENT 38

9.1 Party in Favour of Development 38 9.2 Grounds in Favour 38

10.0 ORAL HEARING REQUEST 39

11.0 APPLICANT’S RESPONSE SUBMISSION 39

11.1 Applicant’s Response – General 39 11.2 Applicant’s Response to Offaly County Council Submission 40 11.3 Applicant’s Response to DoA,H&G Submission 44 11.4 Applicant’s Response to HSE Submission 44 11.5 Applicant’s Response to IFI Submission 45 11.6 Applicant’s Response to IAA Submission 45 11.7 Applicant’s Response to Common Issues of Observers 45 11.8 Applicant’s Response to Specific Issues of Observers 48 11.9 Associated Submissions from Applicant – Section 1 50

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 3 of 114 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

11.10 Associated Submissions from Applicant – Section 2 52 11.11 Revised Site Notices 53 11.12 Further Unsolicited Additional Information 53

12.0 RESPONSES TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUBMISSION 54

12.1 Response of Offaly County Council 54 12.2 Response of Prescribed Bodies 55 12.2.1 Irish Aviation Authority 12.2.2 National Roads Authority 12.2.3 Department of Arts, Heritage & Gaeltacht 12.2.4 Westmeath County Council 12.2.5 Kildare County Council 12.3 Response of Observers Opposed to Scheme 56 12.3.1 General Comment 12.3.2 Omission of Turbines 12.3.3 Relocation of Turbines 12.3.4 Reduction in Height of Turbines 12.3.5 Alteration to Construction Access Between T31 & T32 12.3.6 Adjusted Noise Impact Assessment 12.3.7 Adjusted Shadow Flicker Assessment 12.3.8 Additional Winter Bird Survey 12.3.9 Other Issues 12.3.10 Associated Submissions 12.4 Response Observation In Favour of Scheme 60 12.4.1 Grounds in Favour 12.4.2 Associated Submissions

13.0 ASSESSMENT 61

13.1 General Comments 61 13.2 Principle of Development – Development Plan & Guidance 61 13.2.1 Government Policy and Wind Energy Guidelines 13.2.2 Draft Wind Energy Guidelines 2013 13.2.3 County Offaly Development Plan 2009-2015 13.3 Landscape Character & Visual Amenity 62 13.3.1 Landscape Character 13.3.2 Zone of Theoretical Visibility 13.3.3 Scenic Views 13.3.4 Existing Landscape Interventions 13.3.5 Visual Impact 13.3.6 Cumulative Impact of Wind Farms 13.3.7 Mitigation Measures 13.4 Access & Traffic 65

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 4 of 114 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

13.4.1 Delivery Route for Wind Turbine Components 13.4.2 Access for Conventional Construction Traffic 13.4.3 Access for Maintenance Traffic 13.5 Design & Layout 66 13.5.1 General 13.5.2 Turbines 13.5.3 Electrical Compound & Cables 13.5.4 Temporary Site Compound 13.5.5 Meteorological Mast 13.5.6 New & Upgraded Site Roads 13.5.7 Excavated Spoil 13.6 Cultural Heritage 68 13.6.1 Archaeology 13.6.2 Moated Site & Fulachtaí Fia 13.6.3 Other Archaeological Features 13.6.4 Built Heritage 13.6.5 Mill Race 13.6.6 Settings of Items of Cultural Heritage 13.6.7 General Cultural Heritage of the Area 13.7 Noise 73 13.7.1 Noise-Sensitive Locations 13.7.2 Baseline Noise Monitoring 13.7.3 Noise Modelling 13.7.4 Discrepancies in Noise Data Submitted 13.7.5 Adjusted Noise Impact Report 13.7.6 Inconsistencies in Data Submitted on 3 rd April 2014 13.7.7 Low Frequency Noise 13.7.8 Construction Noise 13.7.9 Noise Mitigation Measures 13.8 Shadow Flicker 76 13.8.1 Wind Energy Guidelines Recommendation 13.8.2 Houses Affected by Shadow Flicker 13.8.3 Shadow Flicker Occurrence 13.8.4 Shadow Flicker Calculations 13.8.5 Adjusted Shadow Flicker Report 13.8.6 Modelling for Shadow Flicker in Revised Scheme 13.8.7 Mitigation Measures 13.8.8 Shadow Flicker and Roads 13.8.9 Recommended Condition 13.9 Ecology 79 13.9.1 General Comment 13.9.2 Flora & Fauna Site Surveys 13.9.3 Natural Heritage Areas 13.9.4 Habitat Surveys

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 5 of 114 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

13.9.5 Mammals 13.9.6 Bats 13.9.7 Birds 13.9.8 Winter Birds 13.9.9 Whooper Swan 13.9.10 Collision Impact for Birds 13.9.11 Aquatic Ecology 13.9.12 Construction Phase 13.9.13 Loss of Habitats 13.10 Soils & Geology 85 13.10.1 Site Surveys 13.10.2 Bedrock Geology 13.10.3 Surface Water Features 13.10.4 Peat 13.11 Water 86 13.11.1 Flooding 13.11.2 Surface Water Quality 13.11.3 Bedrock Aquifer 13.11.4 Mitigation Measures 13.12 Air & Climate 87 13.13 ‘Windtake’ 88 13.13.1 ‘Windtake’ 13.13.2 Wind Energy Guidelines 13.13.3 Proximity to Adjoining Lands 13.14 Environmental Impact Statement 89 13.14.1 General Comment 13.14.2 Compliance with 2001 Regulations 13.14.3 Identification of Likely Significant Effects 13.14.4 Description of Likely Effects Identified 13.14.5 Assessment of Likely Significant Effects 13.14.6 Conclusions – Likely Residual Effects 13.15 Appropriate Assessment 95 13.15.1 EU Guidance 13.15.2 Appropriate Assessment Screening Report 13.15.3 List of European Sites 13.15.4 Qualifying Interests of Nearby European Sites 13.15.5 River Crossings 13.15.6 Conclusions of Screening Report 13.15.7 Whooper Swan 13.15.8 In-combination Effects 13.15.9 Appropriate Assessment Conclusion 13.16 Other Issues 98 13.16.1 Site Ownership 13.16.2 Employment

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 6 of 114 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

13.16.3 Material Assets 13.16.4 Aircraft Safety 13.16.5 Waste Management 13.16.6 Telecommunications 13.16.7 Financial Contribution/Bonds 13.16.8 Decommissioning 13.16.9 Construction Period & Construction Hours 13.16.10 Duration of Planning Permission 13.16.11 Impact on Tourism 13.16.12 Public Consultation 13.16.13 Community Benefit Fund 13.16.14 Safety 13.16.15 Public Health

14.0 RECOMMENDATION 104

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 7 of 114 1.0 PRE-PLANNING CONSULTATION – AN BORD PLEANÁLA

As provided for under section 37B of the Planning and Development Act 2000, (amended by the Planning and Development [Strategic Infrastructure] Act 2006), Jennings ) O’Donovan & Partners Ltd., agent on behalf of Green Wind Energy (Wexford) Ltd, entered into discussions with An Bord Pleanála in relation to the proposed development – ref. 19.PC0149 . Three meetings were held between An Bord Pleanala and the agent for the applicant, on 17 th October 2012, 10 th June and 4 th September 2013. By Order dated 31st October 2013, the Board decided that the proposed development of a 32-turbine wind farm, at Yellow River, Rhode, Co. Offaly, was strategic infrastructure. The current application to An Bord Pleanála is made on foot of that decision.

2.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

2.1 The site, with a stated area of 1,002ha (actual development footprint of 20.6ha), straddles the R400 Regional Road linking Rochfortbridge in Co. Westmeath with Rhode in Co. Offaly. The site (very broadly U-shaped), comprises a number of discrete parcels of farmland, cut-away raised bog and forestry lands (both coniferous and deciduous). Whilst the site is entirely located within Co. Offaly, it is located close to the borders with Counties Meath and Westmeath to the north. Turbines will be placed in a generally flat landscape 75-93m OD. There is a range of low hills to the south of the site – Croghan Hill (236m), Barrysbrook Hill (150m), Clonin Hill (136m) and Fahy Hill (114m). In addition, there is an isolated hill at Knockdrin (110m) within the very roughly U-shaped application site.

2.2 The R400 is the principal access route to the site. The new M6 motorway runs approximately 2km to the northwest of the site – with a grade- separated junction for the R400. The 80kph speed restriction applies on the R400. It is an exceptionally straight road from the county boundary to a recently constructed roundabout at Coolcor, just 1km to the north of the village of Rhode. It is possible to pass two vehicles with ease on this road. The road is a bog rampart construction for most of its length, with the surface uneven and potholed in places. The entrance to Kilmurray Quarry (access to turbines T1-T12) is broad and wide, affording good sight distance in either direction. Sand and gravel is being dredged from below the water table within the said quarry. The tarmac road leading to the quarry, a piggery, peatlands and agricultural lands, is broad and wide. There is a second entrance to the proposed site from the R400 (T1-T12), immediately adjacent to the bridge over the Yellow River. The geometry of this junction is considerably poorer than at the Kilmurray Quarry junction – sight distance towards Rochfortbridge being restricted.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 8 of 114 2.3 At the aforementioned roundabout on the R400 at Coolcur, it is proposed to take access to turbines T13-T32. A continuous access road will be created- partly new and partly using existing farm tracks, and crossing existing county roads in places. There are three roads at this roundabout at present – access to the wind farm will form a fourth arm on the eastern side. Sight distance at the roundabout is good.

2.4 There is a limited county road network in this area – largely due to the presence of peat bogs. Country roads are narrow and twisting in places – only wide enough for one vehicle at some points. The condition of many of the roads is poor, with surface water ponding and surfaces disintegrating. Habitation is generally confined to farmhouses and one-off houses lining the roads – with extensive ribbon development in places.

2.5 The village of Rhode is approximately 1km south of the site. There are Bord na Móna works at Derrygreenagh on the northeast side of the R400. Planning permission exists for a waste recycling & transfer facility and for a gas-fired power plant at Derrygreenagh (close to the Bord na Móna works) – neither of which developments have been constructed to date. There is a pig farm and two sand & gravel quarries on the southwest side of the R400 in the vicinity of proposed T1-T12. Just to the south of Coolcor roundabout, a short cul de sac leads off the R400 to Rhode Peaking Power Plant and Derryiron 110kV sub-station, and the as yet undeveloped Rhode Business Park. There is a communications mast located adjacent to the 110kV sub-station. The road base is in place within the Rhode Business Park, with footpaths flanking it. There is a temporary, 80m high wind-monitoring mast some distance to the west of T10. There is a large pig farm unit located between T28 & T30 at the northern end of the overall site.

2.6 The Mongagh River forms the Offaly County boundary with Counties Westmeath and Meath. The Yellow River and the Big River also drain this area – flowing from west to east. The channels of these rivers have been substantially altered through arterial drainage schemes. There is considerable artificial drainage in the area – particularly to the southwest of the R400, associated with the harvesting of peat. Many fields within the area are separated by drains.

2.7 Section 13.3.6 of the EIS contains a description of the overall site; and whilst worded to address the related issues of archaeology and architecture, gives an excellent pen-picture of proposed individual turbine sites (with reference to associated colour photographs in Appendix O) and to which I would refer the Board. Appendix O contains photographs of the bases of all turbines with the exception of T25-T27 which are located within commercial coniferous/deciduous plantation.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 9 of 114 2.8 There are broad views over the surrounding countryside from roads surrounding Croghan Hill. There are fine views from the old cemetery near the summit of the Hill (accessible only on foot). There does not appear to be a sign-posted footpath through farmland to the cemetery, and certainly none beyond it to the summit of the Hill. The wind farm at Mount Lucas (under construction – and half completed) is clearly visible from the old cemetery and from roads on the east and south sides of the hill. The Mount Lucas wind farm is visible from Knockdrin Hill – within the proposed Yellow River wind farm site. There are fine views across much of the site from Knockdrin Hill – county roads traversing its summit. There are fine views across the site from a cul de sac road on the north side of Clonin Hill just outside of Rhode. The Mount Lucas wind farm is also visible from Garrane Hill within Co. Westmeath – on the old N6 – a Listed View.

2.9 It was not possible to penetrate to the bases of T1 or T11 on 21 st February 2014, due to location within coniferous plantation and scrub woodland respectively. On 26 th February 2014, it was not possible to penetrate to the bases of T26 or T27, due to location within coniferous and deciduous plantation respectively. On 21 st February 2014 there were approximately 60 swans grazing at Derryarkin or roosting on the flooded former quarry pits at Derrygreenagh and Derryiron townlands. On a site inspection on 30 th April 2014, there were 6 swans in a field immediately to the southeast of T5 and next to the boundary with the operational Kilmurray Quarry.

3.0 THE PROPOSED DEVELOP0MENT

3.1 A 15-year planning permission was sought on 28 th November 2013, for development of the Yellow River Wind Farm (96MW) in the townlands of Derryarkin, Derryiron, Coolcor, Coolville, Ballyburly, Greenhills, Bunsallagh, Derrygreenagh, Knockdrin, Wood, Killowen, Corbetstown, Carrick, Garr and Dunville – to the north of Rhode, Co. Offaly. The site comprises a number of discrete parcels of land (totalling 1,002ha), spread over an area measuring approximately 11km east/west by 7km north/south. This spread of the site necessitated the erection of 14 no. site notices. The wind farm comprises the following principal elements- • 32 no. turbines (T1-T32) with a maximum hub height of 110m and a three-blade maximum rotor diameter of 113m – to give an overall height of 166m. Tower colour proposed is grey/white. The base of each support tower has a diameter of 5.5m. The foundations of turbines will measure 18m in diameter and will be 2m deep (420m 3 of poured concrete). Micro-siting of up to 20m is proposed. Turbines will operate at wind speeds of 3-25m/second. • Electrical transformers – to be located either within or immediately adjacent to the base of each turbine – to step up voltage to 33kV. • A hardstand area of 2,000sq.m to be provided adjacent to each turbine for vehicle turning, construction/assembly and maintenance.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 10 of 114 • An electrical compound measuring 37 x 50m – surrounded by 2.6m high palisade fencing. Within this compound will be 2 no. single- storey control buildings (208sq.m) and a fully-bunded diesel generator. The compound will be provided with lighting. • 33kV underground cables linking turbines with the electrical compound. 110kV underground cable linking the electrical compound with the adjacent Derryiron 110kV sub-station. Total of 25.7km of underground cables. • Permanent lattice construction meteorological mast (100m high, and 3m square at base) to northeast of T10 – to replace an existing temporary 80m high lattice mast some 600m to the southeast • New vehicular access off roundabout on the R400 Regional Road to the north of Rhode. • New 5m wide access tracks – 18.25km length. • Upgraded access tracks/roads from approximately 3.5m to 5.5m – 5.9km length. Approximately 2.5km of the access road to the Kilmurray Quarry, which is 7m wide, will not have to be upgraded. • One road bridge upgrade at Corbetstown, and construction of eight stream/river crossings. • Water supply from public mains. • Foul waste discharged to 10m 3 underground holding tank – emptied off-site by tanker. • Surface water discharge to stilling ponds and swales. • Felling of commercial coniferous plantation for four turbines and access – 10.4ha approximately. • Temporary construction compound measuring 30m x 50m – located adjacent to the electrical compound.

3.2 The make and model of turbines is to be subject of tender. Connection to the national grid is planned to be at Derryiron 110kV substation – to the north of Rhode. The wind farm is stated to have a lifetime of 30 years – with a three-year construction period and two-year decommissioning period (35 years total).

3.3 The application is accompanied by the following- • Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Volume 1 – Non-Technical Summary and Main Report. • EIS Volume 2 – Appendices. • A0-size Landscape & Visual Assessment book of images. • Appropriate Assessment (AA) Screening Report – dated 19 th November 2013. • Letter from applicant company indicating that it holds options to lease all necessary lands, and includes a list of landowners who have consented to the application being made – 25 in total.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 11 of 114 4.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND OTHER GUIDANCE

4.1 National Energy Policy

4.1.1 Delivering a Sustainable Energy Future for Ireland – The Energy Policy Framework 2007-2020

This is a Government White Paper. The overriding objective is to ensure that energy is consistently available at competitive prices, with minimal risk of supply disruption. In this respect, a requirement for flexible plant and significantly higher standards of generating plant availability and more interconnection between generating stations is identified.

Without policy intervention, dependence on natural gas for power generation would be 70% by 2020, and while natural gas will continue to be of importance as a fuel, reduced over-reliance on natural gas in the power generation sector will be pursued through promotion of realistic alternatives. The growth in energy demand and closure of older plants will be addressed by new investment in conventional power generation. Gas- fired power stations will continue to play a key role.

Strategic Goal 2: Accelerating the Growth of Renewable Energy Sources, identifies a growth in Combined Heat and Power (CHP) deployment as an important objective to 2020. It is stated that CHP investment yields a relatively low return at high risk, so barriers need to be addressed and supports maintained in order to realise the deployment potential, not just in community and buildings, but also in large-scale plants. It was an objective to achieve at least 400MW from CHP by 2010, with particular emphasis on biomass fuelled CHP, and to achieve at least 800MW by 2020.

‘Strategic Goal 3: Enhancing the Diversity of Fuels for Power Generation’ seeks to limit Ireland’s relative dependence on natural gas for power generation to approximately 50% by 2020.

It is also an objective to achieve 15% of electricity consumption, on a national basis, from renewable energy sources by 2010, and 33% by 2020 (target increased to 40% in Government budget speech of 2009).

4.1.2 National Renewable Energy Action Plan 2010

This Plan implements EU Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, which sets out agreed new climate and energy targets- 20-20-20 by 2020 – 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions; 20% energy efficiency, and 20% of the EU’s energy consumption to be from renewable sources. In relation to the electricity

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 12 of 114 sector, the plan has set a target of 40% electricity consumption from renewable sources by 2020.

4.1.3 Strategy for Renewable Energy, 2012–2020

The Strategy for Renewable Energy, 2012–2020 is the most recent policy statement on renewable energy. It reiterates the Government’s view that the development of sources of renewable energy is critical to reducing dependency on fossil fuel imports, securing sustainable and competitive energy supplies and underpinning the move towards a low-carbon economy. The Strategy sets out specific actions the Government will take to accelerate the development of wind, ocean and bio-energy, R&D, sustainable transport energy, and supporting energy infrastructure.

Strategic Goal 1 aims to achieve progressively more renewable electricity from onshore and offshore wind power for the domestic and export markets.

4.1.4 Ireland’s Second National Energy Efficiency Action Plan to 2020 (March 2013)

This Plan sets out strategy to reduce Ireland’s dependence on imported fossil fuels, improve energy efficiency across a number of sectors and ensure a sustainable energy future. It is stated that over the 7 years, approximately 1,300MW of older plant will be replaced by 850MW of high- efficiency CCGT and wind energy production. The plan offers support for CHP which has the potential for up to 50% lower CO 2 emissions, compared with conventional heat and power. It states that current CHP capacity is 284MW. The objective for 800MW by 2020 is stated.

4.1.5 Government Policy Statement on the Strategic Importance of Transmission and Other Energy Infrastructure, July 2012

This Statement reaffirms the need for development and renewal of energy networks in order to meet both economic and social goals. The consideration of specific technologies and mitigation measures, as well as early consultation and engagement with local communities, is advocated.

4.1.6 Grid 25 A Strategy for the Development of Ireland’s Electricity Grid for a Sustainable and Competitive Future.

Offaly forms part of the Midlands Region within Grid 25. It is stated that there are modest wind resources available in the region. By 2025, the area is expected to have 160MW of wind energy. There are 110kV lines running to and from the power station at Derryiron, north of Rhode.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 13 of 114 4.2 National Economic Policy

4.2.1 Delivering our Green Potential Government Policy Statement on Growth and Employment in the Green Economy 2012

The Policy Statement “Delivering our Green Potential” affirms the Government’s commitment to developing the green economy to a much greater extent than currently exists. One of the sectors for significant expansion, as set out in the Policy Statement, is that of renewable energy. It is an objective to ensure that, on average, at least 200MW of new renewable generation is being connected to the grid per annum.

4.3 National Planning Policy & Guidance

4.3.1 National Spatial Strategy 2002-2020

The NSS states that rural areas have a vital contribution to make to the achievement of balanced regional development by utilising and developing the economic resources of rural areas. It identifies renewable energy as one resource that could support the economic growth and revitalisation of areas in the Midlands Region. Map 6 in the NSS shows the area in which the subject site is located as “Village Strengthening and Rural Area Opportunities’. Such areas were previously centred on agriculture, peat extraction and energy production. Worked-out bogs in the Midlands are highly suited to wind energy development at a significant enough scale to support ancillary manufacturing, servicing and development activities, helping to position Ireland as an innovator in wind farm technology.

4.3.2 Guidelines for Planning Authorities on Wind Farm Development and Wind Energy Development 2006

The Guidelines offer advice on planning for wind energy through the Development Plan process, and in determining applications for planning permission, and are intended to ensure consistency of approach in the identification of suitable locations for wind energy developments, and acknowledge that locational considerations are important. These considerations include ease of vehicular access and connection to the electricity grid. It is acknowledged that visual impact is amongst the more important issues when deciding a particular application. Whilst there is no set-back distance specified, it is indicated at section 5.6 that noise is likely to a problem at less than 500m. In relation to shadow flicker, section 5.12 states that impact at neighboring offices and dwellings within 500m should not exceed 30 hours per year or 30 minutes per day. It goes on to state that at distances greater than 10 rotor diameters, the potential for shadow flicker is very low. Section 5.13, dealing with 'windtake', states that distances between turbines will generally be 3 rotor diameters in the

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 14 of 114 crosswind direction and 7 rotor diameters in the prevailing downwind direction. This section goes on to state- ‘Bearing in mind the requirements for optimal performance, a distance of not less than two rotor blades from adjoining property boundaries will generally be acceptable, unless by written agreement of adjoining landowners to a lesser distance. However, where permission for wind energy development has been granted on an adjacent site, the principle of the minimum separation distances between turbines in crosswind and downwind directions indicated above should be respected’.

4.3.3 Proposed Revisions to Wind Energy Development Guidelines 2006

These Draft Guidelines were introduced by the Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, in December 2013, to deal with limited aspects of wind farm developments. A consultation period was allowed – up to 21 st February 2014 (which time has now passed). The revisions proposed are- • A more stringent absolute outdoor noise limit (day and night) of 40 dB for future wind energy developments. • A mandatory setback of 500m between a wind turbine and the curtilage of the nearest dwelling, for amenity considerations. • A condition to be attached to all future planning permissions for wind farms to ensure that there will be no shadow flicker at any dwelling within 10 rotor diameters of a wind turbine. If shadow flicker does occur, the wind energy developer/operator should be required to take necessary measures, such as turbine shutdown for the period necessary to eliminate the shadow flicker.

There is no indication to date as to proposed changes, if any, to the 2006 Guidelines.

4.4 Regional Policy

4.4.1 Regional Planning Guidelines for the Midlands Region 2010-2022

Section 3.3.4.6 recognises the potential income to farmers from wind farms. Worked-out peatlands offer potential for renewable energy installations, including wind energy. The region has a strong history of energy production (from peat) and an extensive electricity transmission network in place, with the potential for a smooth transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy. The related employment opportunities in manufacturing, servicing and R&D activities, is acknowledged. Section 5.8 of the Guidelines addresses energy provision. It is stated that the region has substantial renewable energy potential to accommodate large- scale energy production in the form of wind farms and bio-energy fuel sources. In particular, TIP33 states- Support the sustainable development

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 15 of 114 of the infrastructure required to assist the Midlands Region in the delivery of renewable energy particularly in the context of the existing energy infrastructure in the region and the need to make a transition from peat to renewable energy.

4.5 Local Planning Policy

4.5.1 County Offaly Development Plan 2009-2015

4.5.1.1 Chapter 8 of the Plan deals with the area of Energy & Communications, and section 8.2.1 deals with wind energy.

Policy P08-02 : It is Council policy to facilitate the continual development of renewable energy sources having regard to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area, having particular regard to amenities, landscape sensitivities and the protection of habitats and heritage, where such proposals comply with policy contained in the County Development Plan.

Policy P08-03 : It is Council policy to encourage the development of wind energy in suitable locations in an environmentally sustainable manner and in accordance with Government policy, having particular regard to the Wind Energy Strategy for the County.

Objective O08-02 : It is an objective of the Council to achieve a reasonable balance between responding to Government policy on renewable energy and to enabling the wind energy resources of the County to be harnessed in an environmentally sustainable manner. This will be implemented having regard to the Council’s Wind Energy Strategy.

Objective O08-05 : It is an objective of the Council to support and facilitate the generation of electrical power within the county and the provision of high-voltage electricity infrastructure to cater for natural growth, and for new and existing large customers. Further, it is an objective of the Council to ensure, insofar as is possible, that the necessary infrastructure is in place to support the existing and future economy in Offaly, to support economic development and to attract investment.

4.5.1.2 Chapter 15 deals with the issue of natural heritage. Map 15.2 indicates that an area centred on Croghan Hill is an Area of High Amenity. Section 15.8.6 states-

The Council recognises the scenic quality and recreational value of the Croghan Hill area. Croghan Hill, Raheenmore Bog and Cannakill Deserted Mediaeval Village are the main elements of the Area of High Amenity. The Council, through its development control function will seek

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 16 of 114 to preserve the scenic amenity and recreational potential of this area and to protect it from development that would damage or diminish its overall attractiveness and character.

4.5.1.3 Map 16.1 of the Plan illustrates Landscape Classification. Most of the wider site is located within a landscape of ‘Low Sensitivity’ with some turbines located within a landscape of ‘Moderate Sensitivity’. The landscape around Croghan Hill is indicated as ‘High Sensitivity’.

4.5.1.4 Map 16.10 indicates Protected Views within the County. There are Protected Views in the vicinity of Croghan Hill- • V7 – Road No. L-01018 in the townlands of Cannakill and Croghan Demesne – towards the Slieve Blooms to the southwest. • V8 – Townlands of Barnan, Kilduff, Old Croghan, Croghan Demesne, Down – towards Croghan Hill and boglands to the east and north. • V9 – Townlands of Grovesend and Coole – towards boglands to south.

4.5.2 County Offaly Wind Strategy to 2015

This document dates from January 2009. Table 1 identifies 12 no. areas examined for potential for wind farm development. Area No. 1 is ‘North of Rhode’. Having regard to proximity to an existing sub-station, access roads, cutover bog, large landholdings, precedent of existing visually intrusive infrastructure, this area is highly suitable. There is some sensitivity to the overlooking of the western portion of this area from protected views.

Section 5.1 states that Wind Energy shall be permitted in the County-

1. In Areas Suitable for Wind Energy Development – Development of Wind Farms and smaller wind energy projects shall be open for consideration.

2. In all other areas Wind Energy Developments shall not normally be permitted – except as provided for under exemption provisions.

Section 5.2.1 states that areas marked in hatched red in Figure 9 are areas that are likely to be suitable for all scales of wind energy development on account of a combination of factors that include- • Available access to suitable grid connections (within 10km). • The absence of overwhelming environmental constraints, and • Low densities of adjacent residential development.

All permissions within Suitable Areas shall have a 20-year life, with the expectation of future intensification by-

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 17 of 114 • Taller turbines with larger swept areas. • Higher densities (closer spacing of turbines). • More advanced technology with higher efficiencies of energy capture.

4.5.3 Draft Offaly County Development Plan 2014-2020

Submissions on this Draft were accepted up to 6 th January 2014. Section 3.5 deals with the issue of Wind Energy. Reference is made to the Wind Energy Strategy for the County. Map 3.2 is a copy of Figure 9 of the Wind Energy Strategy 2009. There is no significant change in relation to wind energy in the Draft Plan.

4.5.4 Kildare County Development Plan 2011-2017

The closest turbine is approximately 4.5km from the county boundary. Scenic Routes 28 & 38 are identified by Kildare County Council as being possibly impacted by the development.

4.5.5 Meath County Development Plan 2013-2019

The wind farm is adjacent to the county boundary. The southwest corner of the county is characterised as Landscape Character Area 15. The Landscape Value is ‘High’; the Landscape Sensitivity is ‘Medium’; and the Landscape Importance is ‘Regional’. In relation to potential capacity, Item 9 states- ‘Medium potential capacity to accommodate wind farms or single turbines because views within this LCA are generally short range and limited by topography and vegetation, so there are opportunities for choosing locations where visual impacts are minimal’. Map 9.5.1 indicates that there are no Views & Prospects listed in this corner of the county.

4.5.6 Westmeath County Development Plan 2008-2014

The proposed wind farm is adjacent to the county boundary. There is a designated view – V21 – View to south over County Offaly from Garrane Hill on Regional Route R446 between Tyrrellspass and Rochfortbridge. This viewpoint is located approximately 4.5km north of the closest turbine.

5.0 PLANNING HISTORY

There is no recent relevant planning history relating to wind farm development associated with this dispersed site. There are a number of other planning permissions for significant developments granted in the area as follows-

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 18 of 114 5.1 Ref. 09/453: Permission granted by Offaly County Council for 32 turbine wind farm at Mount Lucas in July 2010. On appeal by 3 rd parties to the Board ( PL 19.237263 ) permission was granted on 7 th December 2010 subject to conditions – principal amongst which was the reduction in number of turbines by two. This wind farm development site is located near Daingean, approximately 10km to the south of the applicant site. [Development commenced December 2012, and turbines are under construction – almost half of which were erected by 30 th April 2014.

5.2 Ref. 09/537: Permission granted by Offaly County Council to Biotricity Ltd. for a biomass-processing CHP plant for production of 15MW of renewable energy at Coolcor, Rhode. This facility has not been constructed. This site is adjacent to the existing Rhode Peaking Power Plant of 104MW (commissioned in 2004) and driven by combustion engines. This plant in turn is located beside the Eirgrid 110kV Derryiron sub-station.

5.3 Ref. 19.PA0011: Permission granted by An Bord Pleanála (Strategic Infrastructure Development) to Bord na Mona Energy Ltd. on 12 th April 2010, for combined-cycle gas turbine unit and reserve/peaking open cycle gas turbine unit (600MW total) at Derrygreenagh, Rhode. A 10-year permission was granted. There is no development to date on this site.

5.4 Ref. 10/93: Permission granted by Offaly County Council on 9 th September 2010, for materials recycling and waste transfer facility (99,000 tonnes per annum) at Derrygreenagh, Rhode. On appeal by the 1 st party to the Board against conditions ( PL 19.237717 ), permission was granted on 17 th February 2011. There is no development to date.

5.5 Ref. 12/207: Permission granted by Offaly County Council to Kilmurray Precast Concrete Ltd. for extraction of sand & gravel on site of 24.5ha adjacent to an existing quarry at Derryarkin, Rhode. On appeal by the 1 st party to the Board ( PL 19.241985 ) against conditions only, permission was granted on 18 th September 2013.

6.0 OFFALY COUNTY COUNCIL SUBMISSION

6.1 County Manager’s Report.

The Report, received by the Board on 20 th February 2014, can be summarised in bullet point format as follows- • The County Offaly Development Plan remains in force until February 2015. • The proposed site is predominantly located in a low sensitivity landscape area – Map 16.1.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 19 of 114 • The R400 is constructed on peat, and requires constant repair. Site investigation is necessary to establish the strength of the road. • It is preferable that there not be two access points to T1-T12 from the R400. Yet it is preferable the cables be routed along the proposed access road and not along the R400. • There are no details of the 5,916m of site roads to be upgraded. • Haul routes for materials to improve roads and fell trees need to be identified. • Detailed design proposals for road-widening at Greenhills L-50112- 1 and at Carrick L-100-81-1 are needed. • Undergrounding of cable routes along public roads need to be agreed with the local authority. Mitigation measures to protect bog rampart roads need to be outlined. • Culverts and bridges along haul routes need to be surveyed for structural stability. • Evidence of permission to use the Kilmurray Quarry access road is required. • An assessment is required in relation to a fourth arm on the roundabout on the R400 at Coolcur. • It is not clear from drawings what stretches of public and private roads are to be widened. • A Traffic Management Plan is needed for all construction traffic. • On 29/1/14 it was noted that all 14 site notices were in place. • An on-site wastewater treatment system would be preferable at the sub-station site. • No details of swales are given. • Details of concrete wash-down facility are needed. • Calculations in relation to reduction in greenhouse gas emissions are needed. • It is not clear how turbines are to be accessed in case of emergencies, when access roads flood. • Stormwater flows from roads should be indicated for attenuation or discharge. • There are a number of instances where noise limits will exceed 5db above background levels, notwithstanding that limits will not breach 43dB and 40dB levels. • The purported reduction in 61% for shadow flicker needs to be justified. • Chief Fire Officer has no objection to proposal. • The Council has not received all 3 rd party observations at the date of submission of this Report to the Board. • Detailed proposals to control siltation of watercourses are absent from the EIS. • Noise surveys would not appear to have considered houses for which planning permission exists, but which are not yet built.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 20 of 114 • An explanation is needed as to why most of those approximately 31 houses with predicted noise between 40 and 43dB(A) in Table 9.10 of the EIS are shown outside (i.e. lower than) the predicted 40dB(A) noise contour on Figures 9.31-9.34. • A map of results for shadow flicker (like the noise one) would be useful. • Details in relation to reductions for shadow flicker hours (from those outlined in worst case scenario model) are required. • Shadow flicker has not been calculated for houses for which planning permission exists, but which have not yet been built. • Excessive shut-down of turbines to avoid shadow flicker may have a negative and disturbing visual impact. • Photomontages submitted do not reflect the landscape and cultural importance of Croghan Hill. The 2km buffer around the hill should not be treated as absolute – as it was used only a tool in the preparation of the Wind Strategy. • Insufficient photomontages have been submitted – and vantage points include too much vegetation and visual clutter (clustering and overlapping of turbines). More panoramic shots should be included. • In general, the proposal complies with the County Development Plan and the Wind Energy Strategy. The Council is mindful of the proposed revisions to the Wind Energy Guidelines 2006. • There is uncertainty regarding the grid connection at Derryiron 110kV substation. It is noted that permission was granted to the Mount Lucas wind farm in advance of a grid connection. It is important that a15-year permission would not negatively impact on the viability of any other appropriate wind farm or other developments in the area. A 10-year permission would be considered more appropriate. • Whilst the wind farm is spread out, a greater concentration of turbines (such as at Mount Lucas) would not be possible given the settlement pattern of this area. Turbines at Mount Lucas are 150m high, as against 166m proposed at Yellow River. • The 30-year operational life proposed is over and above the 20- year life set out in the Offaly Wind Energy Strategy 2009. • The Council is concerned at the height and clustering of some turbines, something which could be mitigated by removing some turbines. • A slim-line design for towers is preferable – with only slight tapering, and a white/grey colour. No livery stripes should be painted on turbines – to keep them as simple as possible. • The monitoring mast should be limited to the duration of permission of the wind farm. • In the event that the Board is minded to grant permission, headline conditions are suggested – without being specifically worded.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 21 of 114 • It is considered that a Community Gain condition should be attached to any grant of permission. It should be tied down at permission stage – in the event that the applicant is not the ultimate developer. A percentage sum related to the total project cost is suggested. The Community Gain could be divided into categories (i) general grant aid to community groups (ii) an economic development investment fund (iii) a greener homes scheme. A weighted allocation could be made for the local area – rather than the wider area. • The draft Development Contribution Scheme for the county indicates €10,000 per MW to be apportioned - €6,500 for roads and €3,500 for amenities. • In light of works which might be required for roads, the Council is unable to specify any amount for a Special Contribution. The Board is referred to condition 7 of the Mount Lucas permission – PL 19.237263. • The 2006 Guidelines recommend that no bond be attached for decommissioning because the scrap value is likely to cover this cost. A bond condition might be required by the Roads Section for works during the construction phase.

6.2 Minutes of Meeting of Offaly County Council of 17 th February 2014

6.2.1 The Senior Planner reported to Councillors that the development was acceptable in principle. Additional information was required in order to assess impacts on residents, ecology and visual amenity.

6.2.2 Councillors raised the following issues- • Wind Energy Guidelines 2006 were currently under revision, and proposal should be considered under the provisions of the proposed revisions to the Guidelines. • Due consideration should be given to medical concerns of the residents in the area. • Adverse impact on property and homes should be considered by the Board. • The presence of Whooper swans at Derryarkin is an important consideration. • View from Croghan Hill would be impaired by this fragmented development. The application does not address the historical and geological significance of the hill. The buffer zone around the hill should be greater than 2km. • Area is relatively densely populated for a rural area. Permission should be refused on grounds of impact on residential amenity – particularly caused by noise and shadow flicker. • Any community gain condition needs to be definitive. • R400 is in poor condition.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 22 of 114 • Part of the internal road network is in a floodplain. • Property values would be negatively impacted by the development. • Local community should have benefit of reduced electricity costs. • Only 3 of the 32 turbines are located on cutaway bog. • The cumulative impact of wind farms needs to be examined.

6.2.3 Councillors resolved that the proposal was not acceptable in principle.

7.0 PRESCRIBED BODIES

7.1 Bodies Notified by the Applicant

On the advice of the Board, the following, apart from Offaly County Council, were notified by the Applicant- • Westmeath County Council. • Meath County Council. • Kildare County Council. • Department of Arts, Heritage & Gaeltacht. • Údarás na Gaeltachta. • Department of Communications, Energy & Natural Resources. • National Roads Authority. • An Chomhairle Ealaíon. • Fáilte Ireland. • An Taisce. • Inland Fisheries Ireland. • Irish Aviation Authority. • Heritage Council. • Health Service Executive. • Commission for Energy Regulation. • Department of Tourism, Transport & Sport. • Environmental Protection Agency.

7.2 Responses Received

The responses received are listed below in summary form.

7.2.1 Irish Aviation Authority The response, received by the Board on 13 th December 2013, recommends an agreed scheme of aviation obstacle warning lights, supply of co-ordinates of turbines as constructed to the IAA, and prior notification of commencement of development.

7.2.2 National Roads Authority The response, received by the Board on 17 th January 2014, indicates that matters of road access are best addressed by the local authority. Any

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 23 of 114 recommendations set out in Section 12.6 of the EIS in relation to outsize loads, should be adhered to.

7.2.3 An Taisce The response, received by the Board on 29 th January 2014, states that any application for wind energy at this site needs to be part of an integrated energy decarbonisation strategy and peatland conservation and carbon management strategy for both the application site as well as the surrounding area. This application needs to be viewed in the light of the refusal of the Board for planning permission of a wind farm at Cloghan, Co. Offaly, on visual amenity grounds.

7.2.4 Department of Arts, Heritage & Gaeltacht Response, received on 29 th January 2014, recommends that archaeology mitigation strategy outlined in section 13.7.1 be implemented in full. The EIS does not include an underwater archaeological assessment of watercourses – including canalised sections of the Yellow River: this should be a requirement in any grant of permission. Other areas of archaeological potential should be examined by a suitably qualified archaeologist as construction proceeds. The Department recommends that all mitigation measures, including post-construction monitoring, as outlined in the EIS and NIS be a condition of any permission granted – particularly in relation to water quality, bats and Whooper swans.

7.2.5 Health Service Executive The response, received by the Board on 30 th January 2014, states that it is not known if some houses in the vicinity of turbines are served by wells. No samples of groundwater were taken. Consideration should be given to surveying and monitoring wells in the vicinity of turbines. Appropriate mitigation measures should be put in place in the event of deterioration in water quality. If the development has any impact on the Toberdaly springs (source of water for Rhode) some 2km south of the site, then mitigation measures must be put in place with the agreement of Offaly County Council. The Guidelines in relation to noise are currently being reviewed – stating that a separation of 500m between any turbine and the curtilage of any house should be observed, and a noise limit of 40dB(A) applied. There are a number of houses marginally over the 500m separation distance – H207 (501m), H140 (513m) and H141 (506m). The developer must give a commitment to monitor noise and mitigate it where problems are reported by residents. The cost of investigation into nuisance caused by shadow flicker should be borne by the developer. A documented procedure for monitoring, recording, reporting and handling requests should be put in place. An Environmental Management Plan should be put in place by the developer to prevent, control/mitigate any potential negative environmental impacts arising during construction, operational and decommissioning phases of this development.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 24 of 114

7.2.6 Inland Fisheries Ireland The response, received by the Board on 31 st January 2014, notes that impacts on fisheries relate largely to the construction phase. Species which can be affected include salmonids, cyprinids and lampreys, as well as macro-invertebrates, macrophytes and algae. Deleterious matter from construction includes concrete, silt and hydrocarbons. The preferred option for watercourse crossings is ‘Clearspan’ bridge-type structures. Ford crossings are not permitted. Temporary culverts can be allowed subject to safeguards for fish. Bottomless culverts are the preferred option. Works affecting watercourses should generally be carried out between July and September. Protection measures outlined in the EIS should be adhered to in the event of a grant of planning permission. Silt traps should be designed and sized according to location. Natural vegetation can trap silt. Pre-cast concrete should be used in preference to uncured concrete, which can change pH in waters.

7.2.7 Kildare County Council The response, received by the Board on 31 st January 2014, indicated that the primary source of concern was visual. Two Scenic Routes within the county could be impacted – no.s 28 & 38. It is concluded that separation distances are great enough to ensure no significant impact – particularly in relation to views from bridges on the Grand Canal.

8.0 OBSERVATIONS OBJECTING TO DEVELOPEMNT

8.1 Parties Objecting to Development

Observations objecting to the development were received from the following (date received in brackets)-

1. Paul Gibson, Environmental Geophysics Unit, Department of Geography, National University of Ireland, Maynooth (23/1/14). 2. Jeanette Donath, Garr, Rhode, Co. Offaly (23/1/14). 3. Agnes Doolan, 13 Cluain Roighne, Banagher, Co. Offaly (24/1/14). 4. Michael Neary, Rathdrishogue, Castletown-Geoghegan, Mullingar, Co. Westmeath (24/1/14). 5. Pierine & Brownell O’Connor, ‘Jumeriah Lodge’, Garr, Rhode, Co. Offaly (27/1/14). 6. Michael Murphy & Muriel Murphy, Greenhills, Fahy, Rhode, Co. Offaly (28/1/14). 7. Don Kidd, ‘Orchid House’, Clonmore, Edenderry, Co. Offaly (28/1/14). 8. D. George, ‘The Forge House’, Carrick, Rhode, Co. Offaly (28/1/14). 9. Keith Corney, ‘Schoolhouse’, Garr, Rhode, Co. Offaly (29/1/14).

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 25 of 114 10. Paschal Cooney, Ballintoran, Kinnegad, Co. Meath (29/1/14). 11. Michael Conlon, Carrick Stud, Carrick, Castlejordan, Tullamore (29/1/14). 12. Gerard M. Reidy, Ballard, Rhode, Co. Offaly (29/1/2014). 13. William Mulligan, Toberdaly, Rhode, Co. Offaly (29/1/14). 14. Patrick Murphy, Killowen, Rhode, Co. Offaly (29/1/14). 15. Noel Moore, Rathgarret, Tyrellspass, Co. Westmeath (29/1/14). 16. Mary Groome, Garr, Rhode, Co. Offaly (29/1/14). 17. Leonard, Andrew & Edward McKeever, Corbetstown, Rhode, Co. Offaly (29/1/14). 18. Noel & Paula Bennett, Garr, Rhode, Co. Offaly (29/1/14). 19. Dale Treadwell, Ballintoran, Kinnegad, Co. Meath (29/1/14). 20. Bord na Móna, Main Street, Newbridge, Co. Kildare (30/1/14). 21. Julien Champy & Gerard Jenkins, Togher, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 22. Nicole Lonican & Others, 12 Shermount Court, Tyrrellspass, Co. Westmeath (30/1/14). 23. Gerry Hickey & Others, Toberdaly, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 24. Michael Hannon, Bunsallagh, Croghan, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 25. Christine Maguire, Dunville, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 26. Oliver, Gene & Rose Dunne, Connakill House, Croghan, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 27. Mary & Peter Hosey, Ballyheashill, Fahy, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 28. Laura & Patrick Lenihan, Lilybrook, Ballyburly, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 29. Joseph Caulfield, Rathrobin, Mount Bolus, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 30. Paul McPadden & family, Garr, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 31. Michael C. Muldoon, ‘St. Oliver’s’, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 32. Mark Malone, Ballycon, Mount Lucas, Daingean, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 33. Barry Smith, Toor Ballinabrackey, Kinnegad, Co. Meath (30/1/14). 34. Irene Brazil, Colehill, Kinnegad, Co. Meath (30/1/14). 35. Veronica Lynam, Coralstown, Co. Westmeath (30/1/14). 36. David & Siobhán McNamee, Corbetstown, Castlejordan, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 37. Louise Kennedy, Knockdrin, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 38. Mary Smullen, 18D Clonin, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 39. Joanne Addie, Ballyburley, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 40. Paul Stephenson, Robindale, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 41. Patrick Harney, Ballybeg, Croghan, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 42. Gerard & Olivia Dunne, ‘Wren Cottage’, Carrick, Castlejordan, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 43. Paddy & Kathleen Mooney, Corbetstown, Castlejordan, Co. Offaly (30/1/14).

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 26 of 114 44. Clonbulloge Wind Awareness Group, C/o Ann O’Neill, ‘Racefield House’, Clonbulloge, Tullamore, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 45. Robert Delaney, Carrick, Castlejordan, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 46. Cecilia Dowling, Fahy Hill, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 47. Paul & Karen Smith, Coolcor, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 48. Megan Addie-Douglas, Ballyburley, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 49. Stephanie Heffernan, 224 Woodville Manor, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 50. Lill McKenna, Coolcor, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 51. Gerard Mulligan, Coolcor, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 52. Peter Sweetman, Peter Sweetman & Associates, 14 Postnet, 113 Lr. Rathmines Road, Dublin 6 (30/1/14). 53. Denise McCann, Stonehouse, Castlejordan, Tullamore, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 54. Mary Dillon, Coolcor, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 55. Pat Rogers, Fahy, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 56. Una Quinn, Killowen, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 57. Michelle O’Donnell, Glasshammer Designs, Ballyheashill, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 58. Mount Temple & District Windfarm Information Group, c/o Laura Corcoran, Dunegan, Mount Temple, Moate, Co. Westmeath (30/1/14). 59. Brian Coffey, Ballinabrackey, Kinnegad, Co. Meath (30/1/14). 60. Michael & Ann Hosey, Ballyheashill, Fahy, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 61. Stephen Carroll, Bunsallagh, Croghan, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 62. Mary McCartney, Coolcor, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 63. Martin & Adele Kierans, Droskyn Point, Ballybrittan, Edenderry, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 64. Terri B. Carey, Stonehouse, Castlejordan, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 65. Gráinne Dempsey, Clonmore, Edenderry, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 66. Thomas Hutchinson, Clonmore, Edenderry, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 67. Cllr. Denis Leonard (W.C.C.), Trim Road, Kinnegad, Co. Westmeath (30/1/14). 68. Ballymore Wind Information Group, c/o John Reid, Ballymore, Co. Westmeath (30/1/14). 69. B.C.C Wind Action Group, c/o Terri B. Carey, Stonehouse, Castlejordan, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 70. Conal Glynn, Corbetstown, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 71. John & Mary Darby, Stonehouse, Castlejordan, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 72. Darrin Cahill, Corbetstown, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 73. Aisling Flynn, Carrick, Castlejordan, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 74. Westmeath Environmental Group, c/o Richard Murphy, HIghtown, Coralstown, Mullingar, Co. Westmeath (30/1/14).

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 27 of 114 75. Rhode Parish Wind Turbine Action Group, c/o Stephen Carroll, Bunsallagh, Croghan, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 76. Rosaleen & James Addie, ‘Whispering Wind’, Fahy Hill, Rhode, Co. Offaly (30/1/14). 77. Danny & Siobhán Groome, ‘San Martin’, Garr, Rhode, Co. Offaly (31/1/14). 78. North Kildare Environmental Protection Group, c/o Shiela O’Brien, Williamstown House, Carbury, Co. Kildare (31/114). 79. John Dunne, Garr, Rhode, Co. Offaly (31/1/14). 80. Bridie McCabe, Knockdrin, Rhode, Co. Offaly (31/1/14). 81. Nicholas Groome, Clonmore, Rhode, Co. Offaly (31/1/14). 82. Declan Groome, Garr, Rhode, Co. Offaly (31/1/14). 83. Sandra Browne, Baltinoran, Kinnegad, Co. Meath (31/1/14). 84. Derek Owens, Ballyheashill, Rhode, Co. Offaly (31/1/14).

8.2 Grounds of Objection

For convenience, I have grouped objections under broad headings relating to subject. A number of observers have requested that an oral hearing be held, so that they can expand on their grounds of objection. The issues raised can be summarised in bullet point format below.

8.2.1 Archaeology & Built Heritage • North Co. Offaly is an immensely important region for understanding quaternary evolution of Ireland. In addition to individual research projects, the National University of Ireland Maynooth has undertaken extensive geophysical surveys of many historic sites in Co. Offaly, in conjunction with the Heritage Council and Offaly Co. Council. In all such geophysical surveys, many unknown historical and archaeological features have been uncovered by the research. There is a likelihood that more finds remain beneath the surface. This has not been addressed in the EIS. There are two main areas of concern. In the townland of Carrick, part of the wind farm development is located on the south bank of the Mongagh River where it forms the boundary between Offaly and Meath – west of Ballintoran Bridge. An anomalous glacial depositional landform in this region has been under investigation since 2006. This feature extends over 2km along the southern bank of the river. It is crucial that this site remains pristine in order to ensure that later researchers can validate results and interpretation, and that the site can continue to be used for research. Lack of human interference in this area has allowed collection of samples and measurements which can be used as ‘standards’ to compare with other regions. T31 & T32 along the river are of concern.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 28 of 114 • The largest concentration of Fulachtaí Fia in County Offaly is located within the townland of Garr. T24 & T25 are located too close to this cluster. Also located there is an enigmatic ring structure (Moat Hill) which is a possible Anglo-Norman motte. This area is an important route over millennia. Further research in the Garr/Carrick region is planned. Any disturbance in this area would greatly hinder the ability to employ geophysical equipment, and a substantial amount of scientific information may be lost. • The heritage of any landscape is composed of a number of landscape features which have developed over millennia. Paul Gibson has produced a book entitled ‘Heritage Landscapes of the Irish Midlands’ which has County Offaly as its core. In north Offaly, these include the undulating character, formation of peat bogs, and development of Christianity, based on a large concentration of monastic sites. An important landscape characteristic which links all the above is the long vistas from sites such as Croghan Hill. This allows the spatial relationships of features to be recognised. The Iron-Age Hill of Uisneach in Co. Westmeath can be seen from Croghan Hill. The introduction of turbines at this location would disrupt the continuity of the landscape. • The turbines will impact negatively on the tranquillity and sanctity of Garr Graveyard.

8.2.2 Visual Amenity • Given the distance from Knockdrin Hill to the Lagan Cement chimney stack near Kinnegad (which is only 125m high), these giant turbines will dominate the landscape. • The height of turbines is excessive given the low-lying landscape. The development would be contrary to the 2006 Wind Farm Guidelines, as turbines are too dominant. • Croghan Hill has considerable spiritual and cultural significance. To place turbines in its vicinity is almost a sacrilege. The tip height of blades would be 12m above the summit. This hill is a destination for walkers and is a pilgrimage site. It is a rare example of carboniferous volcanism in the midlands. Visibility of this hill will be marred by turbines. T1-T4 are within the 2km buffer zone around the hill. • T1-T4 may be outside of the ‘Area North of Rhode’ identified as being suitable for wind farm development. • Turbines are industrial in nature, and are out of place in an agricultural landscape. • The development (in conjunction with others proposed in the area) would have a negative impact on the picturesque village of Rochfortbridge in neighbouring Co. Westmeath. • There appears to be no rationale to the layout of this wind farm – reading as three separate wind farms with turbines clustered

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 29 of 114 wherever they can be fitted in – regard being had to location of houses, watercourses and nature designations. • Warning lights will render turbines visible at night, and will be unsightly – they might also distract motorists on the R400 and M6. • Roads and canals are used for amenity walking and cycling – and the visual impact of turbines will lessen the pleasure of such amenity outings. • No consideration was given to the many more houses just outside the 1.13km zone of influence, in terms of visual impact. • The view from the top of Knockdrin Hill (in the centre of the application site) had not been included in the visual assessment. • Views from houses across the surrounding countryside will be destroyed by turbines. • Figures 9.25-9.29 of the EIS are OS extract maps showing distance of houses from turbines. Within these maps there are at least two houses numbered 147 and two numbered 227. This leads to confusion in associated tables, which state the distance of each house from the nearest turbine. In at least two instances these are misleading. • If electricity is not required from these turbines in a number of years – the project could be obsolete, with turbines unnecessarily blotting the landscape. Nobody will be responsible for removal of turbines once the wind farm is decommissioned.

8.2.3 Access & Roads • Access roads in the area are substandard – wide enough for only one car, and not suitable for construction traffic. • Bog roads are totally unsuitable for heavy construction traffic. The R400 is a bog road. • Upgrading of laneways would destroy their character. Removing boundary banks would destroy natural flora. • An application for a quarry in Greenhills was turned down by the Board because of inadequate access roads. • Jeanette Donath objects to a right-of-way to Whitefield Stables being used for construction traffic. • Michael Murphy and Muriel Murphy reside on a private laneway – half of which is in their ownership. There is no consent to use this laneway for access to the wind farm. The applicant indicated that it would exclude this access, but this is not possible, as the intended access will encroach on private property.

8.2.4 Noise • There are a significant number of houses within 1.13km of turbines. People already suffer sleep loss because of noise from wind farms. • There may also be an impact from noise at frequencies above and below human hearing.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 30 of 114 • The number of monitoring points for noise was not enough. Monitoring took place in May when silage harvesting and peat cutting was under way. The noise survey undertaken for the EIS was not representative – covering only one month of the year. • Wind speeds were measured at only 80m, when the hub height proposed is 110m: noise levels will be greater than modelled. • German noise standards require a 40dB(A) threshold for night-time (similar to WHO Guidelines). Figures used for wind shear in noise modelling are too low. Wind turbines do not produce point source noise – rather disc source noise. • Noise can be funnelled along the wake of a turbine. Noise monitoring was based on a hub height of 122m rather than 110m. • Night-time construction work will affect the amenity of residents in the area through noise and disturbance.

8.2.5 Ecology • Bird species listed in the EIS underestimate the Red and Amber List species present on this site – according to a bird survey undertaken between 2008 and 2011. • Turbines pose a threat to Whooper swans. Only one winter survey was included, which was insufficient. More than 120 birds have been counted here on occasion. Turbines T1-T11 present a direct threat to these birds. Swans have been wintering here since 2010. • Insufficient survey work has been carried out to determine the impact of the development on habitats and species, as required by both the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive – notably the impact on Annex-listed species and their corresponding significance to sites within the sphere of influence of the development. This is particularly the case with bird species. • Endangered species have protected breeding grounds in the area, and these species will be disturbed. • Construction works along waterways will disturb otters, particularly along the Yellow River. Other mammals such as stoat, mink and pine marten have not been considered in the EIS. • The EIS does not include a detailed survey of insects or butterflies. • The EIS does not include a detailed survey of eels. • Turbines are a death trap for raptor species (particularly the Hen harrier) – attracted by the high perching nature of the nacelle. • Bats will be negatively affected by turbines – caused by pressure changes arising from turning blades. Leisler’s bat which flies high will be particularly affected. Turbines in flat landscapes result in bat mortalities. Insufficient surveys were carried out. • Construction work in such close proximity to rivers will result in damage to salmon spawning grounds. Arterial drainage works in the past seriously damaged salmon stocks, which are just recently recovering, as watercourses have settled into a more natural state.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 31 of 114 • The EIS makes no reference to impact on bees. Brian Coffey runs a small apiary business. Sound vibrations and low frequency sound levels can interfere with the flight path of pollinating queens. This, in combination with air pressure changes, turbulence and electromagnetic fields can combine to negatively impact on honey bee populations. • The amount of forestry to be felled will negatively impact on wildlife.

8.2.6 Livestock & Bloodstock Farming • Turbines will have a negative effect on breeding and gestation periods for livestock on surrounding fields. • The development will destroy a stables business (Whitefield Stables). Special needs children will not be allowed by parents to come to a stables where there are health risks to their children. This service is the only one of its kind in County Offaly. The development poses a risk to animal welfare, and the specially- trained animals at these stables. [Stables are located to southeast of T18 – as ascertained during site inspection]. • Noise from turbines would affect breeding of bloodstock – particularly at Carrick Stud along the Mongagh River (T31 & T32). Horses would be within 50m of T31 and movement and noise would adversely affect animals. Green Wind Energy have included the name of Michael Conlon without his permission, as being one of the landowners consenting to the application being made which affects their lands. Patrick Harney keeps bloodstock at Ballybeg townland – which enterprise would be jeopardised by turbines – caused by noise and shadow flicker. • Turbines could topple onto adjoining land – particularly farmland.

8.2.7 Shadow Flicker • Shadow flicker will be a problem – given the flat nature of the area. Each house affected should have been surveyed in detail – different houses have different orientations and living spaces. • The suggestion of mitigation by fitting blinds to windows has not been discussed with householders. • Shadow flicker for motorists on the R400 has not been examined by the applicant. • The modelling used does not accurately reflect true winter sunshine in the morning and evening – both in terms of time and strength. • Huge shadows will be cast by the turbines – up to 2.5km. • There was no study undertaken of the flicker caused by sunlight reflecting on turbine blades.

8.2.8 Drainage • Construction will have a detrimental impact on landscape and ecology. Drainage will be damaged, and erosion will occur.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 32 of 114 • Dewatering for construction of turbines will damage surrounding land and could lead to flooding. • Construction could result in siltation and pollution of watercourses. • Construction of turbines and roads would place additional pressure on drains on adjoining farmland, and could result in flooding.

8.2.9 Human Health • A poor view from house windows can increase likelihood of depression in occupants of a house. • There are a number of families in the area with members who suffer from autism. Turbines will impact negatively on sufferers. • Many people suffer from poor health and moved to this area for peace and quiet: this will be disturbed by the proposed construction activity and wind turbines. • Shadow flicker can cause problems for people who suffer from epilepsy. • The EIS fails to deal with the issue of health and safety of construction workers or residents of the area, and no proper risk assessment has been carried out. • Construction traffic will pose a threat to children playing at a park beside the R400 roundabout – where a proposed new access into the townland of Coolville is to be taken.

8.2.10 Energy Generation & Transmission • Widely spread out wind farms require a much larger electricity grid than more concentrated gas/hydro/coal generating stations, particularly if these can be located close to centres of employment/population. More extensive electricity grids are more expensive to construct and maintain and result in greater loss of electricity through transmission over greater distances. • Adding wind power to the national grid would destabilise the supply network, with back-up supply from other sources required during periods when wind speeds were inadequate. • The planning application is premature, and should not be decided until the new Guidelines for wind turbines are in place. • Renewable energy targets are not scientifically based and the EU and the Irish Renewable Energy Programmes do not stand up to robust cost-benefit analysis. The emphasis on wind energy is not sustainable – particularly as wind energy requires significant energy subsidies to make it competitive with other sources of energy. • Excavation of large areas of peat for construction of foundations will release large amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. • Wind speeds in this area have been overestimated, and would be insufficient to generate energy required to make this development economically viable. The Midlands is the least windy part of the country and, consequently, the least suitable for wind farms.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 33 of 114 • The Offaly Wind Strategy acknowledges that wind speeds above 8.5m/second will be required to make turbines economical. Such wind speeds are not available in this area – and are only available in the Slieve Blooms (excluded because of its visual and ecological importance). • All of the power generated will be exported to the UK. • Green Wind has applied for a 72MW connection to the grid. It is not clear where the additional 24MW is to go.

8.2.11 Property Values • Property values throughout the country have dropped in recent years. A wind farm in this area will result in further property price reduction. Studies carried out in other countries prove that wind farms have a negative impact on residential property prices. In Denmark, house owners in proximity to wind farms can seek compensation for loss in value to property. • Landowners have been coerced into signing away their rights. • Many of the landowners, on whose land turbines will be located, do not live on the affected land – being non-residential farms. • People will not be able to build houses in this area if the wind farm is built.

8.2.12 General Considerations • Construction traffic will result in dust nuisance during dry periods. • There is no proper peat management plan proposed for this application. • The cumulative impact of other wind farm proposals in the area has not been properly examined. Landowners have been contacted by other companies to seek agreement in relating to siting of turbines on their lands. The current application needs to be considered in conjunction with other proposals for wind power in this area. If granted permission, it could set a precedent for the other proposals in the area. • Turbines will cause electromagnetic interference – disrupting telecommunications signals. Turbines may result in loss of broadband signal. Many people use the transmitter attached to the cement factory chimney outside Kinnegad – which requires direct line of sight. • The Board has set a precedent by recently refusing permission for 10 wind turbines at Cloghan, Co. Offaly ( PL 16.242354 ). The same reasons and considerations given for refusing permission apply in the instance of the Yellow River wind farm. • The exact nature of this application is uncertain. No fewer than seven turbine types are referred to in the application documentation. This is not acceptable for a Strategic Infrastructure

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 34 of 114 Development. Each different turbine type will have different noise, efficiency and visual characteristics. • The issue of fire in turbines has not been addressed. • Offering local communities a ‘Community Fund’ is in essence a bribe for what would otherwise be an unacceptable development. The applicant has not stated how much money would be put into such a fund. Wind farms can change hands, and then contributions to any fund would stop. • The EIS has misrepresented the views of local people who attended the public meeting organised by the applicant company. Some have since changed their views. • The application is premature pending the coming into effect of the Water Framework Directive in 2015 – the site being located in the catchment of the Yellow River. • The wake effect can lead to changes involving clouds forming in the wake of turbines – leading to greater rainfall. The wake effect can also lead to temperature changes. • There will be no benefit to the local community from this wind project – apart from a few larger landowners. There will be minimal long-term employment created (4 positions). • Turbines destroy any possibility of tourism development in the area – eco-tourism and angling in particular. • A site notice is erected on a private laneway and not on a public roadway. Site notices are missing at important road junctions within this development. • There has been a lack of public consultation on the part of the applicant, Green Wind. Only one public meeting was held, and it was poorly attended. Each household affected should have been informed by the applicant that an application was to be made to the Board. The applicant has not had regard to the Aarhus Convention. • Many residents are in favour of wind turbines, so long as they are not too close to dwellings. • Turbines will result in vibration transmitted through the soil – even when the blades are not turning. Such vibration can damage foundations of houses which could ultimately become unstable. • There is insufficient evidence in relation to fault lines in bedrock in the area within the EIS. This could result in stability issues for turbine bases. There is similarly no detail of the depth to bedrock at each turbine base. It may be necessary to dig far beyond the 2.0-2.5m suggested to gain a solid foundation. • Pieces coming loose from turbines (including ice) may be thrown up to 1.3km, causing a health risk to residents.

8.2.13 Site-specific Considerations • Patrick Murphy has signed an option on his lands with another wind farm developer. The access route for T16 & T17 requires

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 35 of 114 permission from Patrick Murphy which he has never consented to. These turbines are located too close to the boundary of the observer’s property. A pipe for watering livestock has been laid under the proposed access route. This supply cannot be interrupted. • T16, T17 and T22 are located less than two rotor diameters from the farm of Paul McPadden. Turbines falling would pose a threat to safety. • The house of Una Quinn (H123) would be just 750m from T19. This would be detrimental to the residential amenities of the occupant. • House 104 is only 547m from T24, and will be impacted by shadow flicker, noise and visual disamenity. • T23 is just 538m from the house of Keith Corney (H138), and there is a construction road crossing directly beside the house. This will have a negative impact on the residential amenity of the observer through noise, shadow flicker and visual disamenity. • T22, T23 & T24 are located 506m, 513m and 521m from the houses of McKeever family members – H139, H140 & H141 respectively. This separation distance is inadequate. The 500m setback distance was set down when turbines were much smaller – heights of only 50m. • T14 is 600m from the house of Joanne Addie, and this and other turbines will negatively impact on the amenity of occupants. • T24 is located only 525m from the house of Noel & Paula Bennet (H105) – assuming it is not micro-sited 20m closer. The house will be totally surrounded by turbines. • Turbines T13-T15 will negatively impact on the residents of Dunville Lane. • Gerard & Olive Dunne (H211) live only 637m from T31. The turbine, and others close to it, would negatively impact on residential amenity. • T14 is only 616m from the property of Laura & Patrick Lenehan, and would negatively impact on residential amenity. • T13 is just 987m from the house of Stephanie Heffernan, and would be detrimental to the residential amenities of the objector. • Lill McKenna resides only 700m from T13, which would be detrimental to the residential amenities of the objector. • Denise McCann resides in H192, with T20 just 690m from a turbine, which would be detrimental to residential amenity. There is a family house (currently unoccupied) between H192 and T20 & T21, not shown on maps included with the EIS. It is the intention of the objector to build a house on this site (photo included). • Darrin Cahill has planning permission to build a house on lands across the road from H139 & H140 closest to T23. The position of this house site is not shown on maps submitted as part of the EIS.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 36 of 114 • Aisling Flynn has planning permission to build a house next to H111 – which is not shown on maps submitted as part of the EIS. • Turbines will cast huge shadows on the garden of the house of Pierine & Brownell O’ Connor. • Bord na Móna recognises the importance of the wind energy sector – particularly on cut-over bogs such as Mount Lucas in County Offaly. The Bord has already proven the viability of wind farms on cut-over bogs. Bord na Móna has plans to develop large-scale wind farms on cutaway peatlands in the east midlands area and to export the renewable energy produced to Great Britain. The areas under consideration include peatlands in Co. Offaly. Lands in the ownership of Bord na Móna in this area are included in Figure 1 of the observation. Bord na Móna has invited adjoining landowners to participate in the project. The Yellow River project abuts Bord na Móna lands in Derryarkin, Drumman and Ballybeg Bog complexes. Wind downwind of a turbine has lower energy content than wind arriving in front (upwind) of the turbine. The concept of ‘windtake’ was devise to ensure that location of turbines would not restrict development on adjoining lands. A distance of not less than two rotor blades from adjoining property boundaries will generally be acceptable – according to the 2006 Guidelines. It is clear that the term ‘blades’ in fact refers to rotor ‘diameters’. The Irish Wind Energy Association (IWEA) Best Practice Guidelines recommends a similar two rotor diameters separation from neighbouring boundaries. The rotor diameter in the case of the Yellow River wind farm is 113m, which multiplied by 2, is 226m. Turbines T6, T5, T27, T3, T8, T10, T1, T9 & T30 are all located within 226m of Bord na Móna boundaries. The proposed development will have a ‘windtake’ effect on Bord na Móna lands. Bord na Móna was not consulted in relation to the location of turbines – although a meeting did take place with the applicant company. Bord na Móna strongly objects to the above-mentioned turbines on grounds of ‘windtake’. • William Mulligan has signed an option on his lands with another wind farm developer. T11 & T12 are too close to his boundary – they should be at least two rotor diameters away from the boundary.

8.3 Accompanying Documentation

Submissions are accompanied by the following relevant documentation- • Annotated coloured pictures of Whooper swans and Mute swans on either side of the R400 and other Bord na Móna bogs. • Newspaper article in relation to impact of turbines on Croghan Hill. • Article by Dick Bowdler (acoustic consultant) in relation to proposed revisions to Wind Energy Development Guidelines 2006.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 37 of 114 • Colour photograph of ‘Jumeriah Lodge’ and photomontage of turbines viewed from rear of the property. • List of bird species observed in the area, together with mammals and amphibians observed. • Annotated A4 OS map extract in black & white showing alleged private right-of-way of Michael Murphy & Muriel Murphy. • Highlighted extracts from the EIS. • Article in relation to floating wind turbines at sea near Japan. • Submission to Wiltshire County Council in relation to a wind farm proposal. • Petitions of signatures objecting to development of this wind farm. • Letter (dated 22 nd November 2013) from residents of Laois/Offaly to Department of Communications, Energy & Natural Resources, expressing concern in relation to wind farms proposed for the midlands, and the impact on people suffering from autism. • Annotated historical maps. • Maps showing neighbouring landholdings. • Letter from Green Wind Energy to Laura Lenehan – dated 21 st May 2013. • Article from ‘Review/Revue’ – Industrial Wind Turbines and Adverse Health Effects’. • Statement from Charlie Flanagan TD, as to why stud farms should be given special status in the consideration of wind farm planning applications. • Selection of statements relating to wind farm development from individuals involved in racing/breeding/training of horses. • Internet article in relation to wind turbines and deformities in foals. • Information from Internet in relation to wind farm companies who are seeking to construct turbines in Ireland, and installed capacity throughout Europe. • Wind data from SEAI and mathematical calculations in relation to wind resource.

9.0 OBSERVATIONS IN FAVOUR OF DEVELOPMENT

9.1 Party in Favour of Development

There is 1 observation in favour of the proposed development from the following (date received in brackets)-

1. James Murphy, 5 St. Patrick’s Ave, Rhode, Co. Offaly (24/1/14).

9.2 Grounds in Favour

The issues raised can be summarised in bullet point format as follows-

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 38 of 114 • This development will help sustain the local economy. There is a lack of local and sustainable employment in the area since the closure of the ESB peat-burning power station. Since the closure, many young people had to leave to find employment. Even GAA club membership is impacted. • The Yellow River Wind Farm will form part of the replacement for the closed power plant. Clean and sustainable energy will be generated in the area. It will be connected to the national grid via underground cables. In addition, landowners, the community and the local authority will gain jobs and income during construction and beyond. • The negative visual impact will be minor in nature and will be far outweighed by the benefits of the wind farm.

10.0 ORAL HEARING REQUEST

A number of the observers requested that an oral hearing be heard in this instance. Following a recommendation from this Inspector that an oral hearing was not necessary, the Board directed, on 10 th March 2014, that an oral hearing should not be held.

11.0 APPLICANT’S RESPONSE SUBMISSION

By letter dated 13 th March 2014, the Board invited the applicant to comment on the observations received in relation to this application, as no oral hearing was to be held. The applicant requested an extension of time within which to respond to the submissions. The Board refused this request, on grounds of the 5 th June 2014 deadline within which the Board intended that the application was to be considered.

11.1 Applicant’s Response - General

11.1.1 The response of Jennings O’Donovan & Partners, agent on behalf of the applicant, Green Wind Energy (Wexford) Ltd, received by the Board on 3 rd April 2014, is in a number of parts. The submission includes- • Letter dated 3 rd April 2014. • Response to submissions of Offaly County Council. • Response to submissions of Prescribed Bodies. • Response to observers’ submissions – general and specific issues. • Revised Shadow Flicker Report. • Revised Noise Report. • Revised Landscape and Visual Assessment – A3-size booklet. • Revised Schedule of Drawings – A0-size. • Revised public notices. [Three new site notices were noted by this Inspector on 30 th April 2014, in the vicinity of T23, T24 and T31].

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 39 of 114

11.1.2 The principal changes proposed are as follows- • Reduction in number of turbines from 32 to 29 through omission of T20, T23 & T28. • Significant relocation of 3 no. turbines – T22, T24 & T31. • Reduction in height to 156m of 11 no. turbines – T13, T14, T15, T16, T17, T18, T19, T21, T22, T24 & T25. • Revised noise impact assessment, with reduction in maximum noise limit at noise sensitive receptors to 40dB(A). • Revised shadow flicker assessment, with reduction of shadow flicker at residences within ten rotor diameters of a turbine.

11.2 Applicant’s Response to Offaly County Council’s Submission

The response can be summarised in bullet point format as follows- • A 2km buffer around Croghan Hill (as required by the Development Plan) has been factored into the design of the scheme. • There are 9 water crossings in this scheme and not 10 as stated in the Non-Technical Summary of the EIS. • Turbines will not be visible from ‘listed view’ – V8. • The applicant will make good any damage caused to the road network by vehicles connected with the project during construction. • Details of pre-construction survey works on the road network will be agreed with the Council prior to commencement of development. • Most upgrade works relate to private roads – but upgrading of public roads will be carried out at Greenhills Road (720m) and Carrick Lane (535m). • Relevant Road-opening Licences will be applied for in relation to pre-development testing and any works of improvement/repair to be carried out. • Some 18,275m of new access roads will be constructed. These will remain in private hands. • Details of 9 no. new water crossings are indicated on Figure 2.14. • No new roads will be required for timber-felling. • Haul routes are set out in the EIS. Drawings of upgraded roads have been submitted with this response. • Where it is not possible to lay cables in private lands, the applicant will obtain a Road-Opening Licence. Directional drilling will be used where verges are not available to lay cables. • A pre-commencement survey of all bridges and culverts on public roads will be carried out. • Applicant has a legal right to use the access road to Kilmurray Quarry. • Details are provided to limit encroachment on the roundabout on the R400 at Coolcur.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 40 of 114 • Details of road-widening at Wood townland are submitted. • The haul route will by-pass Corbetstown Bridge and drawings have been amended to show this. • A Road Safety Audit will be carried out prior to commencement of development. • A Traffic Management Plan will be prepared to cover construction and operational traffic. Temporary traffic lights will be used on local roads during construction. • An effluent storage tank at the electricity compound is more reliable than a septic tank. It will be emptied every three months. Use of the sub-station facilities will be sporadic. • Settlement ponds will be revegated along with grassing of hardstand construction areas. Swales along access roads will be retained. Swales will incorporate filtration flow check dams. • A ‘Big pHi’ concrete wash out unit will be present on site during construction. Ph will be controlled using CO 2. • Yellow River Wind Farm will provide enough electricity to serve 50,000 households, and will save emissions of 123,629 tonnes of CO 2 per annum. • Construction areas can be secured and materials removed in the event of a prolonged period of rainfall. Recommencement of construction will not occur until a flood event has subsided. Part of the R400 is within a 100-year flood zone. New road levels will be at existing ground levels and so will not alter existing drainage. Turbines can be shut down remotely in the event of a flood event which could cut off access. • Discharge of rainwater from the site will be restricted to ‘greenfield’ run-off. The largest pond required would be 57.1m 3. • The suggested change to 40dB(A) can be achieved by relocation of two turbines and lowering the sound power output setting of a number of other turbines. • The permitted power plants at Derrygreenagh (not yet built) will result in maximum noise levels of 37dB(A) at nearest houses. The power plants are located northwest of the closest houses, whilst the nearest proposed turbines are south of these houses. Wind conditions would not permit of the houses being downwind of both noise sources at the one time. The cumulative impact would be negligible – 0.5dB(A). The permitted biomass power plant at Coolcur is small. The predicted noise level at the nearest house is 23dB(A). The closest turbines to the proposed plant are T13 & T14. Irrespective of wind direction, the cumulative impacts of power plant and turbine noise would be negligible, and would be less than 40dB(A). • Shadow flicker will only occur when the wind direction is the same as the angle of the sun. A worst case scenario was assumed in calculating impacts on houses. The highest area of rotor sweep, at

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 41 of 114 right angles to the sun, is 9,852m 2. The reason for the reduction to 61% was because this figure represents the rotation of the turbine swept area during different wind directions (obtained from the wind rose for the area). • A full winter bird survey was carried out for 2013/2014 – with comment particularly on the Whooper swan in Derryarkin. This was to obtain a fuller baseline survey than carried out in 2012/2013. The application will fully comply with the mitigation requirements of the Department of Arts, Heritage & Gaeltacht. • There is no direct discharge from swales to any watercourse. Run- off will be discharged through buffered outfalls (incorporating overland flow) or through existing drains. Daily monitoring of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) will be carried out during construction at points referred to in annotated aerial photographs Figures 1-5. • Turbines T8, T9 & T10 are located on cutover raised bog – close to an active face of raised bog. • Wind speed is measured in metres per second m/s. • An additional house (for which planning permission has been granted – H237) has been added to the noise survey, and will experience maximum 42.14dB(A). • For wind farms LA 90 = LA eq minus 2dB(A). • An error was made in the mapping of the noise contours in the original EIS. Revised mapping is found at Appendix D of this submission. • It will be a condition of the procurement contract for turbines that a guarantee that no clearly audible tonal components be audible at distances of greater than 500m from a turbine. • A revised Non-Technical Summary for noise is submitted. • Construction noise is temporary in nature, and orders of magnitude will be below the guidelines issued by the National Roads Authority for construction work. • Shadow flicker contour maps have been created for the scheme – Figures 10.1-10.4 (Appendix F). There are no dwellings within the area of shadow flicker that will receive greater than 30 hours per annum. • Shadow flicker calculations are reduced to 12.68% due to absence of sunlight, non-operation during low wind speeds, non-operation due to technical issues, and non-directional orientation of the turbine. • Permitted house H237 will only receive 14.59 hours of shadow flicker per annum. • Developer proposes to install a Shadow Flicker Management System to shut down turbines during shadow flicker incidence. • Offaly County Council itself used a 2km buffer zone around Croghan Hill to determine areas suitable for wind farm developments. The southwestern boundary of Area 1 ‘North of

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 42 of 114 Rhode’ is clearly defined by this 2km buffer rather than any other constraint. The Wind Energy Strategy does not mention any lesser or greater buffer around Croghan Hill. The area is zoned suitable for ‘large-scale’ wind farms. The Wind Energy Strategy has guided the applicant to this particular part of the county. The 2km buffer zone from Croghan Hill is appropriate in terms of views to and from the hill. Turbines were deliberately sited (and moved in one instance) so that rotating blades would not appear over Croghan Hill from listed view V8 of the Development Plan. Two additional viewshed reference points have been examined to gauge the impact of the development on Croghan Hill (NV1 & NV2). • It is considered that the flat peatland landscape type most accurately reflects the overall site. Because turbines east of the R400 and south of the Garr Road are located within a more densely populated agricultural area – these turbines (11 in total) could be reduced in height by 10m. Other turbines are located in peatland and more forested areas. • DR3 photomontage was taken at the crossroads where listed view V8 would appear to be on Development Plan maps. • There was no attempt by the developer to use excessive vegetation in photomontages to screen out turbines. • Six additional viewpoints were suggested by Offaly County Council, and photomontages for these have been included. An assessment for each is included. • It is not being suggested by the applicant that each new wind farm in the landscape makes the next one more acceptable. • In order to avoid clutter in the landscape, the applicant comments that overlap is unavoidable where there are 360 degree viewing points around a wind farm. There are 3 no. less turbines in the revised scheme, 3 no. have been relocated and 11 no. have been reduced in height. • The Neolithic trackway identified in Derryarkin Bog is located within AAP1 of the EIS. Appendix G indicates the location of archaeological sites from the Record of Monuments and Places (RMP). • Prior to commencement of construction, the applicant will undertake a photographic survey of the former demesnes of Coolville, Greenhills and Ballyburley. • It is expected that the Derryiron 110kV sub-station will be able to take at least 96MW from this development. • The applicant is willing to accept a 10-year permission in place of the originally sought 15-year one. The applicant accepts that a 25- year lifespan for turbines (in place of the 30-year span sought) with provision for a 2-3 year decommissioning period, is reasonable. • The most common colours for turbines are pure white (RAL 9010) and light grey (RAL 7035). Light grey is the colour listed on

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 43 of 114 Siemens specification brochures and is the colour used at Mount Lucas. • Concrete tower options have been considered to allow for the sourcing of as much material as possible in Ireland – something that is being examined nationally. • The shape of the nacelle depends on the type of turbine. Each manufacturing company has its own distinctive nacelle design. • Turbines and nacelles will not be painted with livery/stripes etc. • Hazard lights for birds on T1-T7 are acceptable to the NPWS. The standard type is a strobe light used on communication towers to warn aircraft. • The maximum expected micro-siting requirement would be 20m. • Sharing of data from the anemometer mast should not be required of the applicant, as such information is commercially sensitive. • The applicant would be willing to discuss access to turbines for educational purposes. However, it is noted that all are located on private land. • In relation to the Community Fund, the developer will need to interact with community groups. It is not acceptable for funds to the filtered through third party groups. Expenditure should be both area- and project-specific. The developer confirms its commitment to support the Community Benefit Fund to a value of €1,000/MW of installed capacity per annum, index-linked for the lifetime of the development.

11.3 Applicant’s Response to DoA,H&G Submission

The response to the Department of Arts, Heritage and Gaeltacht submission can be summarised as follows- • Archaeological testing will be carried out in advance of construction. • There is no standing water in any of the three locations where the mill race site will be crossed by access roads. The feature has been almost completely filled in. Underwater assessment cannot be carried out in dry sections. • Access roads will cross the Yellow River in three locations. The river has been heavily canalised in all three locations – in one instance a completely new channel being created. For the most part, the river channel now resembles a drainage ditch. • In relation to the Whooper swan, a new winter survey from 2013/2014 is now included (Appendix A).

11.4 Applicant’s Response to HSE Submission

The response to the Health Service Executive submission can be summarised as follows-

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 44 of 114 • The impact of the scheme on ground water is comprehensively dealt with in the EIS. • Wind farms involve near-surface excavation only – with a greater potential to impact on surface water than on ground water. • There is no requirement to map all local wells. The landscape is generally flat, and turbines are located at least 500m from houses. • There is no need for ground water sampling for a wind farm. • There is no potential pathway for this development to impact on Toberdaly spring. • Greenwind Energy will comply with the requirements of the HSE, should the Board be minded to include these requirements by way of condition attached to any grant of permission. • A system for documenting, monitoring, recording, reporting and handling of complaints will be put in place by the developer in relation to noise and shadow flicker. • An outline Environmental Management Plan was included with Appendix 1 of the EIS.

11.5 Applicant’s Response to Inland Fisheries Ireland Submission

The response t0 the Inland Fisheries Ireland submission can be summarised as follows- • The consultant company which prepared the relevant chapter in the EIS consulted regularly with IFI. The scoping document of the IFI in relation to wind farm applications was adhered to. • IFI did not require electrofishing of the Yellow River and Mongagh River. • Construction in the vicinity of salmonid nursery habitat will not take place between the beginning of October and the end of June – specifically on Section Y1 of the Yellow River main channel, the Corbetstown Bridge Stream downstream of Corbetstown Bridge, and in the vicinity of the Killowen Stream.

11.6 Applicant’s Response to Irish Aviation Authority Submission

The response to the Irish Aviation Authority submission indicated that the applicant will comply with all requirements of the IAA.

11.7 Applicant’s Response to Common Issues of Observers

The response can be summarised as follows- • There is no evidence to support any association between wind farms and human health problems. • All noise monitoring equipment was calibrated to manufacturers’ specifications.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 45 of 114 • Infrasound and low frequency sound are produced by wind turbines, but it is not audible at 300m distance. The low frequency sound levels from a wind turbine at 100m is less than 70dB. There are many sources of low level sound in modern houses such as extractor fans, refrigerators, boilers, computers, radio, television. Low frequency sound from the M6 Motorway (2-5km distant) is audible at the Yellow River wind farm site. • Trees and other topographic features have not been considered as noise barriers in noise modelling exercise. • A value of 1dB was added to Sound Pressure Level (SPL) of the turbines for uncertainty of measurement. • The source of noise from turbines is point source – the project could not be described as linear. • There was no harvesting noise when noise surveys were undertaken from 12-20 May 2014 [sic]. Data for day-time periods Monday to Friday from 0700 to 1800 hours was excluded as was data from 0700 to 1300 hours on Saturdays. • Bird studies can differ – particularly if the areas of study are not the same. The Roadstone ponds are outside of the Yellow River wind farm site. The EIS bird study comprised an accurate baseline evaluation. • Whooper swans have been recorded in the vicinity of T1-T7 and not T1-T11 as claimed by observers. • The impact on otter will be mitigated by location of wind turbines at least 50m from watercourses. • A thorough assessment of bats in the area was undertaken in the EIS. Mitigation measures are set out in the EIS. • It is acknowledged that Irish Stoat, Mink and Pine Marten could occur in the study area. Mink is not a species of conservation importance. Stoat is widespread throughout the country – although difficult to spot. Pine marten is found mainly in western Ireland: with the main habitat being woodland and scrub woodland. The wind farm will have minimal impact on local woodland. Fallow deer are widespread throughout the country and can be hunted. During the day the deer keep mostly to woodland cover. The wind farm will not have any impact on this species. • The level of habitat survey was adequate – taking into account the absence of any Annex-referenced habitats. The survey identified the Derryiron Bog as being of importance, notwithstanding active turbary. • Survey of breeding birds was carried out over three years. There are no designated sites for birds in the vicinity. • A second winter survey of birds was undertaken between October 2013 and March 2014. The second survey supports the findings of the first survey from January-April 2013.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 46 of 114 • Thresholds for Whooper swan and Golden plover were not reached in Derryarkin surveys. The highest recorded number of Whooper swans was 108 in winter 2013/2014 where the threshold is 130; and Golden plover was 1,200 in winter 2013/2014 where the threshold is 1,700. The Whooper swan population is of relatively recent arrival. There is no evidence of historical use of lands at Derryarkin. • There is no statistical evidence of a drop in property prices in the vicinity of wind farms. The principal impact on property prices in Offaly is the economic recession since 2007. • No turbines are located within a 100-year flood area. Turbine bases are limited to 420m 3 each. This does not constitute a significant displacement of soil over a site of almost 1,000ha. • There will be no disruption of groundwater drainage patterns. • The scheme will not involve the alteration of any surface water features. All existing drainage features will be maintained. • Felling of forestry will not cause any change in drainage. Felled areas will be replaced with slow-growing indigenous species. • Wells in the area will not be affected by this development. There is no pathway for impact on identified wells. • The local community and statutory bodies were consulted prior to the making of the planning application. • Communications providers were consulted and had no objection to the development. The turnkey construction contract will include the requirement to undertake a pre-construction interference survey of the site for TV/broadband/telecoms. • Croghan Hill is not a national monument or a UNESCO World Heritage Site. The hill is over 2km to the south of T1-T10. The turbines will not impact on any theorised links with the Hill of Uisneach in Co. Westmeath. • The potential route of the Slí Mór is located 1km to the south of site. • There is no question but that turbines are tall structures. The design is slim-line and the landscape is predominantly flat. The perceived height reduces with viewing distance. Terrestrial screening will lessen the visual impact of turbines at greater than 2km. The minimum setback of 500m from dwellings, together with the sinuous layout will lessen the visual impact. There are few locations that afford a view of the entire scheme; where this does occur, such as at Croghan Hill, the furthest turbines are distant background features. • Landscape and visual assessment will always be more subjective than the more scientific EIA disciplines. • It is accepted that rotating blades will draw the eye of the viewer. • Landscape and visual assessment is a logical decision-making process, although it may appear complex and subjective. The process does not purport to be definitive, but is undertaken by

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 47 of 114 qualified professionals in an independent and transparent manner. It provides the structure and terminology within which counter arguments can be framed. • Wind farms provide long-term community benefit; from income to landowners to rates to the Council, and construction stage activity. The applicant is also committed to contributing to a long-term Community Benefit Fund – to the tune of €1,000 per MW of installed capacity per annum.

11.8 Applicant’s Response to Site-Specific Issues of Observers

The response can be summarised as follows- • The lands of Michael Conlon were included in the scheme with the agreement of the landowner, to provide a construction link between T31 & T32. The owner has now withdrawn this consent, and the construction track link between the two turbines is broken. It is still possible to access these turbines independently from Carrick Lane, as provided for in the original scheme submitted to the Board. Omission of Mr. Conlon’s lands requires the relocation of T31 by 56m in a west-northwest direction to comply with the minimum of 2 blade lengths from land not in control of the applicant. • Michael & Muriel Murphy refer to the issue of right-of-way and inclusion of their house lands within the original application site. Inclusion of lands was an error, and has now been rectified. The lands concerned are indicated in Figure 4909-PL-111 Rev. A (Appendix 1). The Board is requested to accept this revision. In relation to the concerns of the Murphys regarding the roadway outside their house, the applicant confirms that it will only be using public road and lands owned by one of the participating landowners for the purposes of access between the Greenhills Road and the Yellow River. • On the issue of ‘wind take’, T16 & T17 are in excess of 2R from lands of Pat Murphy, Killowen, and siting is, therefore, in accordance with the Wind Energy Guidelines 2006. Water supply will be ensured for all farmers on the access lane at Wood townland. This lane is shared by farmers, two of whom are participating landowners in the scheme. • On the issue of ‘wind take’, T14 & T15 are in excess of 2R from the lands of Tony Bracken, and siting is, therefore, in accordance with the Wind Energy Guidelines 2006. [Objection is now withdrawn]. • On the issue of ‘wind take’, T15 is in excess of 2R from lands of Pat Lowry, and siting is, therefore, in accordance with the Wind Energy Guidelines 2006. [Objection is now withdrawn]. • On the issue of ‘wind take’, T11 & T12 are in excess of 2R from lands of William Mulligan, Toberdaly, and siting is, therefore, in accordance with the Wind Energy Guidelines 2006.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 48 of 114 • The applicant originally contacted Roadstone in relation inclusion of quarry lands at Derrygreenagh within the wind farm site. Roadstone indicated that lands it quarried were owned by Bord na Móna. Contact was made with Bord na Móna and discussions and meetings held. Bord na Móna indicated that it would not co-operate with the applicant due to impending strategic partnership discussions. Bord na Móna has not indicated any specific plan or detailed design to develop a wind farm on its lands adjacent to the Yellow River wind farm site. The concept of developing large wind farms for electricity export has no regulatory, planning or contractual basis, and recent Government announcements state that such timelines are premature. Bord na Móna is still actively harvesting peat and sand & gravel from its lands. It is unreasonable to expect other applicants to wait upon an application which may or may not be made on adjoining lands. All adjacent turbines are located in excess of 2R from Bord na Móna lands. The 2R guideline distance is in excess of the UK 1R separation guideline. The Yellow River wind farm has been publicly under development for over three years. • T16 &T17 are 2R from the McPadden family lands. The elimination of T20 and T23, and the relocation of T22 to a position which is over 2R from McPadden family lands, result in locations which are within the recommendations of the 2006 Guidelines. • T21 is in excess of 2R from the lands of Conal Glynn. The elimination of T20 and T23, and the relocation of T22 to a position which is over 2R from Glynn family lands, result in locations which are within the recommendations of the 2006 Guidelines. • There are no turbines within 2R of McKeever family lands. The elimination of T20 & T23 and the relocation of T22 & T24 will result in H139 being 553m from T22, H140 being 549m from T22 and H141 being 615m from T22. • No conclusive evidence is submitted in relation to impact of wind turbines on bloodstock or livestock. There are examples of wind farms beside equestrian facilities within the country. Horses routinely graze fields in close proximity to turbines. • There is a feral population of Greylag goose in the area. The Greenland white-fronted goose has not been recorded of late on the site. Lough Ennel is the only site in the wider study area frequented by a population of Greenland white-fronted goose. • There is no record of any application for a house by Denise McCann in the townland of Stonehouse or in the Castlejordan area. T20 & T23 are being omitted from the scheme. Originally the closest turbine was 690m from the objector’s house. The closest turbine is now T21, at 915m. • Permission has been granted for a house for Darren Cahill ref. 07/1149 (as amended by file ref. 09/356) at Garr road. The site

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 49 of 114 (H237) is 585m from the original closest turbine T23. T20 & T23 are being omitted in the revised layout, and the closest turbine is now T22 at 623m. • The house of Terri B. Carey is located approximately 1.45km from the closest turbine. • The house of Louise Kennedy is located approximately 1.56km from the closest turbine. • H227 and H147 were incorrectly numbered in original drawings submitted. Paddy & Kathleen Mooney’s house is in fact H171 rather than H227. Their house is 528m from T23 and 701m from T22. One other house adjacent to Paddy & Kathleen Mooney is in fact H179 rather than H147. This latter house is located 626m from T23 and 748m from T22. Updated tables are provided at Figures 4909/EIA/9.28 Rev. A and 4909/EIA/9.29 Rev. A, in Appendix D. • The cause of the decline of the honey bee in Europe is not known. There is no peer-reviewed evidence in relation to impact of wind farms on bees. • There remains a level of uncertainty in relation to grid access, cost and timelines. It is expected that the Derryiron sub-station has the capacity to accept 96MW. • The 2km buffer will protect the setting of this Croghan Hill. • More than adequate vantage points were used in the visual impact assessment of this scheme. The effects arising from this wind energy proposal are no more than moderate when expressed in EIA terms. • The Wind Energy Strategy is part of the Development Plan for the county. The development would not contravene the landscape character and residential amenity sections of the Plan. • Visual impact assessment is not limited to 10 rotor diameters. There is no basis for the selection for this number. It relates to noise and shadow flicker assessment. • For the landscape and visual assessment, it is not necessary to provide endless reiteration of the same level of impact at numerous similar receptors. • Yellow River and Mount Lucas are separated by 10km. The view from the top of Croghan Hill will not involve 360 degree cover of wind farms in the area. This is one of the few areas that would allow for combined views of both wind farms. • In relation to the An Bord Pleanála refusal of permission for a wind farm at Cloghan, Co. Offaly, it is important that all applications be dealt with on their merits.

11.9 Associated Submissions from Applicant – Section 1

Explanatory note in relation to shadow flicker, noise, drawing schedule, landscape & visual assessment, and Statements of No Additional Impact.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 50 of 114

11.9.1 Appendix A – Whooper Swan Winter Survey 2013/2014 This Survey commenced on 15 October 2013 and will continue until mid- April 2014 – involving a total of 18 visits. Emphasis was placed on early morning and early evening visits. Two vantage points were used – 44 hours observation from VP1 and 38 hours from VP2. Numbers varied during visits, with a peak of 108 swans on 5 March 2014. Distribution of birds was mainly in Fields 1 & 5 with some usage of Fields 2, 4 & 6. The Roadstone Quarry pond to the north was the regular night roost. The flooded cutover bog to the north of the access road to Kilmurray Quarry was also used as a night roost and temporary refuge. There were no observations of usage of Kilmurray Quarry ponds, as had occurred in the previous winter survey. Movement between fields was noted arising from agricultural disturbance. Likely commuting route at 20m altitude was noted from bog to west of Rhode (Cavemount).

11.9.2 Appendix B – Specification for ‘Big pHil Siltbuster’

11.9.3 Appendix C – Schedule of Errors Sheet This comprises a list of 15 no. errors and corrections within EIS/drawings.

11.9.4 Appendix D – Noise Non-Technical Summary, House Location Maps and Noise Contour Maps Construction noise may exceed 45dB(A), but will be for limited duration.

11.9.5 Appendix E – List of Qualifications/Experience of Experts who Prepared the EIS

11.9.6 Appendix F – Shadow Flicker Contour Map Maps indicate areas in which >30 hours of shadow flicker will occur.

11.9.7 Appendix G – Mapped Records of Monuments and Places and of Record of Protected Structures

11.9.8 Appendix H – Inland Fisheries Ireland Wind Farm Scoping Document (Draft)

11.9.9 Appendix I – Letter to Mr. & Mrs. Murphy and Figure 4909-PL-111 Rev. A in relation to exclusion of lands from scheme [incorrectly included]

11.9.10 Appendix J – Drawings for Road Sections • Annotated Discovery Series extract for wider wind farm site. • Road drawings, section and photograph (near T14). • Road drawings, section and photograph (Greenhills road - south). • Road drawings, section and photograph (Greenhills road - north). • Road drawings, section and photograph (Wood townland).

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 51 of 114 • Road drawings, section and photograph (Old schoolhouse, Garr). • Road drawings, section and photograph (near T30). • Roundabout on R400 at Coolcur. • Access arrangements to T17 at Wood townland.

11.9.11 Appendix K – Drawing no. 4909-PL-116. Relating to omission of 3 rd party lands between T31 & T32 – originally part of the scheme.

11.10 Associated Submissions from Applicant – Section 2

11.10.1 Appendix A – Adjusted Noise Impact Report The Adjusted Noise Impact Report takes account of the removal of 3 no. turbines and the relocation of 3 others. Table 9.2 indicates noise-sensitive locations within 1.13km of any turbine – H1-H237 (not inclusive of all numbers between – some 195 in total). Table 9.14 indicates noise levels of below 40dB(A) expressed as L90, 10 min for wind speeds from 4-10m/s at all houses – except H66, H105, H138, H200, H210 & H226. The latter two house owners have a financial interest in the scheme. The first four house owners will experience exceedances of only 0.1-0.2 dB above the new 40dB threshold. In practice, the noise levels will be below predicted values by more than 1.5dB(A) as the noise prediction assumes that the wind direction at these locations will be simultaneously up-wind and down- wind of a number of turbines – something which cannot occur.

11.10.2 Appendix B – Adjusted Shadow Flicker Report The adjusted Shadow Flicker Report takes account of the removal of 3 no. turbines and the relocation of 3 others. There are 195 houses within 1.13km of a turbine. H210 & H226 are within 500m of a turbine, but owners are beneficiaries of the scheme. They will experience 8.17 and 2.32 hours respectively of shadow flicker per annum. Shadow flicker is a nuisance rather than a health issue. Rotors will turn at a speed of 10-25 revolutions per minute, which translates as less than one blade pass per second. Shadow flicker is more likely to occur on sunny winter days, when the sun is lower in the sky. One additional house has been added to the list of those surveyed (H237) for which planning permission has been granted. Computer modelling calculates theoretical worst-case scenario. Table 10.1 indicates details of shadow flicker for each of the 195 houses. 43 of the houses would theoretically experience more than 30 hours of shadow flicker per year. Impacts of shadow flicker occur within 130 degrees either side of north from a turbine. Some houses will not experience any shadow flicker. Based on meteorological data from Birr, there will be on average sunshine for 26% of any day. Turbines could only be operational for 86% of the year, as wind speeds are too fast or too slow for the other 14%. A conservative estimate of 7% down time for repair and maintenance is factored into calculations. Random rotor position in

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 52 of 114 relation to the position of a house in relation to any turbine results in a reduction of 61%. By applying all these reduction factors (12.68%), no house would experience more than 30 hours of shadow flicker per year – as illustrated in Table 10.1. The worst affected is H199 experiencing 14.85 hours per annum. Shadow flicker contour maps have been provided in Figures 10.5-10.8. No reduction factor has been included for screening vegetation or other buildings. Installation of blinds and planting of screens (at the developer’s expense) could be used to mitigate shadow flicker nuisance. A shadow flicker management system could be installed, to shut down turbines in the event that shadow flicker was causing excessive nuisance. The submission is accompanied by a Shadow Control Description from Siemens.

11.10.3 Appendix C – Adjusted Landscape & Visual Report This assessment allows for the removal of some turbines, the relocation of others and the reduction in height of some turbines. Additional view points of the scheme are provided, as suggested by Offaly County Council. The submission includes excerpts from the county development plans of Westmeath, Kildare and Meath.

11.10.4 Appendix D – Statements of No Additional Impact Letters from two consultants involved in preparation of EIS stating that proposed changes to the scheme will not have any significant impacts on findings in relation to ecology or water. Table 11.6 provides a list of all viewshed reference points. An estimation of the visual impacts from all of the additional viewshed reference points is included alongside the original ones. An assessment of the cumulative impact with Mount Lucas wind farm is outlined.

11.11 Revised Site Notices

On 17 th April 2014, the Board received an OS Discovery Series extract map to show the location of new site notices erected in relation to relocation of 3 no. turbines – T22, T24 & T31. Revised site notices were evident on the date of site inspection by this Inspector on 30 th April 2014.

11.12 Further Unsolicited Additional Information

On 7 th May 2014, the applicant submitted further unsolicited additional information in the nature of a change to the blue line boundary of the site, in the vicinity of the proposed electrical compound and temporary site compound. The red line boundary of the site is not affected. This change of boundary relates to the Rhode Business Park. The reduction in the size of the overall site, (as outlined in blue) is not significant, and will not have any impact whatever on the proposed development.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 53 of 114 12.0 RESPONSES TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUBMISSION

12.1 Response of Offaly County Council

The response of Offaly County Council, received by the Board on 8 th May 2014, can be summarised in bullet point format as follows- • It is noted that the additional information submission to the Board of 3rd April 2014, attempts to deal with the issues raised in the Manager’s Report of Offaly County Council. • Table 9.2 of the Revised Noise Report appears to contain inaccuracies in relation to distance of houses from turbines – in some instances too great and in others too little. It is important that this table should be correct. The Council has concerns in relation to the proximity of turbines to some houses in this flat open landscape. • The revised non-technical summary for the EIS in relation to noise still refers to 32 no. turbines, when the number has been reduced to 29. • The applicant is proposing to reduce the sound output from 6 no. turbines, but the figures differ between Section 2 (page 2) and the adjusted noise report (Section 2, Appendix A, page 20). Tables 9.14-9.18 of the revised noise report contain some different distances to dwellings to those on table 9.2 of the same revised report – H77, H104, H105, H111, H112, H195, H196, H207, and H211. H231 is missing from revised tables 9.14-9.18. • The Shadow Flicker Report does not indicate the likely extent of shut-downs required to meet the requirements of the Guidelines. The Council would query why dwellings 95, 125, 181, 182, 128, 185, 192, 194,216, 193, for example are indicated in table 10.1 to experience zero theoretical shadow flicker when houses close by are subject to some flicker. • In relation to design of turbines, the use of a concrete option has not been fully described. • The Council considers that T13-T15, T22, T24 & T31 could still visually dominate. • There are still some instances where visual clutter will occur. • Additional visual impact assessment does not adequately address the concerns of the Council – particularly T1-T12 when viewed from the R400. • The Lagan Cement Factory at Edenderry has not been included in wire frame drawings. • The additional Whooper swan survey is noted. • Inadequate details in relation to road upgrades have been submitted. • Much of road-widening proposed is likely to involve encroachment into third party lands.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 54 of 114 • Details of haul routes are inadequate. • There has been no plan of cable routes submitted – particularly where these would be located within public roads or verges. • Full details of materials and haul routes have not been specified. • Structural surveys of bridges and culverts have not been carried out – this could influence the proposed haul routes. • A structural survey of the R400 has not been submitted. • The alterations required at the roundabout at Coolcur are not acceptable to the local authority. • Road Safety audits have not been submitted for the junctions proposed on the R400. • No Traffic Management Plan has been submitted. • Details of surface water drainage for the enduring infrastructure (permanent hard-standing areas and roads) are not provided. • Post-commissioning noise surveys should be conditioned with a requirement to implement mitigation measures, should the allowed noise limit be exceeded. • On-going monitoring of surface waters should be agreed and carried out during construction and operational phases. • Post-commissioning shadow flicker surveys should be conditioned to implement mitigating measures in the event that shadow flicker limits are exceeded. • The fact that the applicant is not willing to share information from the meteorological mast, could result in proliferation of such masts. • It appears that photomontages CP4 North (B), CP5, CP6, CP7, MR1 are not on the website under the further information tab. [I note that they are there under the original application submission].

12.2 Response of Prescribed Bodies

12.2.1 Irish Aviation Authority The response of the IAA, received by the Board on 2 nd May 2014, indicated that there was no further comment to make.

12.2.2 National Roads Authority The response of the NRA, received by the Board on 6 th May 2014, indicated that there was no further comment to make.

12.2.3 Department of Arts, Heritage & Gaeltacht The response, received by the Board on 8 th May 2014, indicates that the Department is satisfied with the proposals for treatment of underwater archaeology at river crossings and mill race crossings.

12.2.4 Westmeath County Council The response, received by the Board on 8 th May 2014, reiterates that there is a Protected View from Garrane Hill. That section of the R400

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 55 of 114 between the M6 junction and the county boundary with Offaly, should be assessed for impact associated with construction traffic, and appropriate levies applied to cover the costs of reinstatement and/or maintenance. A bond should be lodged with the planning authority.

12.2.5 Kildare County Council The response, received by the Board on 8 th May 2014, indicates that the full visual impact of the development on County Kildare arising from proposed changes be assessed.

12.3 Response Observations Opposed to Scheme

Responses were received from the following (date received in brackets)- 1. Michael & Muriel Murphy (29/4/14). 2. Paul Gibson (30/4/14). 3. Mount Temple & District Windfarm Information Group (2/5/14). 4. Dale Treadwell (6/5/14). 5. Paschal Cooney (6/5/14). 6. Noel & Paula Bennet (6/5/14). 7. Irene Brazil (6/5/14). 8. Robert Delaney (6/5/14). 9. Peter Sweetman (6/5/14). 10. Joseph Caulfield (7/5/14). 11. Pat Rogers (7/5/14). 12. Louise Kennedy (7/5/14). 13. Noel Moore (7/5/14). 14. Paul Mc Padden (8/5/14). 15. Laura & Patrick Lenihan (8/5/14). 16. Gerard & Olive Dunne (8/5/14). 17. North Kildare Environmental Protection Group (8/5/14). 18. Megan Addie-Douglas (8/5/14). 19. Stephanie Heffernan (8/5/14). 20. William & Yvonne Kidd (8/5/14). 21. Christine Maguire (8/5/14). 22. Agnes Doolan (8/5/14). 23. Ballymore Wind Information Group (8/5/14). 24. Rosaleen & James Addie (8/5/14). 25. Thomas Hutchinson (8/5/14). 26. Terri B. Carey (8/5/14). 27. Conal Glynn (8/5/14). 28. Martin & Adele Kierans (8/5/14). 29. Veronica Lynam (8/5/14). 30. Bord na Móna (8/5/14). 31. Mark Malone (8/5/14). 32. Michael C. Muldoon (8/5/14). 33. Joanne Addie (8/5/14).

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 56 of 114 34. Rhode Parish Wind Turbine Action Group (8/5/14). 35. B.C.C. Wind Action Group (8/5/14). 36. Nicole Lonican & Others (8/5/14).

12.3.1 General Comment Many of the responses received restate points already raised in original submissions, and I do not propose to repeat them. I propose to confine my summary to new issues raised and to the points of difference between the scheme as originally proposed on 28 th November 2013 and the scheme as varied by additional information submission received by the Board on 3 rd April 2014.

12.3.2 Omission of Turbines T20, T23 & T28 • Omission of three turbines in insignificant in terms of overall size. • Offaly County Councillors are now in favour of a set-back of 3.2km for wind turbines from houses.

12.3.3 Relocation of Turbines T22, T24 & T31 • Revised information states that H105 is 610m from T24 for the purposes of noise and 570m for the purposes of shadow flicker – one or both of these figures is incorrect. Two different distances have been given for H77 H195, H196 and H104.

12.3.4 Reduction in Height of 11 no. Turbines • Reduction in height is insignificant in visual amenity terms. The reduction will bring these turbines to the height of those at Mount Lucas – which are already significant features on the landscape.

12.3.5 Alteration to Construction Access Between T31 & T32 • The final stretch of Carrick Lane is not taken ‘in charge’ by the local authority. The applicant does not have permission of all affected landowners to use this stretch of road.

12.3.6 Adjusted Noise Impact Assessment • There is no information on how noise from turbines affect those using hearing aids. • Noise monitor placed within property of Paschal Cooney was placed there under false pretences. • Noise measurement period was insufficient – less than 3 weeks. • The Board should apply the precautionary principle and refuse planning permission on noise grounds, where there are so many health professionals who have stated that turbines have a negative impact on human health.

12.3.7 Adjusted Shadow Flicker Assessment • Shadow flicker can occur up to 2km from a turbine.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 57 of 114 • Programme used to calculate shadow flicker is not accurate. • The shadow flicker map for turbines does not represent the true area which would be subject to shadow flicker – it is in fact much larger. The map shows shadow flicker only extending to 300m approximately from Turbines. When the sun is low in the sky in winter, shadows cast will be much longer. Shadows may be cast of almost 3km. • There is no guarantee to householders that shadow flicker will not occur.

12.3.8 Additional Winter Bird Survey (Whooper Swan) • A member of Birdwatch Ireland has recorded 267 swans (inclusive of 7 Mute swans) from observation on Croghan Hill on 28 th December 2013 – dispersed over Derryarkin Bog, Ballybeg Bog, Cavemount Bog and Ballycon Bog. Swans fly between these bogs with no set pattern. The NPWS has not carried out any counts of Whooper swans in this area. • The revised survey is still inadequate. • Standard survey methods did not conform to best practice on recognised methodology for breeding, non-breeding and migratory birds. • Surveys must be conducted at the right time for swans – dawn and dust. There were inadequate surveys at these times. • No quantitative assessment of collision risk for swans has been undertaken. • There is insufficient evidence as to where the swans arrive from or depart to. • Further information is required on nature and intensity of hazard lights for swans on T1-T7. • There appears to be doubt as to whether swans feed and roost at T1-T7 or at T1-T11.

12.3.9 Other Issues • Construction traffic at Greenhills will result ina significant increase in traffic over a farm laneway which is normally just used by two farmers and residents of the adjoining house. This will result in nuisance and possible damage to the house from vibration. The Murphys own half of this road and will not allow improvement works on it [Maps, photographs and Property Registration documentation supplied]. • New photomontage LC11 is labelled ‘Annagheane’ which means nothing to local people. The townland is Knockdrin. This is an attempt to mislead objectors. • A huge amount of CO 2 will be released in the construction phase.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 58 of 114 • Construction of turbines means that it is unlikely that local residents will want to build houses for children in the area or that other people will want to move into this area. • Dunville Lane is private – and the construction of the connecting access road between T13 and T14 may affect private right-of-way. • Ireland is already well on-target to meet its renewable energy target up to 2020. This wind farm is not needed. This wind farm does not have a Gate 3 Offer. This wind farm is merely in a Post-Gate 3 queue. No timeframe has been set for Gate 4. The application by Yellow River Wind Farm is for a Gate connection of only 72MW. • New access roads will constitute a barrier to surface water flow and will cause flooding. • The applicant has only revised this scheme, having had sight of the objections submitted. • Bord na Móna has issued a statement in April 2014, in relation to its Clean Energy Hub project for export of electricity to the UK not now proceeding, but re-iterating its commitment to developing wind energy projects in Ireland. • Objectors have been afforded insufficient time to respond to the revised proposals submitted by the applicant.

12.3.10 Associated Submissions Response submissions are accompanied by the following items of note- • Colour photographs of the area. • Extract from ‘Croghan winter birds and Croghan summer birds’ by John Feehan. • Extract from Bird Atlas 2007/08 to 2010/11. • Colour photographs of wildlife in the area. • Series of internet extracts, articles and reports, relating to low frequency noise emitted by wind turbines. • Annotated colour photographs – Carrick Lane. • Black & White photographs of Mount Lucas wind turbines. • Annotated maps (taken from those submitted with the application). • Petition of signatures from Dunville, Rhode. • Extract map from Property Registration Authority – in relation to Dunville Lane. • Letter from Department of Health (dated 23 rd December 2013) in relation to noise from wind turbines and effects on hearing. • Newspaper articles. • Decision in High Court Case IEHC 415. • Documentation in relation to Case C-258/11. • ‘Wind Energy Developments and Natura 2000 – Guidance Document’. EU guidance document. • Article from British Medical Journal (2012) relating to wind turbine noise.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 59 of 114 • Report of Dr. Christopher Hanning in relation to sleep disturbance and wind turbine noise – on behalf of Stop Swinford Wind Farm Action Group (June 2009). • University of Adelaide report on ‘Systematic Review of the Human Health Effects of Wind Farms. • Article from journal ‘Epilepsia’ in relation to shadow flicker (2008). • Landscape Institute Advice Note 01/11 – Photography and Photomontage in Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. • SERC Discussion Paper 159 – Gone with the Wind: Valuing the Visual Impacts of Wind Turbines through House Prices – April 2014. • Article from Journal ‘Energy Policy’ – 2013 – Wind farms on Undegraded Peatlands are Unlikely to Reduce Future Carbon Emissions’. • Article from Journal ‘Policy Sturdy – February 2013 – Adam Smith Institute – ‘The Limits of Wind Power’. • Conference Paper in relation to impact of wind turbines on horses. • Article in relation to court case – Rylands v Fletcher. • OS Discovery Series Map extract showing Bord na Móna lands in the vicinity of the proposed wind farm. • European Landscape Convention (Florence 2000). • Heritage Council proposals for the Onshore Wind Farm Sector in Ireland (November 2013). • Letter from B.C.C. Wind Action Group to NPWS (dated 10 th February 2014). • Letter from B.C.C. Wind Action Group to Environment Directorate General of the EU (dated 3 rd April 2014). • Fact sheet from National Wind Watch – FAQ Impact on Wildlife. • Internet article in relation to Low Frequency Sound. • Report from Doyle & O’Troithigh Landscape Architects (dated May 2014). • Report from Ecologists Ireland (dated May 2014).

12.4 Response Observation In Favour of Scheme

Responses were received from the following (date received in brackets)- 1. Eamonn Naughton (07/05/14).

12.4.1 Grounds in Favour Issues raised, where not already stated in earlier submissions, can be summarised as follows- • Turbines provide an important income for struggling farmers. The proposed wind farm is a definite project, as opposed to the vague promise of future development from other potential wind farm developers.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 60 of 114

12.4.2 Associated Submissions • Article from Leinster Leader newspaper in relation to axing of plans by Bord na Móna of Clean Energy Hub project in the midlands.

13.0 ASSESSMENT

13.1 General Comments

13.1.1 The Board decided that an oral hearing was not required in relation to this application for Strategic Infrastructure Development. A significant number of observations were received. Offaly County Council and a number of Prescribed Bodies sent submissions to the Board. The original scheme, as submitted to the Board, was altered somewhat by way of submission of unsolicited additional information of 3 rd April 2014. This submission provided for a reduction in the number of turbines by 3 – through the omission of T20, T23 & T28. The revised scheme relocated one turbine T22 some distance, and relocated two further turbines by approximately 60m (T24 & T31). The final significant change was the reduction in hub height of 11 no. turbines from 166m to 156m. Changes to the layout were re-advertised, and those interested were given the opportunity to comment.

13.1.2 The principal issues of this application relate to visual impact, noise, shadow flicker, ecology and construction traffic.

13.2 Principle of Development – Development Plan & Other Guidance

13.2.1 Government Policy and Wind Energy Guidelines 2006 Development of energy from wind sources is supported in national and regional guidance. Government policy in relation to wind farms is largely set out in the 2006 Guidelines. Within these Government guidelines, there is a presumption in favour of wind farm developments in suitable circumstances. The visibility of a wind farm from designated views or prospects would not automatically preclude an area from such development. The strategic importance of wind farms in reducing dependence on fossil fuels needs to be considered. Birds can be impacted by wind farms in terms of direct loss or degradation of habitats for breeding, feeding or roosting purposes. Noise impact must be examined for noise-sensitive receptors within 500m of the turbines. Careful design can reduce the negative impact of shadow flicker. Peat stability must be considered where applications are on peatlands. It is clear that the Guidelines envisage wind farm developments even where county development plan policies might appear to indicate that they should not be located within a particular area.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 61 of 114 13.2.2 Draft Wind Energy Guidelines 2013 The December 2013 Draft Wind Energy Guidelines provided for more stringent noise limits, omission of all shadow flicker and minimum 500m separation distance from the curtilage of any house (except with the consent of the owner). Until such time as they are adopted, the 2006 Guidelines must be the relevant guidance document. It is entirely unreasonable to expect wind farm developers to meet Guidelines which may not be adopted. The application cannot be viewed as premature, given that there is no indication of when, the new Guidelines might be adopted. Notwithstanding this, the unsolicited additional information submission from the applicant has gone some way towards trying to meet the more stringent requirements of the Draft Guidelines in terms of noise and shadow flicker.

13.2.3 County Offaly Development Plan 2009-2015 The Draft County Offaly Development Plan 2014-2020 has not been adopted to date. Offaly County Council has indicated that the current Plan will remain in force until 2015. Within this Plan, there are general objectives which favour development of electricity from wind energy. The ‘County Offaly Wind Strategy to 2015’ – identified the ‘Area north of Rhode’ as one of the two areas within the county suitable for wind farm development. This Strategy had regard to the availability of suitable grid connection, absence of overwhelming environmental constraints, and low density of residential land use. The principle of wind farm development in this part of the county is, therefore, acceptable. It has been argued by an objector that T1-T4 may be outside the area identified on Figure 9 of the Wind Energy Strategy for the county. Given the small scale of the said map, it is difficult to determine the precise boundary. Turbines T1-T4 are certainly close to the boundary of the Wind Energy Development Area, but I would consider that they are within it.

13.3 Landscape Character & Visual Amenity

13.3.1 Landscape Character Chapter 11 and the A0 booklet of photomontages from the EIS deal with this issue. Viewpoints for consideration were selected as being key views, designated scenic routes, local community views, centres of population, major traffic routes or amenity and heritage features – 29 in total, and indicated at Table 11.6. These were supplemented by additional viewpoints (as suggested by Offaly County Council) by way of additional information submission of 3 rd April 2014. A Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) of 20km was used. The landscape is generally flat, punctuated by small but prominent hills of 50-100m above surrounding lands. Croghan Hill at 234m OD is the highest in the area. Part of the site is peat bog, with little or no screen vegetation. The eastern portion of the site is characterised by farmland broken up by hedgerows with some

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 62 of 114 coniferous/deciduous plantation which will provide some degree of screening of turbines. The Wind Energy Development Guidelines 2006, identify ‘flat peatland’, land cover type which allows for large wind energy developments. The County Offaly Wind Strategy 2009, identifies the ‘Area north of Rhode’ as being suitable for wind energy developments. This designation was subsequent to extensive examination of the impact on landscape – amongst other considerations. Croghan Hill and its environs (including Raheenmore Bog) is an Area of High Amenity in the County Development Plan. Such areas were allocated a 2km buffer zone when drawing up the County Offaly Wind Strategy. The layout of the development has respected this buffer, although it does not actually appear anywhere within the Strategy. Within adjoining County Westmeath, Landscape Character Assessment Unit 10 (Lough Ennell and South-Eastern Corridor) is considered to have medium capacity for wind farms. Within adjoining County Meath, Landscape Character Assessment Unit 15 (Southwest Lowlands) has a medium capacity for wind turbines. Views within this LCA are generally short-range and limited by topography and vegetation. County Kildare I would consider to be too far from the wind farm for impact on landscape character areas within that county.

13.3.2 Zone of Theoretical Visibility The ZTV for this wind farm does not take account of intermittent screening vegetation. The vast majority of land within 10km of this wind farm will be impacted by the wind farm, with the exception of the shadow of Croghan Hill to the southwest. Actual visibility beyond 10km is likely to be limited to elevated hills with little in the way of foreground screening. The ZTV map indicates just how visible the turbines are likely to be in the landscape (without allowance for screening vegetation).

13.3.3 Scenic Views Scenic Views within the County Development Plan are indicated in the vicinity of Croghan Hill to the southwest. Views V7 & V9 are away from Croghan Hill to the southwest and southeast respectively (away from the wind farm). Views V8 (two indicated) are towards Croghan Hill from the west and from the south. The hill itself will screen out any views of wind turbines from these vantage points. Within the Westmeath County Development Plan, View 21 from the old N6 (now R446) across peatlands to the county boundary with Offaly is of relevance to this wind farm development. The new M6 motorway is now inserted between the viewpoint and the county boundary – but it is sunken from view. The Mount Lucas wind farm is clearly visible from this location. The Yellow River wind farm will not be particularly visible from this location – particularly from the small landscaped seating area at the junction of the R446 with the Meedian road. This part of the old N6 is flanked by a number of houses and farm buildings.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 63 of 114 13.3.4 Existing Landscape Interventions The character of the landscape has been highly influenced and moderated by human intervention – in the form of roads (M6 and R400 being the principal ones), industrial-scale peat harvesting, power plants and associated electricity pylon infrastructure, commercial coniferous forestry, arterial drainage, farming and residential settlement, both in terms of village settlement such as Rhode and Rochfortbridge, and also dispersed ribbon development along country roads. The area also accommodates sand & gravel quarries and industrial-scale agricultural enterprises such as piggeries. The construction of a wind farm at this location will be yet one further significant introduction to an already highly moderated landscape.

13.3.5 Visual Impact Croghan Hill to the southwest, is the most distinctive landscape feature in the area. The Royal Canal to the north and the Grand Canal to the south are now largely amenity features in the landscape. There are no other commercial wind farms in the area – something which renders the introduction of one somewhat more sensitive. Access roads for turbines within a flat landscape such as this will not be obtrusive. Turbines of the height proposed will be extremely prominent in the landscape, and there is no hiding this fact. This will be the case particularly for T1-T12 where screening vegetation is limited. The reduction in height by 10m of 11 no. turbines will have an imperceptible impact on the overall visibility within the landscape. However, I would consider that the vast openness of the landscape will allow for the accommodation of such large structures (156m & 166m tall). The turbines will not have a significant impact on the land itself – the actual footprint of the development being small. The principal impact will be visual. Against this visual impact must be set the benefits to be gained from harnessing wind energy from a renewable source. I would be satisfied that the gains will outweigh the loss in terms of landscape impact. The permission granted would be for a limited period.

13.3.6 Cumulative Impact of Wind Farms The cumulative impact with the Mount Lucas wind farm, some 10km to the south, will not be significant – given that the most significant views will be from somewhere in between, but with wind farms being located in opposite directions. The cumulative ZTV is indicated on drawings submitted. The addition of the Mount Lucas wind farm does not greatly increase the area within 20km of the Yellow River wind farm from which at least one wind farm would be visible – the ZTV of the Yellow River wind farm being already so extensive. Both wind farms will be visible from Croghan Hill and other hills to the east of it, but not in the same viewshed.

13.3.7 Mitigation Measures There are no real mitigation measures possible to screen structures such as these in the landscape. Matt, non-reflective paint finish will be used on

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 64 of 114 turbines. Cables will be located underground. Counter rotation of blades will be avoided. Manufacturers’ livery colours should not be allowed on nacelles, blades or support towers. The design and layout of the wind farm will ensure that it does not read like a linear barrier, and the widespread location of turbines will result in not all turbines being visible from specific viewing points for most areas surrounding the wind farm.

13.4 Access & Traffic

13.4.1 Delivery Route for Wind Turbine Components The route of delivery for oversize components is outlined in Appendix G – for a total of 204 outsize loads. This quantum will be reduced by the omission of 3 no. turbines. Large components will be transferred from Dublin along the M4 and M6 – departing at Junction 3 onto the R400. The largest components will be the blades (55m long) and delivered on extendable trailers. Access to the wind farm is from two existing access points on the R400 and a proposed new access road (fourth arm) at the roundabout at Coolcur – 1km north of Rhode. The Roads Department of Offaly County Council was not satisfied with the second access off the R400 (to the east of the proposed meteorological mast). Whilst the existing access to Kilmurray Quarry is fine and wide with good sight visibility, the second access off the R400 has restricted sight visibility back towards Rochfortbridge, and the junction alignment would make turning manoeuvres difficult. The applicant’s response to the submissions sent to the Board does not address this concern of the Council. It is not that this second access would facilitate a one-way system for construction traffic to T1-T12. I recommend that this second access from the R400 be omitted by way of condition attached to any grant of planning permission. On the other side of the R400 (T13-T32), the applicant proposes a largely off-road series of construction access tracks – utilising parts of the existing agricultural track access network in the area. Some tracks will have to be widened and strengthened to facilitate access. Where existing county roads are to be used or where crossings are proposed, temporary traffic lights and traffic controls are proposed. This is acceptable for the period of construction traffic – in agreement with Offaly County Council. The developer has acknowledged that a bond would be required by the local authority for any damage to the road network caused by construction traffic. This is most likely to apply to Offaly rather than the short stretch of R400 within County Westmeath (which appears to be in better structural condition than the stretch within County Offaly). However, I note that Westmeath County Council has requested that a bond be put in place for any damage caused to the road within County Westmeath. Offaly County Council are seeking pre-construction surveys of all roads to be used for construction traffic. Having regard to the structural condition of the R400, it would be appropriate to attach such a condition requiring pre- commencement structural survey of the R400 to any grant of planning

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 65 of 114 permission. A bond condition should be attached to deal with any issues arising from damage to the road network – regard being had to the bog rampart construction of most of the R400. The proposed arrangements for delivery of outsized components are satisfactory. An appropriately- worded condition should be attached to any grant of planning permission to issue from the Board in relation to the route to be used.

13.4.2 Access for Conventional Construction Traffic Normal construction traffic will use the existing road network. Section 12.6 of the EIS deals with roads. The principal impact of this development on roads will be during the construction phase. Aggregates and ‘Readymix’ will be sourced locally – delivery to be from the north only along the R400 and M6. It is estimated that 13,989 HGV loads will be delivered over the 26-month construction period (somewhat reduced by the reduction in the proposed number of turbines from 32 to 29). Some small road improvements are proposed to facilitate construction traffic – 1.25km in length at Greenhills road (L-50112-1) and Carrick road (L-10081-1). Junction widening will also be necessary to facilitate construction traffic. The application documentation and additional information submission of 3rd April 2014 clearly indicate the roadworks proposed and the necessary installation of temporary traffic controls. Offaly County Council suggests a similarly-worded condition to no. 7 of the Mount Lucas wind farm permission in relation to roads issues. That condition dealt with a Transport Management Plan, condition survey, construction damage, and haul routes. This would appear to be reasonable.

13.4.3 Access for Maintenance Traffic Maintenance traffic will be light for this development. The newly constructed access roads will be used for agricultural, peat harvesting and forestry traffic also.

13.5 Design & Layout

13.5.1 General The site is dispersed over cutover peatlands, reclaimed agricultural lands and forestry lands. The site lies on the edge of much larger Bord na Móna peat bogs. The layout is constrained (amongst other factors) by the necessity of separating turbines from houses – particularly northeast of the R400. There could be said to be no pattern to the layout – being neither linear nor grouped. The landscape is generally flat, and no turbine will be located on elevated lands. The area is crisscrossed by rivers/streams and a dense network of bog/field drainage. Particularly to the east of the R400, screening vegetation is more plentiful. Micrositing of 20m is referred to in the EIS, and I would see that this is acceptable – provided that micrositing did not bring any turbine within 500m of a dwellinghouse or 113m of any site boundary (lands not in the control of the applicant).

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 66 of 114

13.5.2 Turbines The proposed 29 turbines (T1-T32) will have hub heights of 100m or 110m and rotor diameters of 113m – total base to tip height of 156m or 166m accordingly. Each turbine will have three blades which will rotate at a rate of 5-24 revolutions per minute. Turbines will be white/grey in colour. The exact model of turbine is not indicated – the turbines to be installed will depend on the market, the time of installation and the state of technology at that time. This would appear to be reasonable, given that the permission would be for a period of 10 years. The principal impact of turbine type chosen will relate to noise, as there will be no significant visual difference between nacelles. Transformers are to be located either within the base of the turbine tower or else immediately beside the base. Foundations are to be 2m deep and 18m in diameter – necessitating approximately 420m 3 of poured concrete over rafted steel foundations for each base. Hardstand areas of 2,000m 2 are to be laid at turbine bases to facilitate construction.

13.5.3 Electrical Compound & Cables The compound is to be located within the Rhode Business Park, beside a power plant and electricity sub-station. I would see no difficulty with this arrangement, and this is an appropriate location for such a facility. It is not proposed to install an effluent treatment plant within the compound: a 10m 3 holding tank will be installed instead, and emptied at regular intervals. This is an appropriate solution for a development which will have only intermittent visits from staff. Water supply will be from the public mains. The compound will be connected to turbines and the 110kV sub- station via underground cables. Cabling will run along access tracks and roads. It will be necessary to obtain a Road Opening Licence from the Council to lay cables in public roads, and it would appear that the local authority would prefer if cables were run outside of roads. However, the granting or refusing of such a licence is outside the control of the planning system. The proposals for the compound are satisfactory.

13.5.4 Temporary Site Compound The site compound (70 x 50m) will be located beside the Electrical Compound. It will be required for the estimated 26-month construction period. The area in which the compound is located is set out as a future Business Park – with the road base and footpaths already in existence. This location is satisfactory.

13.5.5 Meteorological Mast There is an 80m temporary mast erected to measure wind speed at this location. Claims by objectors that the wind speeds measured at the temporary mast do not give an accurate reflection of wind speeds at the 110m proposed hub height is not a particularly relevant planning

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 67 of 114 consideration. If the applicant is satisfied that the wind resource at this location is sufficient to power the proposed turbines, then I would see no difficulty. The temporary mast in this area will be replaced by a permanent lattice structure, 100m high to the southeast of T12. This permanent mast will be more visually obtrusive – being closer to the R400 than the temporary structure. However, in terms of the overall visibility of the wind farm, it will not be particularly noticeable. I would see no difficulty with this aspect of the development. The mast should be decommissioned at the same time as wind turbines.

13.5.6 New & Upgraded Site Roads It is proposed to construct some 18.25km of construction site road – which road will then also serve as access for agricultural, peat harvesting or forestry use. The reason why such an extensive length of new road is required is to allow for ease of access for construction traffic where the existing road country road network is narrow and twisting, and serves a considerable amount of one-off housing and also agricultural land. New access tracks will be 4-5m wide, depending on available verges for widening. Some 5.9km of existing farm/forestry tracks are to be upgraded and widened to facilitate construction access. Access roads will involve the construction of new river/stream crossings (9 in total). Appendix J of the submission of 3 rd April 2014 indicates a selection of cross-sections. The roads will all be constructed of hardcore, and there is no proposal to surface or bind them. Existing services beneath farm tracks will be protected. The level of roads will not be above existing levels, so there will be no alteration in land drainage. ‘Tensar Geogrid’ will be used as a base course where access tracks are to cross peat greater than 1m in depth. Shallow swales will be constructed on either side of access tracks where peat depths are shallower than 1m. The proposed road network is satisfactory – particularly as it largely removes construction traffic from existing county roads.

13.5.7 Excavated Spoil Peat probes carried out on site indicate depths ranging from 0.0-3.6m – with an average of 0.5m depth. Some of the agricultural land on this site is former cutover bog. Excavated material around bases of turbines will be spread out around the bases. Proposals for dealing with excavated spoil are acceptable.

13.6 Cultural Heritage

13.6.1 Archaeology Chapter 13 and Appendix O of the EIS deal with this issue. A field inspection was carried out on 10 th October 2012 and 4 th May 2013 for the EIS. The site is an extensive one (1,002ha), straddling a number of townlands. Notwithstanding the extent, the footprint of development is

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 68 of 114 limited to approximately 20.6ha within this larger site – somewhat reduced by the omission of 3 no. turbines by way of submission of 3 rd April 2014. There are no archaeological monuments within areas proposed for development, although there are a number of identified monuments within close proximity of turbines or access roads. The monuments included within the Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) of the OPW within 2km of the site are listed at Appendix O. I have listed the ones within 500m as follows- • OF004-009 – Moated site in the townland of Wood (Adjacent to proposed haulage route and 200m to the south of T17). • OF003-021 – Road, class 2 togher in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-022 – Redundant record of single stake in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-023 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-024 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-025 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-026 – Road, class 3 togher in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-027 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-010 – Redundant record of single stake in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-028 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130-150m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-029 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130-150m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-030 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130-150m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-031 – Redundant record of single stake in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.130-150m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-011 – Road, class 2 togher in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.180m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-012 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.180m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-013 – Road, class 3 togher in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.180m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-014 – Road, class 3 togher in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.180m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-015 – Road, class 3 togher in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.180m north of T1 & T3).

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 69 of 114 • OF003-016 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.180m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-017 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.180m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-018 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.180m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-019 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.180m north of T1 & T3). • OF003-020 – Road, class 2 togher in the townland of Bunsallagh (c.180m north of T1 & T3). • OF004-003 – Enclosure in the townland of Stonehouse (c.440m northeast of T19). • OF003-032 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Derrygreenagh (c.460m northeast of T6). • OF003-033 – Road, class 1 togher in the townland of Derrygreenagh (c.460m northeast of T6). • OF003-034 – Redundant record of brushwood in the townland of Derrygreenagh (c.460m northeast of T6). • OF004-017-021 – Fulachtaí Fia (5 in total) in the townland of Garr (460m southwest of T24). Much of the peatland archaeology referred to in the list above has been removed following examination. The EIS identifies remaining peatland as an area of archaeological potential (AAP1), arising from the preservation characteristics of peat. Excavations within this area will be monitored for any unrecorded remains. The submission of 3 rd April 2014 gives a map at Appendix G showing the position of Recorded Monuments and Places.

13.6.2 Moated Site & Fulachtaí Fia There is an Anglo-Norman moated site in the townland of Wood (RMP OF004-009) located immediately to the east of a haul road – c.200m south of T17, and part of which is within the wider site boundary as outlined in red. This feature is outlined in an aerial photograph included as Plate 22 of Appendix O. Approximately half of the feature is outside of the site as outlined in red. The widening of the access road to facilitate construction traffic could have an impact on this archaeological feature. It is recommended that the access road be widened on its western side – so as to avoid impact on the monument on its eastern side. However, it is not clear that the applicant has control over sufficient lands within the road corridor for widening purposes – notwithstanding additional information submitted on 3 rd April 2014. All excavation work would have to be monitored to see if any archaeological remains extend under the road. A condition should be attached to any grant of planning permission in relation to road widening at this location. Turbines T13-T15 are located in the vicinity, but could not really be said to have a negative visual impact on the setting of the monument. The monument is located within a field network, divided by hedgerows. The hedgerows will partially screen the

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 70 of 114 turbines from view. The impact on the monument would be moderate and of limited duration – the 25-year lifespan of the turbines. There is a cluster of fulachtaí fia (ancient cooking places) in Garr townland. These are located over 300m to the south of T25 and will not be impacted by either turbines or access roads to them.

13.6.3 Other Archaeological Features In addition to the list above, archaeological features have been picked up from aerial photography in the townland of Wood (AAP2 & AAP3) which are located close to the Yellow River and what may be a former channel of the river – close to T16. These areas of archaeological potential would have to be closely examined in the event of a grant of planning permission. A possible burnt mound was identified adjacent to T17 – indicated as AAP4. There is no map submitted to indicate the exact locations of these Areas of Archaeological Potential. Excavations in the vicinity would have to be closely monitored for possible archaeological remains. An observation from the Department of Geography, Maynooth University, refers to an area where the Environmental Geophysics Unit has been carrying out surveys for a number of years past. No map has been provided, but it is stated that the study area extends for 2km on the south bank of the Mongagh River (T31 & T32). It would appear that features described are located within private farmland. The features referred to are not included in the Record of Monuments and Places of the OPW. The landowners (T31 & T32) have consented to the making of the planning application. T32 was relocated slightly further away from the Mongagh River by way of the submission of 3 rd April 2014, and the connecting construction road between T31 & T32 was also omitted. It would be possible for the University, with the agreement of the landowners, to carry out its survey work in advance of any disturbance relating to the construction of T31 & T32 (a limited area within the stated 2km length of the archaeological feature). However, this is a matter for agreement with private landowners and should not form part of any condition attaching to a planning permission.

13.6.4 Built Heritage The built heritage of the area was examined through the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage (NIAH) and OS maps. Some vernacular cottages and farmhouses and an old schoolhouse are identified within the area. There are larger demesne houses at Coolville and Rathmoyle still extant. Ancillary buildings associated with demesne houses survive at Greenhills and Ballyburly. Coolville House is a Protected Structure – within the wider site as outlined in red. It is 590m south of T13. The proposed new access road from the Coolcur roundabout on the R400 passes within 60m of the rear of this house, but it will not affect the Protected Structure. Greenhills stable block (farm buildings associated with the now demolished Greenhills House) is located

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 71 of 114 some 700m to the east of T15. The construction access track will pass within 60m of the site of the former house and extant stable block, but will not have any impact on this Protected Structure. Apart from these two Protected Structures, all others are located at a greater distance. Coolville House is the only Protected Structure within the wider site boundary. The EIS suggests photographic and written records be undertaken of all access road works within the demesnes/former demesnes of Coolville, Ballyburly and Greenhills. This would appear to be reasonable.

13.6.5 Mill Race A mill race runs southeast from the Yellow River adjacent to T8-T10 in Derryiron townland [Plate 14 of Appendix O of the EIS]. This watercourse divides with one branch running south and annotated ‘canal supply’ – feeding the Grand Canal in Toberdaly townland. The eastern branch runs southeast to Coolcur townland – possibly supplying a now vanished mill associated with the remains of a church and monastery in Coolcur townland. The mill race is crossed three times by the proposed haulage road. It is stated that the mill race has been almost entirely filled-in and that here is no standing water at any of the proposed crossing points. The proposed development will not have any significant impact on this mill race.

13.6.6 Setting of Items of Cultural Heritage The monumental scale of turbines will result in them being highly visible within the landscape. It could be argued that such height will impact on the setting and relative remoteness of many archaeological monuments and items of built heritage in the area. However, I would consider that the turbines will not impinge upon public understanding of monuments or the setting of buildings. Whilst items of built heritage could be screened, this would be counterproductive – hiding them in the landscapes. The visual impact will be relevant for a period of 25 years only (the lifetime of the permission).

13.6.7 General Cultural Heritage of the Area Croghan Hill is an important archaeological site with a Bronze Age burial mound and a ring barrow at the summit. There is an early Mediaeval church site and graveyard on the hill. There is an holy well recorded here also. The proposed development will not have any direct impact on this area – other than visual. But there is no denying that the wind farm will be highly visible from the hill. The wind farm at Mount Lucas to the south is visible from this hill. There are a number of houses (some of recent construction) located on the side of this hill. The small hamlet of Croghan is situated on the southern side of the hill. The Bord na Mona peat bog harvesting operations in the area are highly visible from this hill. The visual impact of the wind farm will be relevant for a period of 25 years only (the lifetime of the permission). I would be satisfied that the wind farm has

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 72 of 114 been set back a sufficient distance from Croghan Hill so as to mitigate somewhat the impact.

13.7 Noise

13.7.1 Noise-Sensitive Locations Chapter 9 and Appendix M of the EIS deal with the issue of noise. A fixed limit of 43dB(A) L A90, 10min is the accepted maximum for night-time with 45dB(A) L A90, 10min for day-time in Ireland. Table 9.2 lists the 214 houses (noise sensitive receptors) within 1.13km of the nearest turbine – equal to ten times the rotor diameter proposed. Appendix N contains letters (dated 22 nd November 2013) from two landowners whose houses are between 400m and 500m from the closest wind turbine. In both cases the landowners will be beneficiaries of the scheme through rental income from turbines on their land. In all other cases, houses are more than 500m from the nearest turbine. There are 26 houses located between 500m and 600m from the nearest turbine in the scheme as originally outlined.

13.7.2 Baseline Noise Monitoring Baseline noise monitoring was carried out at 10 locations from 12-30 th May 2013. I would be satisfied that monitoring points and the time periods are sufficient to give a representative picture of background noise in this area. Locations included eight houses scattered throughout the site (photographs at Appendix M). Locations were at H210, 40m from H138, 220m southwest of H192, H226, H145, H88, H18, H87, H41 & H220. Principal sources of noise were wind on vegetation, road traffic, and agricultural activity. The M6 Motorway and R400 Regional Road are noise generators in this area. Noise from rain and from the dawn chorus was removed from measurements. The submission of 3 rd April 2014 indicates that noise data from day-time periods Monday-Friday and the morning period on Saturdays was excluded in the calculation of background noise. Wind speed data was recorded from a mast on site – at 80.8m and 44.8m above ground level respectively. I would be satisfied that predicated wind speed at 110m hub height could be estimated from these measurements. Background noise levels (from regression analysis) for day-time and night- time, with varying wind speeds (4-10m/second) are given for the 10 monitoring locations, at Table 9.5 of the EIS. Table 9.6 indicates derived noise limit from the baseline noise survey for daytime and night-time.

13.7.3 Noise Modelling Mechanical noise and aerodynamic noise is emitted from turbines. Turbines do not operate at low speeds. At wind speeds above 7 or 8m/second, background wind noise will usually mask the noise from turbines. Noise modelling was undertaken using a Siemens SWT-3.0-113 3MW turbine – although the manufacturer and model had not been chosen when the application was lodged with the Board. The sound power level

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 73 of 114 at 122m hub height varied from 98.6dB(A) at 4m/second to 105.5dB(A) at any speed above 7m/second. The modelling was applied to all 236 houses. Table 9.10 outlines the predicted noise level expressed as dB(A)L eq, 10 min for wind speeds of 7m/second and upwards, ranging from a low of 33.4 to a high of 42.6 dB(A). Houses H210 and H226 (both within 500m of a turbine, had maximum predicted noise levels of 42.5 and 42.0dB(A) respectively. The predicted noise levels at all wind speeds are within the day-time lower limit of 45dB(A) and within the night-time lower limit of 43dB(A). Modelled predication is a worst case scenario, assuming that the noise-sensitive receptors will be downwind from all turbines at the same time – which cannot in practice occur. Figures 9.26-9.29 of the EIS indicate the locations of houses relative to turbines.

13.7.4Discrepancies in Noise Data Submitted The submission of 3 rd April 2014 acknowledged that two houses (H227 and H147) had been incorrectly numbered in the original maps submitted with the Noise Impact Assessment. This is rectified in the Adjusted Noise Impact Report, and is listed in the Schedule of Errors (Appendix C of submission of 3 rd April 2014). I would be satisfied that there was no intention to mislead parties to the application. Some houses were indicated as being outside the 40dB(A) contour when they had predicated noise levels of between 40dB(A) and 43dB(A) in the original EIS submission. This is acknowledged as an error, and revised Noise Contour Mapping – Figures 9.31-9.34 of Appendix D – were submitted on 3 rd April 2014 to correct this.

13.7.5 Adjusted Noise Impact Report An Adjusted Noise Impact Report together with Noise Non-Technical Summary were submitted on 3 rd April 20014. The originally proposed noise limits for this development were:- a fixed lower limit of 45dB(A)L A90,10min or 5dB(A) above background, whichever is the greater, at all residences; and a fixed lower limit for night-time of 43dB(A)L A90,10min or 5dB(A) above background, whichever is the greater, at all residences. It is indicated that the noise control setting of T2, T4, T14, T22, T24 & T30 & T31 has been specified variously at minus 1-6dB(A) in order to restrict sound output levels. Table 9.14 indicates that almost all houses in the vicinity of a turbine will experience noise levels of 40dB(A) or less – with the exception of just six (two of which are occupied by beneficiaries of the scheme). The other four are H66, H105, H138 & H200. The position of houses relative to revised noise contours are indicated at Figures 9.35- 9.38 of the Adjusted Noise Impact Report (Appendix A) of the submission of 3 rd April 2014. Exceedances are minor – 0.1-0.2dB(A). The revised proposals come close to meeting the requirements of the Draft Wind Guidelines, of a more stringent 40dB(A) absolute night-time and daytime limit (except with the written agreement of affected residents). The figures indicate worst-case scenarios, it being impossible for some houses to be

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 74 of 114 upwind and downwind of turbines at the same time. The submission of 3 rd April 2014 makes clear that the applicant is voluntarily agreeing to abide by the stricter noise standards of the 2013 Draft Wind Energy Guidelines, even though such adherence is not a requirement of the current 2006 Guidelines. I do not think that it is reasonable to require the developer to abide by noise standards which are not in the current Wind Energy Guidelines. A condition should be attached to any grant of planning permission requiring the applicant to abide by the current 2006 Guidelines. It may be, that the proposed wind farm will adhere to the noise threshold set out in the 2013 Draft Guidelines, but I do not consider that it would be correct for a condition of a planning permission to refer to Guidelines which were not in force at the time the decision was made.

13.7.6 Inconsistencies in Data Submitted on 3 rd April 2014 The response of Offaly County Council to the submission from the applicant of 3 rd April 2014 (also referred to by other observers) points out some inconsistencies in relation to the purported distance of turbines from houses within the Adjusted Noise Impact Report – differences between Table 9.2 and Tables 9.14-18 (these latter effectively one table). The discrepancies relate to H77, H104, H105, H111, H112, H195, H196, H207 & H211 – with H231 being absent from Tables 9.14-18. The differences are as much as 219m. One set of figures is clearly partially incorrect. Similar tables were used for noise impact and shadow flicker impact. In Table 10.1 of the Adjusted Shadow Flicker Report (Appendix B of submission of 3 rd April 2014), the figures listed correspond with Tables 9.14-9.18 – so that it would seem the incorrect distances have crept into Table 9.2. In order to confirm this, I have made rough calculations of the distances between the relevant houses and the nearest turbines, and can confirm that the measurements relating to the houses referred to are broadly correct in Tables 9.14-18 and Table 10.1. I note that there is no mention of H231 in Table 10.1: the separation distance would appear to be approximately 750m from T25. I would be satisfied that there was no intention to mislead parties to the application – and that the correct information is available within documentation submitted to the Board.

13.7.7 Low Frequency Noise Low frequency noise (infrasound) – 10-200Hz – can impact on the human body, but there is no evidence of deleterious impacts on human health. Low frequency noise is present in the environment from wind and water, from household appliances and piping. The separation distances of houses from turbines – greater than 500m will serve to lessen any impact from infrasound. A significant number of studies have been referenced by objectors and by the applicant in relation to low frequency noise. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) document ‘Guidance Note on Noise Assessment of Wind Turbine Operations at EPA Licenced Sites (NG3) states at p.11- “There is similarly no significant infrasound from

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 75 of 114 wind turbines”. It is acknowledged that infrasound was a prominent feature of passive yaw ‘downwind’ turbines where the blades were positioned downwind of the tower which resulted in a characteristic ‘thump’ as each blade passed through the wake caused by the turbine tower. With modern active yaw turbines (i.e. the blades are upwind of the tower and the turbine is turned to face into the wind by a wind direction sensor on the nacelle activating a yaw motor) this is no longer a significant feature. In the absence of any conclusive evidence in relation to low frequency noise and its impact on human or animal health, planning permission could be granted for this development.

13.7.8 Construction Noise Construction noise will be mostly from traffic/excavation, and will be of limited duration. Construction will take place during the day-time and will not have a significant impact on noise-sensitive receptors. Exceptional loads will have to be delivered at night-time because of traffic considerations. Standard mitigation measures in relation to maintenance of machinery will be put in place. This may cause some temporary nuisance to residents, but will be of short duration.

13.7.9 Noise Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures proposed include post-construction monitoring of noise at various wind speeds and direction. It will be possible to reduce the power output of turbines in order to reduce noise if it is exceeding thresholds. This should ensure that the wind farm will not cause noise nuisance to residents.

13.8 Shadow Flicker

13.8.1 Wind Energy Guidelines Recommendation The 2006 Guidelines refer to houses within 500m of turbines, but also refer to shadow flicker above 10 rotor diameters (in this instance 1.13km) – as not being significant. The Guidelines are silent in relation to houses located between 500m and 10 rotor diameters. Turbines have increased in size since the Guidelines were published. The Draft Guidelines 2013 refer to ‘no shadow flicker at any dwelling within 10 rotor diameters of a wind turbine’. These Draft Guidelines have not been adopted, so the recommendation contained within the 2006 Guidelines remains valid – 30 minutes per day or 30 hours per year at any dwelling/office.

13.8.2 Houses Affected by Shadow Flicker Chapter 10 and Appendix N of the EIS deal with this issue. The potential impact on all houses within 1.13km was predicted – equivalent to ten rotor diameters. There are 194 houses within ten rotor diameters. Houses were numbered 1-236 for the purposes of noise assessment – and the same numbering was retained for shadow flicker assessment. Two houses

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 76 of 114 within 500m of a turbine (H210 & H226) belong to beneficiaries of the proposed scheme, and both have submitted letters indicating awareness of proximity of their houses to turbines. House H210 is 452m from T32 and will experience a maximum of 7.44 hours of shadow flicker per annum. Notwithstanding this, the dwelling is surrounded by mature forest plantation which will mitigate the impact. House H226 is located 485m from T19, and will experience a maximum of 3.33 hours of shadow flicker per annum – figures revised as per 3 rd April 2014 revised layout.

13.8.3 Shadow Flicker Occurrence Shadow flicker will not occur where there is intervening screening vegetation/other buildings, when the sun is not shining, when the house in question is fitted with blinds/shutters or when there is insufficient/too much wind to turn the turbines (outside 3-25m/second wind speeds). Most turbines operate at between 10-25 revolutions per minute. A Siemens turbine with a rotor diameter of 113m and a hub height of 122.5m was used in modelling exercises. Shadow flicker at distances greater than 1.0km is not generally considered a nuisance. Notwithstanding this, 1.13km has been used in this instance. The model used assumed that the sun shone every day, that there was no intervening vegetation/buildings, that the turbines rotated perpendicular to the receptor at all times, and that all houses were occupied at the affected times. Shadow flicker is most likely to occur in winter when the sun is low in the sky, and generally at sunrise and sunset – when the sun is lowest in the sky. Shadow flicker is more likely to occur when turbines are sited east, southeast, southwest or west of receptors. If a turbine is located to the south of a receptor, the sun will be higher in the sky, and therefore unlikely to cause shadow flicker nuisance.

13.8.4 Shadow Flicker Calculations Table 10.1 of the EIS provides details of maximum hours of shadow flicker per day, maximum days per year and maximum hours per year for houses modelled. Sixty-three houses would theoretically be exposed to more than the 30-hour maximum per year. A reduction factor is applied for actual days of sunshine – as observed at the weather station at Birr, Co. Offaly – an average of 3.2 hours of sunshine per day. The hours of sunlight at Yellow River wind farm represents 26% of the total hours of daylight, therefore, shadow flicker will only occur for 26% of the predicted worst case time. According to the wind rose for Yellow River, turbines will not operate 14% of the time because of unsuitable wind speeds. Forced outages may also reduce the period during which turbines are rotating – conservatively estimated at 7% of time. A reduction must be allowed for the fact that turbines will not always be rotating perpendicular to the receptor. By applying all of the above reductions (12.68%), no house will be subjected to in excess of 30 hours shadow flicker per year. Table 10.1 gives the projected exposure figures (revised downwards to take account

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 77 of 114 of all of the above). In addition, intervening vegetation and buildings will screen some houses from shadow flicker. The most affected house would be H139 in Corbetstown at 16.46 hours.

13.8.5 Adjusted Shadow Flicker Report The additional information submission of 3 rd April 2014, somewhat changed the situation regarding shadow flicker through the omission of turbines, relocation of some others and reduction in the height of yet others. It would appear that the revised model did take account of reduced hub heights of 100m (T13-T25) and the original hub height of 110m for the remainder. A revised Shadow Flicker Report is included at Appendix B. An additional house was added H237 (to reflect a grant of planning permission). I note that maps supplied, which indicate the position of all houses relative to a turbine – Figures 9.25-9.29 – in error have included a wrong map for Figure 9.26 (which should have shown the area surrounding T1-T12). However, houses within this area are shown in another map – Figure 10.5. The revised report also includes a Shadow Flicker Contour map. Within these maps areas are shaded blue which will experience more than 30 hours of shadow flicker – confined tightly to the areas immediately to the northwest, north and northeast of a turbine. These areas are affected by periods when the sun is higher in the sky.

13.8.6 Modelling for Shadow Flicker in Revised Scheme The computerised modelling calculates a theoretical worst case scenario. Table 10.1 provides revised details of maximum hours per day and total hours per year for the 195 houses within 1.13km of a turbine. Forty-three houses would theoretically experience more than 30 hours shadow flicker per year. As in the earlier modelling, exposure figures are revised downwards to take account of average hours of sunshine, unsuitable wind speeds, temporary outages, and the fact that turbines will not always be rotating perpendicular to the receptor. By applying these reduction factors (12.68%), no house would experience more than 30 hours of shadow flicker per year. Calculations are outlined at Table 10.1. The most affected house is H199 at 14.85 hours – a small decrease on the 15.57 hours in the calculations pertaining to the original layout. The originally worst-affected house, H139, would see a reduction from 16.46 hours to 11.81 hours. The additional permitted house (H237) would be subject to a projected 12.62 hours of shadow flicker.

13.8.7 Mitigation Measures Shadow flicker will cause minor short-term nuisance. Mitigation measures are suggested where shadow flicker is deemed to have an impact on the health and safety of nearby residents. It is not clear just who would decide on this or how. Suggested mitigation includes installation of appropriately designed blinds/screens at the expense of the developer. Screens of vegetation could also be agreed. In practice, either or both of these

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 78 of 114 measures would be difficult to implement. The developer now proposes to install a Shadow Flicker Management System, as a component of the wind farm’s SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) software. This system can shut down turbines until the period for shadow flicker has passed. A photocell (light sensor) is mounted on the top of the turbine nacelle. A Siemens ‘Shadow Control Description’ document has been submitted by the applicant – although it is acknowledged that the turbine type remains to be selected by the applicant. This latter proposal would seem like a more appropriate mitigation measure for shadow flicker nuisance.

13.8.8 Shadow Flicker and Roads Objectors have referred to the problem which shadow flicker can cause for motorists. There are wind farms erected throughout the country, and I would be satisfied that the proposed Yellow River wind farm will not have a significant impact on motorists – over and above how wind farms effect motorists in other parts of the county.

13.8.9 Recommended Condition I would be satisfied that the proposed development will not result in significant disamenity for residents arising from shadow flicker. A condition should be attached to any grant of planning permission requiring compliance with the thresholds set down in the Wind Energy Guidelines 2006, and requiring the developer/operator to implement (if necessary) the mitigation measures outlined in the EIS and Adjusted Shadow Flicker Report of 3 rd April 2014.

13.9 Ecology

13.9.1 General Comment Chapter 5 and Appendix J of the EIS deal with this issue. Of note, a separate Appropriate Assessment Screening Report has been prepared in relation to potential impact on European sites. The site mostly comprises agricultural land (some of it reclaimed from bogland), with some cutover peatlands and some commercial forestry.

13.9.2 Flora & Fauna Site Surveys Site surveys were conducted in June 2010, July 2012 and May 2013, to examine habitats. Site surveys for breeding birds were carried out from April-June 2010, July 2012 and May 2013. The site was surveyed for wintering birds during 2012/2013 and 2013/2014. Weekly visits were conducted to Derryarkin to study Whooper swans between January and early April 2013, and again over the 2013/2014 winter period. Surveys for terrestrial mammals, amphibians and reptiles were carried out during habitat and bird surveys. Bat surveys were carried out on 30 th September

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 79 of 114 and 1 st October 2012. This level of survey undertaken is appropriate for a scattered site of this nature.

13.9.3 Natural Heritage Areas No part of the site is within or immediately abutting an area of nature conservation. I have elsewhere commented on European sites in the vicinity within the Appropriate Assessment section of this Report, and it is not proposed to repeat it here. In addition to European sites, there are a number of Natural Heritage Areas (NHAs) in the vicinity- • Woodtown Bog - 14km distant. • Nure Bog - 12km distant. • Milltownpass Bog - 8km distant. • Cloncrow Bog (New Forest) – 5km distant. • Black Castle Bog – 2km distant • Molerick Bog – 10km distant. • Daingean Bog – 10km distant. • Rahugh Ridge (Kiltober Esker) – 7km distant. • Ardan Wood – 10km distant. • Murphy’s Bridge Ridge Esker – 7km distant. • Royal Canal – 10km distant. • Grand Canal – 3km distant. There is no proposal to alter hydrology or hydrogeology in the area. Having regard to separation distances (the closest being 2km), the proposed development will not have any impact on the NHAs listed.

13.9.4 Habitat Surveys Apart from one small area of raised bog to the southwest of T8, T9 & T10, none of the habitats encountered correspond to any Annex I habitat of the Habitats Directive. The raised bog is compromised by an active cut face, by Bord na Móna commercial harvesting immediately to the north, and by surface drains excavated in the western portion. Other habitats encountered are- depositing lowland rivers, drainage ditches, improved grassland, wet grassland, dry meadows and grassy verges, cutover bog, bog woodland, conifer plantation, deciduous plantation, hedgerows and treelines, active quarries and mines, arable land, and buildings and artificial surfaces. Table 5.2 lists the predominant habitat at each turbine base – for the most part improved grassland. The level of detail provided in relation to habitats surveyed is acceptable – regard being had to the dispersed nature of the site.

13.9.5 Mammals Otter ( Lutra lutra ) occurs along the bank of the Yellow River and is likely to be active along all its tributaries. Badger ( Meles meles ) is widespread throughout the area – with a large sett in the Derryarkin farm area of the site. The Irish Hare ( Lepus timidus hibernicus ) is widely distributed throughout the site as is Fox ( Vulpes vulpes ). Pygmy shrew ( Sorex

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 80 of 114 minutus ), Long-tailed field mouse ( Apodemus sylvaticus ) and Hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus ) also occur. The common frog ( Rana temporaria ) is widespread throughout the site. The common lizard (Zootoca vivipara ) was not encountered in surveys, although it is likely to occur on bogs. The proposed development has been set back from watercourses and will not have any significant impact on any of the species mentioned. Construction will be carried out within working farmland/forestry or peatlands. There is only a small area of scrub woodland to be disturbed.

13.9.6 Bats Seven of the ten bat species in Ireland have been recorded within 10km of this site. There are no known bat roosts within the site area. A field survey detected Soprano pipistrelle ( Pipistrellus pygmaeus ), Common pipistrelle ( Pipistrellus pipistrellus ), Leisler’s ( Nyctalus leisleri ), Brown long- eared ( Plecotus aurtius ), Natterer’s ( Myotis nattereri ), and Daubenton’s (Myotis daubentonii ). The Whiskered bat ( Myotis mystacinus ) was not detected during survey work, but is expected to occur. Five of the six bat species recorded on site fly at less than 10m above ground level. They are a low collision risk. Leisler’s bat is the species most at risk of collision – flying at between 10-70m. There are no published results for bat mortality at wind farms in Ireland. There is no evidence of bat migration on a large scale outside of Northern Ireland. Prior to felling of any large deciduous trees, they will be examined for bat roosts. A 50m buffer zone between rotor sweep and nearest hedgerow shall be maintained to discourage bat flight. Turbines T14 & T15 are adjacent to the most favourable bat habitat on site – as is T11. A 50m vegetation-free buffer will be maintained around turbine bases. This would appear to be a reasonable attempt to ensure that bats are not encouraged to fly too near turbines.

13.9.7 Birds A total of 42 species were recorded during surveys for breeding and summering birds – recorded at Table 5.5. Red listed species include Lapwing (possible) and Yellowhammer (probable). Amber species include Little grebe, Great crested grebe, Tufted duck, Kestrel, Black-headed gull, Stock dove, Skylark, Sand Martin, Swallow, Wheatear, Starling, House sparrow and Linnet. Quarry ponds are an attraction in the area. Whilst bird collisions may occur, the layout of the turbines will allow for passage of birds between them and will not form a barrier to movement. Separate surveys were carried out for winter birds.

13.9.8 Winter Birds Whooper swans at Derryarkin farm are the principal wintering bird species of concern in relation to this application – being an Annex I species. The area is rendered attractive by the proximity of ponds within neighbouring quarries (Kilmurray and Roadstone) – suitable for roosting. Golden plover

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 81 of 114 (Up to 1,200 on 31 st January 2013), Lapwing, Curlew, Teal and starlings use the Derryarkin area during winter. A male hen harrier was recorded foraging at Derryarkin on 26 th March 2013 – Figure 5.6 of the EIS refers. Golden plover and Hen harrier are Annex I species. Other wintering birds used the agricultural lands within the site, such as Chaffinch, Linnet, Greenfinch, Goldfinch, Skylarks, Reed buntings, Yellowhammers, Lesser redpoll, Redwing, Fieldfare, Song thrush, Blackbird and more common species. Kestrel, Sparrowhawk and Buzzard were recorded throughout the area. Snipe were flushed regularly from pasture fields. Mallard, Moorhen and Grey heron occurred along the river channels. A Black- headed gull colony of national importance occurs on the large Roadstone Quarry pond beside the Derryarkin farm. Whilst the numbers of Whooper swan and Golden plover are significant, they do not reach the respective national importance levels of 130 and 1,700 for these species. A single Hen harrier was observed at Derryarkin. The site does not have significant potential to support winter roosting Hen harriers. The Department of Arts, Heritage & Gaeltacht did not object to the development on nature conservation grounds – recommending that all mitigation measures outlined in the EIS be put in place.

13.9.9 Whooper Swan Surveys for Whooper swan indicated a maximum number of birds at 82 in the winter survey of 2013 and 108 in 2013/2014. This latter survey was submitted on 3 rd April 2014, and was to be continued until the end of that month. The additional survey was carried out arising from complaints that the survey of the previous winter had not included the months of November and December. Fields at Derryarkin Farm are part of a larger complex of sites used by swans – extending to the south of Rhode. Swans were using nearby quarry ponds (Roadstone & Kilmurray) as night roosts. This enabled birds to feed after darkness and then to take a short flight to the night roost. Mitigation measures proposed for impact on swans include- • Restriction on site works for T1-T7 to the months of April-October. • Limitation of habitat loss (in this instance feeding grounds) to turbine bases and access tracks only. • Hazard warning lights on the hubs of T1-T7 to render them more visible to swans during dusk and dawn – November-March only. • Undergrounding of all cables associated with turbines. • Winter monitoring prior to construction, and then for a period of 5 years thereafter. This will involve the recording of flight lines.

It is likely that swans will avoid turbines when constructed – avoiding feeding within 200m and up to 500m of turbines. Two turbine locations in Derryarkin (T1 & T7) are not likely to be used by swans for feeding due to location either within or adjacent to remnant bog and conifer plantation. Turbines T2-T6 are within grassland suitable for feeding. The proximity of

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 82 of 114 T4 & T6 to Kilmurray Quarry ponds will likely deter swans from using them for roosting purposes. The larger Roadstone Quarry pond to the north will likely not be affected – as the closest turbine, T5, is just over 500m from it. It is not known if swans will habituate to the presence of turbines, and if they do, how long it will take. The agricultural lands at Derryarkin are man-made, as are the quarry ponds. There is no indication of whether this type of agriculture or quarrying will persist. Arable farming would obviously remove grassland. Drainage could affect quarry ponds. Swans do seem to have adapted to regular disturbance from farming and quarrying activity. Derryarkin is not on a route used by migrating swans or on a route used by birds moving from feeding to roosting sites or vice versa . The potential barrier effect of turbines is not relevant in this instance. The layout of the turbines is not linear – with gaps between clusters – separation distances of 500m being available. Swans colliding with turbines are documented. Many swans collide with power lines in poor light. Feeding swans during daylight hours would be aware of the presence of turbines. Local flights within the feeding fields and to night roosts would generally be at low levels – less than 30m – and well below the rotor sweep in this instance of 51.5m above ground level. I would consider that the application has adequately dealt with the issue of Whooper swans at Derryarkin and nearby ponds. The mitigation measures proposed are acceptable, and should ensure that the impact of the development on Whooper swans will be limited.

13.9.10 Collision Impact for Birds Fields at Derryarkin are used by wintering Golden Plover. Construction works will be limited to the months of April-October. Collision has not emerged as a problem with Golden plover and wind turbines elsewhere in the country. Hen harrier is likely to be an occasional visitor to the area. Foraging birds generally fly low. The turbines would not pose any significant risk of collision. Turbine T5 (the nearest turbine) is 600m from a breeding colony of Black-headed gulls on an island in the pond at the Roadstone Quarry. Construction disturbance is unlikely at this distance – there already being substantial disturbance from quarrying activity. Gulls are not expected to be a collision concern due to flight and manoeuvrability. Other Red and Amber bird species are not expected to be deterred by the presence of turbines.

13.9.11 Aquatic Ecology Section 5.9 of the EIS deals with aquatic ecology. All watercourses within the site or 1km downstream of it were surveyed – some 23km length. Habitat assessment was carried out between 25-29 th October 2012, and on 13 th May 2013 – particularly for salmonids (salmon & trout), crayfish and lamprey – all Annex II species. Of the three, only Salmon is a qualifying interest of the River Boyne and River Blackwater SAC. Six sites (A-F) were selected for biological water quality assessment – illustrated on

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 83 of 114 Figure 5.8. Sites A, B & F were moderately polluted (Q2-3 or Q3). Sites C, D & E were slightly polluted (Q3-4). A five-minute kick and stone wash sample was taken at each. A Q-rating was obtained for each site. Electro-fishing was not undertaken because arterially drained channels of the Yellow and Mongagh Rivers are too deep. In the absence of such surveying, it is assumed salmonids were present. All watercourses ultimately drain to the Boyne River – c.5km downstream of the closest turbine. The Boyne River is salmonid. EPA water-monitoring indicated, as late as 2012, that the Yellow River at Garr Bridge was dominated by pollution-tolerant macro-invertebrates. There are good stocks of Brown trout in the Yellow River. The Mongagh River contains good salmon stocks. Some tributaries have significant salmonid habitat – the Corbetstown Bridge Stream and the Killowen Stream in particular. A 50m buffer zoned is maintained from all watercourses. New crossings will use bottomless culverts or clear-span bridges to lessen the impact of the development. I would be satisfied that if mitigation measures outlined in the EIS are put in place and observed, that there will be no significant impact on aquatic ecology.

13.9.12 Construction Phase The most significant impact on ecology is likely to occur during the construction phase of development (roads and turbine bases) – with siltation, concrete and hydrocarbon contamination possible. The proposed development involves the construction of 9 new watercourse crossings. Watercourse crossings will be ‘Clearspan’ construction at the crossing points identified, and bottomless culverts used for drain crossings. Turbines are set back a minimum of 50m from watercourses. Silt traps and settlement ponds will be utilised on roads and at turbine bases. No watercourses will be diverted. No concrete will be mixed on site – deliveries of ‘Readymix’ will be used instead. The submission of 3 rd April 2014 indicated the nature of an on-site concrete wash-out unit which will be used to control the pH of water. The EIS suggests that water quality monitoring should be completed at points A-F immediately prior to commencement of construction and upon completion of construction.

13.9.13 Loss of Habitats T11 construction will involve clearance of 1.5ha of bog woodland – rated as locally important. Approximately 1.4km of hedgerow will be lost as a result of road/track construction. Hedgerows will not be removed during the months of March to August inclusive. Hedgerows will be replaced using native species where roads/tracks are widened. It will be necessary to clear-fell 10.4ha of coniferous/deciduous plantation. This forestry is planted for commercial purposes and would be clear-felled at any event. The amount of habitat lost will not be significant – 20.6ha as stated in the EIS (slightly less arising from the omission of 3 no. turbines).

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 84 of 114 13.10 Soils & Geology

13.10.1 Site Surveys Chapter 6 and Appendix K of the EIS deal with these issues. Preliminary site assessment was carried out from 4-9th October 2012 and 20-21 st May 2013. Two trial pits were excavated to a depth of 3.25m and manual peat probes undertaken. A shear vane was used to measure shear strength of peat. This diffuse site is located largely on improved agricultural grassland. Turbines T8-T12 are located on peat bog and heath grassland – the maximum depth of peat being 3.6m. The average depth of peat was found to be 0.5m. Peaty, clalyey topsoil overlies a natural sequence of glacial sands and gravels. Groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from 2.2-3.1m below ground level. Slope ranges are negligible over the site.

13.10.2 Bedrock Geology The site is underlain by Visean Basinal Limestone & Shale, Waulsortian Mudbanks, Marine Shelf Facies and Carboniferous Volcanics with minor intrusions. The Kilmurray Quarry for sand & gravel extraction lies within the site (between T5 and T6). There is a further sand & gravel quarry to the north of the Kilmurray Quarry, operated by Roadstone, in the townland of Derrygreenagh. The complex drift deposits overlying base rock in this area can result in complex water bodies, with perched water tables in places. The site is underlain by locally important aquifers which are generally moderately productive. The aquifer has low to moderate vulnerability owing to the overburden present. Increased groundwater vulnerability exists at T15-T21.

13.10.3 Surface Water Features There is a large network of land drains within the site area – generally along field boundaries. Within the peat bog areas of the site, drains are more numerous. The Yellow River and its tributaries (the principal one being the Mongagh River) drain this area. These rivers have been dredged and canalised in the past. Lagoons exist within the Kilmurray Quarry where the water table has been breached, and where sand & gravel is being extracted from the ponds. Peat present on site ranges from none at T5 to a depth of 3.0m at T7. The average peat depth is 0.5m. These results arise from peat probing, and should be regarded as indicative only. Full on-site excavation for turbine bases will reveal a more detailed picture.

13.10.4 Peat The site is largely flat – with slopes of 0-5 degrees to the horizontal for both turbine bases and access roads. Where peat thickness is in excess of 1.0m, floating roads will be constructed – in the vicinity of T7-T10 and at T23 (this latter subsequently omitted from the scheme). The turbines

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 85 of 114 where peat comprises the principal soil type are, T7-T10, T23 (omitted), T30 & T32. At turbine locations T8, T10, T23 (omitted), T30 & T32, the peat cover is not significant and turbines are located on slopes of negligible magnitude. Peat depth at T7 & T9 is greater, but because of negligible slopes, the risk of peat slide is insignificant. The estimated volume of peat to be excavated at turbine bases is given in Table 3.3 of the EIS. The maximum amount to be excavated is at T7 – 6,750m 3. Appendix K of the EIS comprises a Preliminary Peat Slide Risk Assessment. Bog-slides are more likely to occur on blanket bogs rather than raised bogs. The bog within the site is raised bog. Where there is a possibility of peat slippage, buttress support will be used and appropriate drainage put in place. These arrangements would appear to be reasonable, and I would be satisfied that there is no danger of peat slippage at this wind farm site.

13.11 Water

13.11.1 Flooding Chapter 7 and Appendix L of the EIS deal with the issues of hydrology and hydrogeology. Because of the nature of the development, impact on surface water is more likely than on ground water. Baseline monitoring and sampling was undertaken on 11-12 th October 2012 and on 9 th May 2013. The site is broken up into sub-catchments (T1-T7, T8-T12, T13- T15, T16-T23 and T24-T32) draining to local streams and rivers. Areas of the site which might be at risk of flooding were identified through flood maps of the OPW. All turbine sites are located outside flood risk areas. There is potential for flooding on some access roads and at the monitoring mast. These elements of the scheme will not impact on flooding in the area. The applicant has stated that it will be possible to shut down turbines remotely, in the event that flooded access roads prevent staff from reaching a turbine in an emergency.

13.11.2 Surface Water Quality EPA Q-rating is available for the Yellow River immediately downstream of T1-T9 and immediately upstream of the confluence with the Castlejordan/Mongagh River. The Q-rating is Good and Moderate for these two areas respectively. Hydrochemistry measurements were taken at 10 locations – indicating nothing unusual. Water samples were taken at four locations (SW1-SW4). Ammonia was elevated at SW1, SW3 & SW4. Ortho-phosphate was elevated at SW2, SW3 & SW4. Suspended solids were elevated at SW2 (perhaps due to recent heavy rainfall). With baseline measurements it will be possible to monitor water quality during the construction phase, to ensure no deterioration. It is noted that there is no proposal to reroute any watercourses or drain. Where new construction roads cross drains, bridges or culverts will be installed.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 86 of 114 13.11.3 Bedrock Aquifer The bedrock aquifer in the area is Dinantian limestone – moderately productive in local zones. Sand & gravel underlies peat at T1-T12, with groundwater level approximately 1.5m below ground level. High water tables – less than 1m below ground level are expected over the remainder of the site – T13-T32. Vulnerability ratings for the aquifer vary from Low to Extreme. Two trial pits TP1 & TP2 were excavated. Depth to bedrock is unknown, as rock was not encountered. There is no borrow pit proposed on this site. Groundwater sampling was not undertaken, and I would not consider that it is necessary for a development of this nature which does not involve any significant excavation. The wind farm overlies the Athboy Ground Water Body (GWB) and the Trim GWB. Both have ‘Good’ status. The wind farm is located 2km from the Toberdaly public water supply: there will be no impact on this water supply from the development. On the assumption that each dwelling in the area has a private well (something which is highly unlikely), a private well impact assessment was undertaken for the groups of turbines set out in the drainage sub-catchments – based principally on assumed direction of ground water flows. The development will have no impact on private water supplies.

13.11.4 Mitigation Measures Section 7.5.1 of the EIS outlines the possible threats to water quality from construction activities, indicating pathways, receptors and proposed mitigation measures. The latter involves buffer zones, drainage design, storage of excavated materials, dedicated refuelling areas, drain monitoring and inspection, surface water quality sampling/monitoring, use of a mobile Roadside Concrete Washout (RCW) unit, and attenuation of dewatered turbine foundations. A mobile silt-buster will be available for foundation excavations. Mitigation measures for impact on hydrology include- turbine bases located a minimum of 50m from watercourses; watercourse crossings for new roads will be ‘Clearspan’ or bottomless culverts; chemical toilets will be used during construction; settlement/stilling ponds, silt traps, check dams and interceptor drains will be constructed on roads and at turbine bases. Any dewatering required at turbine bases will be attenuated before release. A mobile fuel tanker will be used for refuelling. Accidental spillages of hydrocarbons will be mitigated using spill kits and containment where possible. Hydrocarbons at the electrical compound will be stored in a bunded area. There will be no impact on hydrology during the operational phase. Stilling ponds installed at turbine bases will remain in place and operational after turbines are erected, to check the flow of rainwater from disturbed ground.

13.12 Air & Climate

Chapter 8 of the EIS deals with this issue. The proposed wind farm will not have any significant impact on air quality in the area either during the

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 87 of 114 construction or operational phases of development. The wind farm will result in a reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases and gasses causing acid rain, through the replacement of electricity generated by burning fossil fuels. It is estimated that the wind farm will result in an approximate reduction of 144,000 tonnes of CO 2, per annum (somewhat reduced by the reduction in the number of turbines from 32 to 29). Two different figures are quoted within the EIS for annual reduction in each of SO 2 and NO x [pages 148 & 364] – 2,613 or 4,702 tonnes of SO 2, and 288 or 528 tonnes of NO x over the 30-year lifetime of the permission. It is not clear which figures are the correct ones. Mitigation measures outlined in the EIS include use of a water bowser on access roads to suppress dust in dry weather during the construction phase. Objectors have claimed that wind turbines lead to changes in microclimate – promoting additional rainfall and reducing temperatures. There is no detailed scientific evidence of this. This wind farm is widely dispersed. The wind farm will contribute to national goals agreed in relation to reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. In this regard, the impact on air quality (nationally) will be positive. The impact of the wind farm on local climate will not be significant.

13.13 ‘Windtake’

13.13.1 ‘Windtake’ This issue has arisen in relation to the siting of turbines close to site boundaries. The site is a dispersed one, with no large blocks or parcels of lands. Section 5.13 of the Wind Energy Guidelines 2006 deals with the issue of ‘windtake’ and clearly states- ‘Bearing in mind the requirements for optimal performance, a distance of not less than two rotor blades from adjoining property boundaries will generally be acceptable, unless by written agreement of adjoining landowners to a lesser distance’. The applicant has interpreted this to require that turbines should be located two blade/rotor lengths from any site boundary. Two blade/rotor lengths is the equivalent of one diameter length – in this instance 113m. Objectors have argued that the Guidelines really refer to two diameter lengths of separation from boundaries – or 226m. Whilst the Guidelines do refer elsewhere to rotor diameters – the reference to two blade lengths is unequivocal. The revised layout submitted by the applicant on 3 rd April 2014 has ensured that no turbine base is within 113m of any lands not under the control of the applicant company. This has involved significant relocation of some turbines, and marginal relocation of others (an example of marginal relocation being T5 & T6).

13.13.2 Wind Energy Guidelines In relation to ‘windtake’, the Guidelines do specify separation distances between turbines of three rotor diameters in the crosswind direction and seven rotor diameters in the downwind direction. Such recommendations

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 88 of 114 do depend upon deciding just what direction is upwind/crosswind. The applicant does not control land nearly sufficient to ensure that no future turbines are constructed which would adhere to the suggested separation distances. This has implications for possible sterilisation of adjoining lands outside the control of the applicant in relation to the future siting of turbines. The alternative is the possible construction of a turbine on adjoining lands (outside the control of the current applicant) which could essentially deprive a Yellow River wind farm turbine of its upwind source, by constructing a new turbine two rotor blade lengths from a boundary.

13.13.3 Proximity to Adjoining Lands A number of objectors have raised the issue of proximity of turbines, claiming to have offers from potential wind farm operators to site turbines on their lands in the future. They claim that the siting of the Yellow River wind farm turbines would destroy their opportunity to have a turbine on their lands because turbines are too close to their boundaries. Bord na Móna (a large landowner in the area) has articulated the argument in more detailed submissions. Bord na Móna stated that it was consulting in partnership with a large wind farm developer for potential export of energy to the UK. This has been negated in a recent statement by Bord na Móna (dated April 2014), wherein it is indicated that the project to export energy has been put on hold, but that the company will continue to develop wind energy projects within its land holding. A Project of Community Interest could be seen to be take precedence over any other wind farm proposal which did not involve another member state. It would appear from recent Government statements that the proposed large-scale wind farm developments for export of energy to the UK are not now to proceed – for the time being at any rate. The applicant indicates that it has consulted with Bord na Móna since the beginning of the project, over four years ago, and that Bord na Móna indicated it was not interested in a co-operative venture. A fully-developed projected development should not be set aside in favour of a possible future development. The large-scale development of wind energy projects is a matter for Government policy. In the absence of clear policy, there is a development scheme for a wind farm before the Board, and I would consider that it should be dealt with on its merits.

13.14 Environmental Impact Assessment

13.14.1 General Comment The EIS submitted includes a Non-Technical Summary (within Volume 1). A public consultation meeting was held in Rhode on 10 th December 2012. Alternatives considered related to alternative electricity generation, locations, designs for turbines and processes. Choice of site had been guided by the Wind Energy Strategy for County Offaly, wherein 12 sites had been examined for their suitability – with 6 ultimately chosen. The choice of site was the first of these 6 sites – ‘Area north of Rhode’. There

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 89 of 114 is an excellent grid connection in the county on account of the history of peat-burning power stations in the region. Road access is good. There are relatively few nature designations in the area. Population density is low. There is limited telecommunications infrastructure which could be impacted by turbines. Turbines from four manufacturers were considered. The Siemens turbine was used for modelling noise and shadow flicker. A turbine of 110m hub height and 112m rotor diameter was used for modelling impact on the landscape. The precise turbine model has not been chosen. It is stated that a number of different layouts were chosen – modified according to archaeological, residential, ecological, geological, visual and hydrological constraints. The wake effect of turbines was also considered in the placement of this group of turbines. The additional information submission to the Board on 3 rd April 2014, made changes to certain of the information contained within the original EIS – based on further studies and survey.

13.14.2 Compliance with Requirements of Articles 94 & 111 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 (as amended)

The proposed development, in overall terms, is in compliance with Articles 94 and 111 of the Planning and Development Regulations, 2001, as amended. To this extent I would observe that-

• The EIS contains the information specified in paragraph 1 of Schedule 6 of the Regulations. The EIS- o Describes the proposal, including the site and the development’s design and size; o Describes the measures envisaged to avoid, reduce and, if possible, to remedy significant adverse effects; o Provides the data necessary to identify and assess the main effects the project is likely to have on the environment; o Gives an outline of the main alternatives studied and the main reasons for the choice of this dispersed site and development, taking into account the effects on the environment.

• The EIS contains the relevant information specified in paragraph 2 of Schedule 6 of the Regulations. This includes- o A description of the physical characteristics of the project and its land use requirements; o The main characteristics of the wind energy process to be pursued; o The emissions arising; o A description of the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected by the proposal; o A description of the likely significant effects on the environment resulting from the development’s existence, the development’s use

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 90 of 114 of natural resources, the emission of pollutants and the creation of nuisance; and a description of the forecasting methods used; o An indication of any difficulties encountered in compiling information.

• There is an adequate summary of the EIS in non-technical language.

• Section 5.0 of the EIS considered alternatives to the proposed development. The exact turbine type has not been specified – although a selection of possible turbine types has been indicated. Maximum hub heights and rotor diameter have been specified – as has the number of blades, at three. Technology is rapidly changing in turbine design. By the time the wind farm comes to be built, technology and suppliers to the Irish market may have changed. I would see no difficulty with the arrangement as proposed by the applicant, whereby exact model types are not specified.

13.14.3 Identification of the Likely Significant Direct and Indirect Effects of the Project on the Environment

The submitted EIS, and the assessment preceding this part of the Inspector’s Report, focus on the significant direct and indirect effects arising from the proposed wind farm development. I propose here solely to identify the main likely effects under a range of headings as follows:

Human Beings - Employment. - Shadow flicker.

Flora & Fauna - Effects on Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas. - Species impact. - Avifauna disturbance – particularly Whooper swans.

Soils & Geology - Peat stability.

Water - Undermining water quality in surrounding streams during construction. - Effecting important habitats downstream of the site.

Air, Climate, Noise and Vibration - Climate Change. - Noise disturbance to residents.

Landscape and Visual Impact

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 91 of 114 - Scale, height and extent of visibility. - Impact on landscape character. - Impact on important Scenic Routes and Scenic Landscapes both within County Offaly and adjoining counties.

Cultural Heritage - Effects on archaeology. - Effects on setting of Croghan Hill.

Material Assets - Impact on local road network.

Interactions - Humans and noise, shadow flicker and visual impact. - Flora & fauna and water quality. - Landscape and the natural environment.

13.14.4 Description of the Likely Effects Identified

The likely effects arising are anticipated to include the following-

Human Beings Employment : Short-term local community impact at the construction stage.

Shadow Flicker : Shadow flicker cast on neighbouring residential properties.

Flora & Fauna Special Areas of Conservation & Special Protection Areas : Impacts on the surface water system at the construction stage due to drainage, excavations for foundations, access road construction, and peat disturbance.

Avifauna: Impacts on birds which use the site and adjoining lands.

Water

Undermining water quality : Changes in site run-off volumes, impacting on water chemistry for fish, siltation in streams.

Air, Climate, Noise & Vibration

Climate Change : Role of renewable energy and climate change.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 92 of 114 Noise disturbance : Mechanical and aerodynamic noise impacts on nearby residents.

Landscape and Visual Impact

Scale and height and extent of visibility : Intrusive visual effects on the area beyond the site.

Impact on landscape character : Alteration of the existing landscape character.

Impact on Important Views : Incongruity with views into, across and beyond the site – with relation to listed Scenic Views both within Co. Offaly and from neighbouring counties.

Cultural Heritage

Archaeology : Disturbance to or destruction of on-site archaeology. Cultural Heritage : Visual Impact on setting of Croghan Hill

Material Assets

Road Network : Transportation of materials and consequences for the structure and carrying capacity of existing regional and local roads.

Interactions

The effects of the interactions between humans and, the visual landscape, flora & fauna and water and soils; and landscape and the natural environment are implicit in the range of preceding issues listed.

13.14.5 Assessment of the Likely Significant Effects Identified, Having Regard to the Mitigation Measures Proposed

The detailed assessment which precedes this section of the report fully considers the range of relevant likely significant effects with due regard given to the mitigation measures proposed to be applied if the proposed development proceeds. What follows is a short list of some of the most important mitigation measures proposed to be employed which are considered necessary to address the range of potential significant impacts arising from the proposed development. Chapter 14 of the EIS deals with the issue of interactions. There are no significant negative interactions identified between the different aspects of the environment examined in the EIS, and I would concur with this conclusion.

Human Beings

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 93 of 114

Shadow flicker : Separation distance from sensitive receptors, turbine controls during sensitive periods – individual turbines being taken out of commission at certain times, screening.

Flora & Fauna

Special Areas of Conservation & Special Protection Areas: Constraints-led approach to layout of turbines, detailed surface water drainage proposals.

Impacts on on-site habitats : Avoidance of natural watercourses, maximum use of existing agricultural tracks and private access roadways.

Species impact : Protection of watercourses on surrounding lands through drainage design, track construction and application of buffer zones.

Avifauna disturbance : Monitoring of the effects of the operating wind farm, undergrounding of cables, separation distance between turbines to minimise barrier effect to movement, and restriction of construction period to avoid disturbing wintering birds – particularly Whooper swans.

Soils & Geology

Peat impacts : Placement of relevant turbines in areas of cutover bog.

Water

Water quality : Minimising run-off volumes, drainage design and control, avoidance of impacts by application of buffer zones, no on-site cement batching, and use of bottomless culverts and ‘Clearspan’ bridges .

Natural water system : Off-site disposal of human effluent.

Important habitats : No direct discharge to any surface water body.

Air, Climate, Noise and Vibration

Climate Change : Application of project and consequent carbon savings.

Noise disturbance : Separation from sensitive receptors, adherence to standards, post-commissioning noise surveys.

Landscape and Visual Impact

Landscape character and important views : Separation distance from the public realm.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 94 of 114

Cumulative impact : Separation from other similar permitted developments – nearest wind farm at Mount Lucas 10km to south.

Cultural Heritage

Archaeology: Archaeological monitoring of soil disturbance during construction.

Material Assets

Road network : Heavy materials delivery and plant transportation from identified import ports with access junction improvements where necessary.

New Access: New access road to all turbines utilising existing private roads and tracks to remove construction traffic (insofar as is possible) from the existing county road network.

Aviation : Warning lights affixed to turbines.

13.14.6 Conclusions Regarding the Acceptability or Otherwise of the Likely Residual Effects Identified

The conclusions regarding the acceptability of the likely main residual effects of this proposal are clearly addressed under the various headings of the main assessment and it is not proposed to repeat them. Suffice to indicate, that the principal areas of concern focus on landscape & visual impacts, impacts on humans (noise/shadow flicker), and on ecology.

13.15 Appropriate Assessment

13.15.1 EU Guidance EU Guidance on wind energy developments and European Sites was published in October 2010, and outlined the potential impacts of wind farms on nature and wildlife. The Guidelines are not of a binding nature.

13.15.2 Appropriate Assessment Screening Report An Appropriate Assessment Screening Report (dated November 2013) accompanied the application as required by Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EC. Turbines 1-12 are located on areas of former raised bog. The remaining turbines are located within agricultural/forestry areas – divided by the Yellow River. No turbine base, access road or support infrastructure is located either within or immediately abutting any European site.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 95 of 114 13.15.3 List of European Sites European sites within a 15km radius are as follows- • Lough Ennell SAC (Site code 000685). • Lough Ennell SPA (Site code 004040). • River Boyne and River Blackwater SAC (Site code 002299). • River Boyne and River Blackwater SPA (Site code 004232). • Raheenmore Bog SAC (Site code 000582). • Mount Heavy Bog SAC (Site code 002342). • Split Hills and Long Hill Esker SAC (Site code 001831). • The Long Derries SAC (Site code 000925).

13.15.4 Qualifying Interests of Nearby European Sites The closest European site to any turbine is Raheenmore Bog SAC – located some 4km to the southwest of T1. It comprises a largely intact raised bog. Qualifying interests include- Active raised bog; Degraded raised bog still capable of natural regeneration; and Depressions on peat substrates of Rhynchosporian. Lough Ennell SPA is located approximately 10km to the northwest of T1, T3 & T5. The qualifying interests of the SPA are Pochard ( Aythya farina ), Tufted Duck ( Aythya fuligula ), Coot ( Fulica atra ) and Wetlands & Waterbirds. The River Boyne and River Blackwater SPA is located approximately 14km to the northeast of T31 & T32. The qualifying interests of the SPA relate to the Kingfisher (Alcedo athis ).

13.15.5 River Crossings There are no crossings of the Mongagh River proposed. Other proposed crossings on the Yellow River and on tributaries are either new or comprise upgrading of existing crossings. New crossings will be by way of ‘Clearspan’ bridges, in order to reduce the possibility of siltation of channels.

13.15.6 Conclusions of Screening Report The Screening Report concluded that, arising from separation distances from European sites, the wind farm would not have any impact on habitats. The Mongagh River on the northern boundary of the site ultimately discharges into the Yellow River. The Yellow River discharges into the Boyne River. An access road culvert for T19 is the downriver point of the development closest to the River Boyne and River Blackwater SAC. This SAC stretches upriver as far as Boyne Aqueduct – where the Royal Canal crosses the River Boyne. The separation distance between the culvert on the access road for T19 and the Boyne Aqueduct is some18.5 km. This separation distance is more than sufficient to ensure that there will be no impact on the SAC. The wind farm development will not have any impact on this SAC. There are no hydrological links with any other European sites – Raheenmore Bog to the southwest is more than 4km from the nearest turbine. The wind farm will have no detrimental

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 96 of 114 impact on habitats within these sites. As regards impacts on avian species, indicated as conservation interests within SPAs, the separation distances between the closest turbine and any site is more than sufficient to ensure that there will be no detrimental impact (10km in the case of Lough Ennell SPA and 14km in the case of the River Boyne and River Blackwater SPA).

13.15.7 Whooper Swan A population of Whooper swan ( Cygnus cygnus ), an Annex I species, winters within the site area – on improved grassland in Derryarkin townland. Between 3 and 82 birds were noted during 10 of 15 winter visits between November 2012 and April 2013. The Kilmurray Quarry ponds were used by roosting swans occasionally. These fields are part of a larger complex of sites used by swans – extending to the south of Rhode. Swans were using nearby quarry ponds (Roadstone & Kilmurray) as night roosts. This enabled birds to feed after darkness and then to take a short flight to the night roost. Mitigation measures proposed for impact on swans include- • Restriction on site works for T1-T7 to the months of April-October. • Limitation of habitat loss (in this instance feeding grounds) to turbine bases and access tracks only. • Hazard warning lights on the hubs of T1-T7 to render them more visible to swans during dusk and dawn – to be used November to March only. • Undergrounding of all cables associated with turbines. • Winter monitoring prior to construction, and then for a period of 5 years thereafter. This will involve the recording of flight lines. It is likely that swans will avoid turbines when constructed – avoiding feeding within 200m and up to 500m of turbines. Two turbine locations in Derryarkin (T1 & T7) are not likely to be used by swans for feeding due to location either within or adjacent to remnant bog and conifer plantation. Turbines T2-T6 are within grassland suitable for feeding. The proximity of T4 & T6 to Kilmurray Quarry ponds will likely deter swans from using them for roosting purposes. The larger Roadstone Quarry pond to the north will likely not be affected – as the closest turbine, T5, is just over 500m from it. It is not known if swans will habituate to the presence of turbines, and if they do, how long it will take. The agricultural lands at Derryarkin are man-made, as are the quarry ponds. There is no indication of whether this type of agriculture or quarrying will persist. Arable farming would obviously remove grassland. Drainage could affect quarry ponds. Swans do seem to have adapted to regular disturbance from farming and quarrying activity. Derryarkin is not on a route used by migrating swans or on a route used by birds moving from feeding to roosting sites or vice versa . The potential barrier effect of turbines is not relevant in this instance. The layout of the turbines is not linear – with gaps between clusters – separation distances of 500m being available. Swans colliding with turbines are documented.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 97 of 114 Many swans collide with power lines in poor light. Swans feeding during daylight hours would be aware of the presence of turbines. Local flights within the feeding fields and to night roosts would generally be at low levels – less than 30m – and well below the rotor sweep in this instance of 51.5m above ground level. I note that Whooper swan is not a species which is part of the qualifying interests of Lough Ennell SPA.

13.15.8 In-combination Effects In considering ‘in-combination’ effects, the Mount Lucas wind farm 10km to south (currently under construction) was examined. The separation distance was considered sufficient to preclude any in-combination effects. The in-combination effects with other projects planned in the area will not result in any significant impact on European sites.

13.15.9 Appropriate Assessment Conclusion Having regard to the above, I am satisfied that the proposed wind farm development will not have any significant impact on any European site.

13.16 Other Issues

13.16.1 Site Ownership Letters of consent to the making of the application were submitted by relevant landowners. During the course of consideration of the application, one landowner withdrew consent, necessitating the removal of the construction link road between T31 & T32 – illustrated on drawings submitted by the applicant on 3 rd April 2013. Further, the applicant included, in error, lands within Greenhills townland. This error was rectified in the submission of 3 rd April 2014, and did not affect the layout of the scheme in any way. Finally, the applicant indicated, by way of unsolicited additional information submission of 7 th May 2014, that additional lands at Rhode Business Park had been included in error. These lands were located within the wider land holding (as outlined in blue) and the reduction in site area does not affect the layout of the development in any way. There are objectors who claim that the applicant does not have right of way across roads which are not taken-in-charge by the Council. The applicant is satisfied that landowners who are beneficiaries of the scheme have the necessary rights of way. Matters of dispute in relation to private property are not strictly planning considerations. The granting of planning permission does not entitle the applicant to carry out works, if the consent of 3 rd parties is required. I would be satisfied that the applicant company has sufficient legal interest in the site to make the planning application.

13.16.2 Employment Chapter 4 of the EIS deals with this issue. The scheme will have no impact on population. Employment, for roughly 75 workers, will be created

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 98 of 114 during the construction phase of 26 months, with no more than 45 workers on site at any one time. This employment will bring expenditure to the area for the duration. Unemployment in Offaly increased significantly from 2007 to the present. The increase is similar for neighbouring Meath and Westmeath. Tullamore town and Tullamore rural are the population drivers of the county – accounting for 49% of total county population. The project will benefit the area through jobs, rents, rates, supply of materials and support services. It is stated that four full-time jobs will be created by the project when operational.

13.16.3 Material Assets Chapter 12 of the EIS deals with this issue. Natural assets of the area include agriculture, forestry and peat harvesting. Other assets include the road network, local tourism amenity, electricity networks, telecommunications networks, air traffic and the housing stock.

Agriculture: The footprint of the development is small. The wind farm will not have any significant impact on agriculture in the vicinity. Farming activity will continue around the bases of turbines. The access road for construction will function as an agricultural access road – improving access for farmers. There is no evidence submitted of adverse impact on livestock or bloodstock arising from proximity to wind turbines.

Forestry: Some 10.4ha of commercial forestry will be felled to facilitate this development. This is an insignificant amount in terms of the overall forestry lands in the area. The amount of forestry which may have to be ‘wake felled’ has not been determined, as this depends on the turbine chosen. In any event, the amount is not likely to be significant, given the limited amount of forestry within the overall site. The wind farm will not have any significant impact on forestry. Construction and improvement of access roads will facilitate forestry in the area.

Peat Harvesting: Whilst a number of wind turbines are located in close proximity to commercial harvesting of peat – such harvesting can continue around the base of turbines, if required. The proposed wind farm will not have any significant impact on peat harvesting.

Electricity Network & Grid Connection: There are 110kV lines running to Derryiron sub-station. It is proposed to connect to this sub-station using underground cables. 110kV power lines run to the south of the site and will not be impacted by the proposed wind farm. Mount Lucas wind farm to the south is under construction and will connect to the National Grid. The applicant has applied for a grid connection – connection in 2016 is the earliest estimate. Objectors have argued that absence of a Gate 3 connection for this wind farm means that the application is premature – particularly as there are a number of wind farms queuing for a Gate 4

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 99 of 114 connection already. The proposed development is for 87MW output – with a grid connection for 72MW applied for. The planning permission sought is for a period of 10 years. There is no way of knowing if a grid connection for the proposed scheme will or will not be available. However, I would consider that this does not necessarily make the application premature.

Housing Stock: There is no evidence that wind turbines in an area have any significant impact on house prices. Objectors have submitted studies in relation to wind farms and property prices from other countries. No studies have been carried out to date in Ireland, and the results from other countries do not necessarily translate to Ireland or to this part of the country in particular. The proposed development has been sited to maximise the separation distances between turbines and houses. No house is located within 500m of any turbine (apart from the houses of two beneficial landowners, and with their written consent).

13.16.4 Aircraft Safety There are no airports within this area – the closest being Dublin Airport 60km distant. The Irish Parachute Club operates from Clonbulloge airstrip – 13km southeast of the site. The proposed development will not have any significant impact on navigation of aircraft. The Irish Aviation Authority has commented on the application, and requires that appropriate warning lights be affixed to turbines. Objectors have argued that red lights on turbines distract from the rural feel of an area at night-time. Whilst this may be true, the requirements of the safe navigation of aircraft would override such considerations. I note that he nearby grade-separated junction of the M6/R400 is flood lit. A condition reflecting the requirement for warning lights on turbines should be attached to any grant of planning permission.

13.16.5 Waste Management A condition should be attached to any grant of planning permission relating to a construction waste management plan (as part of a detailed environmental health and safety management plan). There will be little or no waste arising from the operational phase – apart from lubricants.

13.16.6 Telecommunications Telecommunications: The applicant has consulted with service providers in the area. There are two transmission corridors through the site for Meteor & Vodafone – indicated at Figure 2.7 of the EIS. Turbines have been sited to avoid these corridors. Objectors have raised concerns in relation to broadband signals in the area being disturbed by turbines. No evidence has been submitted to substantiate the claim. This is a matter for service providers in the area. A standard condition should be attached to any grant of planning permission in relation to impact on telecommunications.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 100 of 114

13.16.7 Financial Contribution/Bonds The submission of Offaly County Council indicated that the Development Contribution rate for wind farms was €10,000 per MW of installed capacity. In the instance of this wind farm, 87MW of installed capacity is proposed (following a reduction in the number of turbines from 32 to 29. It would be appropriate to attach a condition relating to payment of a development contribution. In advance of a structural survey of the road network in the area, the Council was unable to specify any Special Development Contribution amount for roads. The Council suggested a condition similar to condition no. 7, attached by the Board for the Mount Lucas wind farm, would be appropriate in this instance. This condition relates to survey of roads, road usage and rectification of any damage caused to roads by the developer, and would appear to be reasonable. I note that the Board also attached a bond condition for roads to the Mount Lucas permission (condition 20). The Council noted that a bond condition for restoration following decommissioning of the development might not be required, as the scrap value of turbines would be sufficient to ensure their dismantling. This might be the case where the turbine towers were constructed of metal. However, I note the comment of the applicant in relation to possible construction of towers from concrete, in order to limit the necessity for import of materials. It would be prudent to attach a condition requiring submission of a bond to cover decommissioning in the event of a grant of planning permission.

13.16.8 Decommissioning Section 3.14 of the EIS refers briefly to decommissioning. Towers will be removed from the site, but not bases or access roads. A potential re-use for the electricity compound buildings would be sought in consultation with Offaly County Council. It is not proposed to dig up cables. The submission of 3 rd April 2014, referred to a 2-3 year decommissioning period in addition to the 25-year lifespan of the development. This would appear to be reasonable. I have elsewhere in this report referred to a bond condition for decommissioning.

13.16.9 Construction Period & Construction Hours The construction period is estimated at 26 months. It is estimated that 75 construction jobs would be created – headquartered at the temporary construction compound at Rhode Business Park. Construction hours are not outlined anywhere within the EIS – other in relation to Local Authority recommended noise levels during construction. Objectors were concerned in relation to construction disruption – particularly outside of normal working hours. The delivery of outsize loads is likely to be at night- time – to limit traffic disruption. Such deliveries, whilst they will result in some disruption to residents and farmers, will be of limited duration. Given the separation of wind turbines from the nearest houses it would not

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 101 of 114 be appropriate to attach a condition to any grant of planning permission limiting the working hours.

13.16.10 Duration of Planning Permission The applicant has requested a 15-year duration for the planning permission. I would consider this to be excessive, planning permissions generally lasting just 5 years. Having regard to the scale of the project and the need to obtain a connection to the national grid (something that may be beyond the control of the applicant), it would be appropriate to allow for a 10-year planning permission in this instance. This is not unusual in relation to wind farm applications, and I note that the Board has granted permissions with a lifetime of 10 years.

13.16.11 Impact on Tourism No evidence has been provided, one way or another, in relation to claims of impact/no impact on tourism. This is a rural area. Planning permission has recently been granted for a 28-turbine wind farm on a site approximately 10km to the south at Mount Lucas. The application site does not benefit from any special tourist designation in the Development Plan. The visual impact of turbines on the landscape in terms of beauty or rural nature is subjective. There is no evidence that tourists avoid areas within which turbines are located. There are no major tourist attractions in the area of the wind farm. The area has been designated for wind farm development in the County Development Plan. The Grand Canal Way walking/cycling route is located approximately 3.5km to the south of the site. The Royal Canal Way walking/cycling route is located approximately 8.0km to the north of the site. The development will not have any significant impact on these routes. The application was referred to Fáilte Ireland for comment, with no response received. The development will not have a significant impact in this regard.

13.16.12 Public Consultation It is evident that the applicant has attempted to engage with the public, notwithstanding claims by objectors that the level of consultation was inadequate. The long lead-in to the making of a planning application to the Board has resulted in widespread local awareness of the proposed scheme, which has resulted in a substantial volume of observations to the Board relating to the proposal – in excess of 120.

13.16.13 Community Benefit Fund Section 4.3.1 of the EIS states that ‘Green Wind’ proposes to establish a Community Fund once the Yellow River Wind Farm is operational. The objective of the Community Fund will be to provide long-term financial support to local community groups, activities and projects’. The applicant has stated a willingness to contribute €1,000 per MW of installed capacity per annum towards a community fund (index linked). This will result in the

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 102 of 114 contribution of €87,000 per annum over the twenty-five year life of the permission – a sum of €2.175m (index linked). Observers have claimed that this would be in the form of a bribe for an otherwise unacceptable form of development. It could otherwise be seem as a form of compensation to the community for inconvenience caused during construction and the temporary impact, for the twenty-five year lifetime of the development, on the local community through perceived impact on the landscape, agriculture and the residential community. It has been argued by objectors that sale of the wind farm would result in non-payment of the community contribution. There is no rationale for this argument. A condition should be attached to any grant of planning permission requiring payment of such a community fund by the wind farm operator – not necessarily the applicant.

13.16.14 Safety Residents and adjacent farmers have objected to proximity of turbines to property boundaries on grounds of potential collapse. Whilst turbine collapse could occur, it is an unlikely eventuality where turbines are constructed in accordance with standard engineering practice. The owner/operator would be liable for any damage caused following such an eventuality. The 2006 Guidelines only recommend a full height set-back from National and Regional Roads and railway lines. I would not consider that Bord na Móna industrial railway lines were to be included in this set- back requirement. Similarly, the contention that ice could be thrown from turning blades, thereby causing a threat to human safety, is a possibility, but is unlikely to cause a threat due to the separation distances of turbines from houses. It is noted that the Chief Fire Officer of Offaly County Council had no objection to the development. Turbines are sufficiently far away from houses to ensure that there would be no danger in the event of a fire at any turbine or at the electricity compound. There is no evidence that wind turbines transmit vibration which could damage houses. The set-back of at least 500m will be more than sufficient to ensure that there will be no damage to houses arising from vibration. The safety of construction workers is a matter for the contractor, and is not a planning consideration.

13.16.15 Public Health A substantial amount of the submissions to the Board referred to public health. I have elsewhere in this report dealt with the issue under the headings of noise and shadow flicker. However, some observers refer to the impact of turbines on mental health, persons living with autism and on general health and wellbeing. There is no conclusive evidence in relation to the impacts of turbines on mental health, or on persons living with autism or on general health and wellbeing. There are wind farms erected elsewhere throughout the country.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 103 of 114 14.0 RECOMMENDATION

I recommend that permission be granted for the Reasons and Considerations set out below and subject to the attached Conditions.

REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS

Having regard to:

(a) national policy with regard to the development of sustainable energy sources,

(b) the “Wind Energy Development Guidelines” – Guidelines for Planning Authorities issued by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in June, 2006,

(c) the character of the landscape in the area and the topography surrounding the site,

(d) the policies of the planning authority as set out in the current Offaly County Development Plan and the County Offaly Wind Strategy to 2015,

(e) the polices of adjoining planning authorities – Westmeath, Meath and Kildare,

(f) the distance to dwellings or other sensitive receptors from the proposed development,

(g) the Environmental Impact Statement submitted,

(h) the Appropriate Assessment Screening Report for Habitats Directive Assessment submitted,

(i) the extensive submissions made in connection with the planning application, it is considered that, subject to compliance with the conditions set out below, the proposed development would not have a significant adverse impact on the landscape or on the visual or residential amenities of the area or upon its archaeological or cultural heritage, would not 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 acceptable in terms of traffic safety and convenience of road users. The proposed development would, therefore, be in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 104 of 114

CONDITIONS

1. The development shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the plans and particulars lodged with the application, as amended by the submission received by the Board on the 3 rd day of April 2014, except as may otherwise be required in order to comply with the following conditions. Where such conditions require details to be agreed with a planning authority, the developer shall agree such details in writing with the planning authority prior to commencement of development and the development shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the agreed particulars.

Reason: In the interest of clarity.

2. The mitigation measures identified in the Environmental Impact Statement and the Appropriate Assessment Screening Report, and other particulars submitted with the planning application and the further particulars lodged with the Board on the 3rd day of April 2014, shall be implemented in full by the developer, except as may otherwise be required in order to comply with the following conditions.

Reason: In the interest of clarity and protection of the environment during construction and operational phases of development.

3. The period during which the development hereby permitted may be carried out shall be ten years from the date of this order.

Reason: Having regard to the nature and extent of the proposed development, the Board considered it appropriate to specify a period of validity of this permission in excess of five years.

4. The date of commissioning of the wind farm shall be notified to, and established in writing with, Offaly County Council before any commercial use of the development is brought about. This permission shall be for a period of 25 years from the said date of commissioning of the wind farm. The wind turbines and related ancillary structures shall be removed at the end of this period of 25 years unless, prior to the end of the period, planning permission shall have been granted for their retention for a further period.

Reason: To enable the relevant planning authority to review the operation of the wind farm in the light of the circumstances then prevailing.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 105 of 114 5. The layout and design of the proposed wind farm shall be as per the revised layout submitted to the Board on the 3 rd day of April 2014 – for 29 no. 3MW turbines.

Reason : In the interest of clarity.

6. No turbine base shall be located within 113m of any site boundary.

Reason: In the interest of protecting the amenities and property value of adjoining landowners.

7. Micro-siting of turbines (by up to 20m) shall not result in any turbine being located closer than 500m to any dwelling (except with the written consent of the owner of the affected dwelling) or within 113m of any site boundary (except with the written consent of the owner of the affected property).

Reason: In the interests of protecting the amenities and property value of adjoining landowners.

8. The developer shall appoint an Environmental Manager with suitable ecological and construction expertise to ensure that the mitigation measures identified in the Environmental Impact Statement and the Appropriate Assessment Screening Report and the further particulars lodged on the 3rd day of April 2014, are implemented fully.

Reason: In the interest of clarity and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

9. Mitigation measures recommended in the Environmental Impact Statement for the protection of water quality shall be implemented in full and according to best practice, and in accordance with a scheme, details of which shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, Offaly County Council prior to the commencement of development. Works with potential to result in pollution or siltation of watercourses shall be supervised by an on-site Environmental Manager who will report on compliance with the relevance mitigation measures.

Reason : To protect the quality of watercourses, and to avoid deleterious impact on habitats and species in the River Boyne and River Blackwater SAC.

10. Prior to the commencement of development, the developer shall submit a comprehensive Construction-Stage Drainage Report and Construction Management Plan for the written agreement of Offaly County Council, which shall include-

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 106 of 114 (a) details of the proposed water monitoring protocol and drainage inspection regime,

(b) full details of measures for the control of drainage during and after construction (including tree-felling prior to construction), including the use of settlement ponds, swales and silt traps, and measures for the control of run-off from temporary spoil storage areas,

(c) details of the nature of all materials used in constructing access tracks to the turbines,

(d) full details of storage proposals for hazardous materials, cement leachate, hydrocarbons and other materials to be used during construction,

(e) details of all aspects of the management of excess spoil, such that slope stability measures and prevention of water pollution are fully implemented. Soil, rock, peat and sand/gravel excavated during construction shall not be left stockpiled on site following completion of works,

(f) details of the timing of works to ensure that no works impacting on watercourses take place during the bird breeding season or the fish spawning season.

Reason: In the interest of environmental protection and orderly development.

11. Prior to the commencement of development, details of the following shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with Offaly County Council and, where relevant, with Westmeath County Council:-

(a) a Transport Management Plan including details of the road network/haulage routes and the vehicle types to be used to transport materials on and off site,

(b) a condition survey of the roads and bridges along the haul routes shall be carried out by a qualified engineer both before and after construction of the wind farm development – to be carried out at the developer’s expense. This survey shall include a schedule of required works to enable the haul routes and, in particular, regional and local roads in the Offaly and Westmeath areas to cater for construction-related traffic. The extent and scope of the survey and the schedule of works shall be agreed with the planning authority/authorities prior to commencement of development,

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 107 of 114 (c) if any construction damage arises, this shall be immediately rectified to the satisfaction of the planning authority/authorities,

(d) detailed arrangements for temporary traffic arrangements/controls on roads,

(e) a phasing programme indicating the timescale in relation to use of each public route to facilitate construction of the development,

(f) within three months of the cessation of the use of each public road and haul route to transport material to and from the site, a road survey and scheme of works detailing works to repair any damage to these routes in the Offaly area shall be submitted,

(g) all works in the aforementioned scheme shall be completed at the developer’s expense, within 12 months of each roads cessation as a haul route for the proposed development, and

(h) abnormal load haul routes shall be restricted to the M6/R400 delivery route outlined, with onward haulage as per drawings submitted with the application

In default of agreement on any of these requirements, the matter shall be referred to An Bord Pleanála for determination.

Reason: To assess the impact of the development on the public road network and to clarify the extent of the permission in the interest of traffic safety and orderly development.

12. (a) The proposed second access from the R400 (at the bridge over the Yellow River) for turbines to the southwest (T1-T12 and the meteorological mast) shall be omitted from the scheme. All construction and operational traffic shall utilise the existing R400 access to Kilmurray Quarry,

(b) The proposed fourth arm off the roundabout on the R400 at Coolcur shall be constructed to the requirements of Offaly County Council, and shall only be used for wind farm access or agricultural access,

Reason: In the interest of traffic safety.

13. Noise mitigation measures outlined in the EIS and in the Adjusted Noise Impact Report, received by the Board on the 3 rd day of April 2014, shall be carried out in full. In particular-

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 108 of 114 (a) noise levels emanating from the proposed development following commissioning, when measured externally at 3 rd party noise- sensitive locations, shall not exceed the greater of 43dB(A)L90 , or 5dB(A) above background levels,

(b) all noise measurements shall be made in accordance with I.S.O. Recommendations R1996/1 and 2 “Acoustics – Description and measurement of Environmental Noise”,

(c) prior to commencement of development, the developer shall agree a noise compliance monitoring programme for the operational wind farm with Offaly County Council.

Reason: In the interest of residential amenity.

14. Shadow flicker mitigation measures outlined in the EIS and in the Adjusted Shadow Flicker Report, received by the Board on the 3 rd day of April 2014, shall be carried out in full. No house shall be subject to more than 30 minutes per day, or 30 hours per annum of shadow flicker. Prior to the commissioning of the proposed wind farm, the developer shall agree in writing with Offaly County Council (and Meath County Council where relevant), a shadow flicker monitoring programme to determine actual flicker effects at agreed locations following commissioning of the wind farm, and shall implement an agreed programme to mitigate the impact on these receptors, and any other impacted receptors following a review of the monitoring programme. The developer shall comply with any mitigation measures deemed necessary by the planning authority/authorities including the intermittent switching off of the turbine as a result of the monitoring.

Reason : In the interest of residential amenity.

15. 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 -

(a) 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,

(b) employ a suitably-qualified archaeologist who shall monitor all site investigations and other excavation works, and prepare a report on the results of such monitoring to be submitted to the planning authority and to the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, and

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 109 of 114

(c) provide arrangements, acceptable to the planning authority, for the recording and removal of any archaeological material which the authority considers appropriate to remove. In particular, archaeological excavation shall be carried out at Areas of Archaeological Potential identified in the EIS submitted, at the mill race feature in Derryiron townland and at the agricultural track widening in Wood townland (west of RMP OF004-009), prior to the commencement of development on the site, or at such later date as may be agreed in writing with the planning authority.

A comprehensive report on the completed archaeological excavation shall be prepared and submitted to the planning authority and to the National Monuments Service within a period of six months or within such extended period as may be agreed with the planning authority.

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, it is considered reasonable that the developer should facilitate the preservation and protection or the preservation by record of any archaeological features or materials which may exist within it. In this regard, it is considered reasonable that the developer should be responsible for carrying out properly supervised archaeological excavations in circumstances where the permitted development works would be likely to result in the unavoidable disturbance or destruction of such features or materials.

16. The wind turbines including towers and blades, and the meteorological mast, shall be finished externally in a colour(s) to be agreed in writing with Offaly County Council prior to commencement of development.

Reason : In the interest of visual amenity.

17. (a) Cables within the site shall be laid underground. Cables to be laid within public roads or in margins abutting public roads shall be laid only with the necessary Road Opening Licence from Offaly County Council. This permission shall not be construed as any form of consent to the location underground of cables within lands outside of the control of the applicant/developer.

(b) The wind turbines shall be geared to ensure that the blades rotate in the same direction.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 110 of 114 (c) Transformers associated with each individual turbine and mast shall be located either within the turbine tower structure or at ground level beside the tower.

Reason : In the interest of visual amenity.

18. Details of aeronautical requirements shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, Offaly County Council, prior to commencement of development. Subsequently, the developer shall inform the planning authority and the Irish Aviation Authority of the co-ordinates of the ‘as constructed’ turbines and the highest point of the turbines.

Reason: In the interest of air traffic safety.

19. Facilities shall be installed to minimise interference with radio or television reception in the area, in the event that such facilities prove necessary following the commissioning of the wind turbines. Details of the facilities to be installed, which shall be at the developer’s expense, shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, Offaly County Council prior to commissioning of the turbines, and following consultation with the relevant authorities.

Reason: In the interest of orderly planning and residential amenity.

20. Any significant works to bridges over rivers or streams shall be carried out in accordance with the National Roads Authority guidelines for the treatment of otters.

Reason : To comply with requirements for the protection of breeding otters.

21. The developer shall review usage by birds of the wind farm site (particularly Whooper swan) and document bird casualties through an annual monitoring programme, which shall be submitted by the developer to, and agreed in writing with, the planning authority prior to commencement of development. This programme shall be developed in consultation with the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht.

Reason: To ensure appropriate monitoring of the impact of the development on the avifauna of the area.

22. Removal of hedgerows shall be carried out only between September and February inclusive. Replacement hedgerows shall be of native species.

Reason : To avoid adversely affecting breeding birds and in the interest of ecology and visual amenity.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 111 of 114

23. Prior to the commencement of development on the site, details of the form and the operation of the proposed Community Benefit Fund, detailed in section 4.3.1 of the Environmental Impact Statement, shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, Offaly County Council. The amount agreed is €1,000 per MW of installed capacity per annum (index-linked)

Reason: In the interest of clarity

24. On full or partial decommissioning of the wind farm, or if the wind farm ceases operation for a period of more than one year, the towers, turbines and the meteorological mast concerned shall be removed permanently within three months of such decommissioning.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory reinstatement of the site upon cessation of the project.

25. Construction and demolition waste shall be managed in accordance with a construction waste and demolition management plan, which shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, the planning authority prior to commencement of development. This plan shall be prepared in accordance with the “Best Practice Guidelines on the Preparation of Waste Management Plans for Construction and Demolition Projects”, published by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in July 2006. [The plan shall include details of waste to be generated during site clearance and construction phases, and details of the methods and locations to be employed for the prevention, minimisation, recovery and disposal of this material in accordance with the provision of the Waste Management Plan for the Region in which the site is situated.].

Reason : In the interests of sustainable waste management.

26. This permission shall not be construed as any form of consent or agreement to a connection to the national grid or to the routing or nature of any such connection.

Reason: In the interest of clarity.

27. Prior to commencement of development, the developer shall lodge with Offaly County Council, a cash deposit, a bond of an insurance company, or such other security as may be acceptable to the planning authority, to secure the reinstatement of public roads which may be damaged by the transport of materials to the site, coupled with an agreement empowering the planning authority to apply such security or part thereof to the satisfactory reinstatement of the public road. The form and amount of the

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 112 of 114 security shall be as agreed between the planning authority and the developer or, in default of agreement, shall be referred to An Bord Pleanála for determination.

Reason: In the interest of road safety and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

28. Prior to commencement of development, the developer shall lodge with Westmeath County Council, a cash deposit, a bond of an insurance company, or such other security as may be acceptable to the planning authority, to secure the reinstatement of public roads which may be damaged by the transport of materials to the site, coupled with an agreement empowering the planning authority to apply such security or part thereof to the satisfactory reinstatement of the public road. The form and amount of the security shall be as agreed between the planning authority and the developer or, in default of agreement, shall be referred to An Bord Pleanála for determination.

Reason: In the interest of road safety and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

29. Prior to commencement of development, the developer shall lodge with Offaly County Council, a cash deposit, a bond of an insurance company, or such other security as may be acceptable to the planning authority, to secure the satisfactory reinstatement of the site upon cessation of the project coupled with an agreement empowering the planning authority to apply such security or part thereof to such reinstatement. The form and amount of the security shall be as agreed between the planning authority and the developer or, in default of agreement, shall be referred to An Bord Pleanála for determination.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory reinstatement of the site.

30. The developer shall pay to Offaly County Council a financial contribution in respect of public infrastructure and facilities benefiting development in the area of the planning authority that is provided or intended to be provided by or on behalf of the authority in accordance with the terms of the Development Contribution Scheme made under section 48 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The contribution shall be paid prior to the commencement of development or in such phased payments as the planning authority may facilitate and shall be subject to any applicable indexation provisions of the Scheme at the time of payment. Details of the application of the terms of the Scheme shall be agreed between the planning authority and the developer or, in default of such agreement, the matter shall be referred to the Board to determine the proper application of the terms of the Scheme.

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 113 of 114

Reason: It is a requirement of the Planning and Development Act 2000 that a condition requiring a contribution in accordance with the Development Contribution Scheme made under section 48 of the Act be applied to the permission.

______Michael Dillon, Inspectorate.

15 th May 2014 .

19.PA0032 An Bord Pleanala Page 114 of 114