Greater Dublin Drainage Project Irish Water

Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Chapter 21 Material Assets

June 2018

Envir onmental Impact Assessment Report: Vol ume 3 Part A of 6 Irish Water

Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Contents 21. Material Assets ...... 1 21.1 Introduction ...... 2 21.2 Major Utilities and Natural Features ...... 4 21.2.1 Introduction ...... 4 21.2.2 Methodology ...... 4 21.2.3 Impact Assessment Criteria ...... 5 21.2.4 Baseline Environment ...... 8 21.2.5 Predicted Potential Impacts ...... 14 21.2.6 Mitigation Measures ...... 15 21.2.7 Residual Impacts ...... 19 21.3 Raw Materials ...... 19 21.3.1 Introduction ...... 19 21.3.2 Methodology ...... 20 21.3.3 Baseline Environment ...... 20 21.3.4 Predicted Potential Impacts ...... 21 21.3.5 Mitigation Measures ...... 22 21.3.6 Residual Impacts ...... 22 21.4 Difficulties Encountered in Compiling Required Information ...... 22 21.5 References ...... 22

32102902/EIAR/21 ii Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

21. Material Assets

This Chapter assesses and presents the potential impacts of the Greater Dublin Drainage Project (hereafter referred to as the Proposed Project) on material assets. The material assets which may be impacted upon by the Proposed Project can be split into two main sections:  Major utilities and natural features; and  Raw materials. The proposed pipeline routes will pass beneath these, where possible. It is proposed to traverse the majority of the material assets using trenchless techniques. Where this is not possible, engineering solutions have been proposed to mitigate any impact on the assets. The major utilities and natural features which have been identified include:

 Gas transmission infrastructure;  Wastewater collection infrastructure;  Power transmission infrastructure;  Connolly Hospital;  Rail infrastructure;  Communications infrastructure;  Motorways, National Primary Roads and  Significant watercourses; and other roads;  Baldoyle Bay and Portmarnock  Water supply infrastructure; Beach. The resulting predicted impact of the Proposed Project on major utilities and natural features will be moderate, negative and short-term. The raw materials which have been identified include:  Material for pipe bedding and surround;  Various pipes for the proposed orbital sewer route and proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section and marine section);  Concrete – precast elements, concrete blocks, ready mix concrete;  Structural steel;  Insulation materials;  Glass, roof slates and various other building materials; and  Mechanical and electrical equipment. Approximately 84,200m3 of material will have to be sourced from quarries in the region to be used for pipe bedding and surround as well as to construct temporary access roads, temporary working areas and compounds. The sourcing of materials during the construction of the Proposed Project on raw materials will have an imperceptible impact on the existing natural resources and other resources available. The quantities of raw material required will be reduced where possible through the reuse of suitable materials generated during the Construction Phase. Refer to Chapter 20 Waste in Volume 3 Part A of this Environmental Impact Assessment Report for further details. The resulting predicted impact of the Proposed Project will be Imperceptible, Negative and Permanent.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 1 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

21.1 Introduction Material assets are resources that are valued and that are intrinsic to specific places. These may be of human or natural origin. The Greater Dublin Drainage Project (hereafter referred to as the Proposed Project) will have the potential to impact on some significant material assets which, in turn, will have the potential to affect large sections of the population nearby. A desktop review of the available and collected data was carried out to assist in the preparation of this Chapter. The material assets related to the Proposed Project can be split into two main sections:

● Major utilities and natural features; and ● Raw materials. The Proposed Project will form a significant component of a wider strategy to meet future wastewater treatment requirements within the Greater Dublin Area as identified in a number of national, regional and local planning policy documents. The plant, equipment, buildings and systems associated with the Proposed Project will be designed, equipped, operated and maintained in such a manner to ensure a high level of energy performance and energy efficiency. The table below includes a summary of the Proposed Project elements. A full description of the Proposed Project is detailed within Volume 2 Part A, Chapter 4 Description of the Proposed Project of this Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR).

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 2 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Proposed Project Outline Description of Proposed Project Element Element

Proposed  WwTP to be located on a 29.8 hectare (ha) site in the townland of Clonshagh (Clonshaugh) in Fingal.  500,000 population equivalent wastewater treatment capacity. Wastewater  Maximum building height of 18m. Treatment Plant  Sludge Hub Centre (SHC) to be co-located on the same site as the WwTP with a sludge handling and (WwTP) treatment capacity of 18,500 tonnes of dry solids per annum.  SHC will provide sustainable treatment of municipal wastewater sludge and domestic septic tank sludges generated in Fingal to produce a biosolid end-product.  Biogas produced during the sludge treatment process will be utilised as an energy source.  Access road from the R139 Road, approximately 400m to the southern boundary of the site.  Egress road, approximately 230m from the western boundary of the site, to Clonshaugh Road.  A proposed temporary construction compound to be located within the site boundary. Proposed  Abbotstown pumping station to be located on a 0.4ha site in the grounds of the National Sports Campus at Abbotstown. Abbotstown pumping  Abbotstown pumping station will consist of a single 2-storey building with a ground level floor area of 305m2 station and maximum height of 10m and a below ground basement 17m in depth with floor area of 524m2 incorporating the wet/dry wells.  The plan area of the above ground structure will be 305m2 and this will have a maximum height of 10m.  A proposed temporary construction compound to be located adjacent to the Abbotstown pumping station site. Proposed orbital  The orbital sewer route will intercept an existing sewer at Blanchardstown and will divert it from this point to the WwTP at Clonshagh. sewer route  Constructed within the boundary of a temporary construction corridor.  13.7km in length; 5.2km of a 1.4m diameter rising main and 8.5km of a 1.8m diameter gravity sewer.  Manholes/service shafts/vents along the route.  Odour Control Unit at the rising main/gravity sewer interface.  Proposed temporary construction compounds at Abbotstown, Cappoge, east of Silloge, Dardistown and west of Collinstown Cross to be located within the proposed construction corridor. Proposed North  The NFS will be intercepted in the vicinity of the junction of the access road to the WwTP with the R139 Road in lands within the administrative area of Dublin City Council. Fringe Sewer (NFS)  NFS diversion sewer will divert flows in the NFS upstream of the point of interception to the WwTP. diversion sewer  600m in length and 1.5m in diameter.  Operate as a gravity sewer between the point of interception and the WwTP site. Proposed outfall  Outfall pipeline route (land based section) will commence from the northern boundary of the WwTP and will run to the R106 Coast Road. pipeline route (land  5.4km in length and 1.8m in diameter. based section)  Pressurised gravity sewer.  Manholes/service shafts/vents along the route.  Proposed temporary construction compounds (east of R107 Malahide Road and east of Saintdoolaghs) located within the proposed construction corridor. Proposed outfall  Outfall pipeline route (marine section) will commence at the R106 Coast Road and will terminate at a discharge location approximately 1km north-east of Ireland’s Eye. pipeline route  5.9km in length and 2m in diameter. (marine section)  Pressurised gravity tunnel/subsea (dredged) pipeline.  Multiport marine diffuser to be located on the final section.  Proposed temporary construction compounds (west and east of Baldoyle Bay) to be located within the proposed construction corridor. Proposed Regional  Located on an 11ha site at Newtown, Dublin 11.  Maximum building height of 15m. Biosolids Storage  Further details and full impact assessment are provided in Volume 4 Part A of this EIAR. Facility

The total Construction Phase will be approximately 48 months, including a 12 month commissioning period to the final Operational Phase. The Proposed Project will serve the projected wastewater treatment requirements of existing and future drainage catchments in the north and north-west of the Dublin agglomeration, up to the Proposed Project’s 2050 design horizon.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 3 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

21.2 Major Utilities and Natural Features

21.2.1 Introduction In this Section of the Chapter, the baseline environment is examined with regards to current major utilities (any above ground or below ground services, any manmade infrastructure) and any natural features. Predicted potential impacts on these aspects of material assets resulting from the Proposed Project are evaluated, and appropriate mitigation measures are proposed.

Please note that the material assets impact assessment of the proposed RBSF aspect of the Proposed Project is addressed in Chapter 12 Material Assets in Volume 4, Part A of this EIAR.

21.2.2 Methodology This Section has been prepared in accordance with relevant European Union and Irish legislation and guidance, including the requirements of Annex IV of Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive) and in accordance with Schedule 6 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 as amended (S.I. No. 600 of 2001) and conforms to the relevant requirements as specified therein. The following guidelines were referred to and complied with while preparing this appraisal:

● Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements (Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2002) (and revised and draft guidelines 2015/2017 (EPA 2015b; 2017)); ● Advice Notes on Current Practice in the Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements (EPA 2003) (and revised advice notes (EPA 2015a); and ● Guidelines for Planning Authorities and An Bord Pleanála on carrying out Environmental Impact Assessment (Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government 2013). The scope of the appraisal is based on a review of legislation, guidance documents, other EIAR feedback from public consultation, consultation with prescribed bodies and on a consideration of the likelihood of significant impacts arising, having regard to the nature of the baseline environment and the nature and extent of the Proposed Project. A schedule of consultations is detailed in Table 21.1. Feedback received is detailed in the relevant sections below.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 4 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Table 21.1: Schedule of Consultations

Stakeholder Meeting Date Additional Consultation

Bord Gáis Networks (Currently Gas 19 November 2012 In addition to the meeting, there was additional Networks Ireland) correspondence by phone and email. EirGrid 23 November 2012 Iarnród Éireann 14 December 2012, In addition to the meeting, there was additional 14 March 2014 correspondence by phone and email. Rail Procurement Agency (currently 12 April 2013, In addition to the meeting, there was additional Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII)) 27 June 2017 correspondence by phone and email. National Roads Authority (currently TII) 11 February 2013, In addition to the meeting, there was additional 27 June 2017 correspondence by phone and email. Inland Fisheries Ireland 5 November 2012 Fingal County Council (FCC) water 11 February 2014 In addition to the meeting, there was additional operations correspondence by phone and email. FCC wastewater operations 27 February 2014 In addition to the meeting, there was additional correspondence by phone and email. DCC water operations 20 March 2014 Hibernia Atlantic 10 April 2014 In addition to the meeting, there was additional correspondence by phone and email.

This Section sets out how the appraisal of material assets, specifically utilities, road and rail infrastructure, water and wastewater infrastructure, watercourses and drainage, were evaluated for the Proposed Project. The objective of this Chapter is to identify existing material assets and determine whether these features place constraints on the Proposed Project.

21.2.3 Impact Assessment Criteria The assessment of the potential impact of the Proposed Project on the major utilities and natural features has been undertaken in accordance with the Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements (EPA 2002) (and Revised and Draft Guidelines (EPA 2015b; 2017) which have been drafted to facilitate compliance with Directive 2014/52/EU of 16 April 2014 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (EIA Directive). Impacts are described in the guidelines under various headings which are summarised in Table 21.2 below. Further details on the definitions of impacts on the environment can be found in Section 3.7.3 of the Revised and Draft Guidelines (EPA 2015b; 2017).

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 5 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Table 21.2: Description of Impacts as set out in the Environmental Protection Agency Draft Guidelines (EPA 2017)

Quality of Effects Positive Effects A change which improves the quality of the environment (for example, by increasing species diversity, improving reproductive capacity of an ecosystem, or by removing nuisances or improving amenities). It is important to inform the Neutral Effects non-specialist reader whether the effect is No effects or effects that are imperceptible, within normal bounds of variation or within the margin of positive, negative or forecasting error. neutral. Negative/adverse Effects A change which reduces the quality of the environment (for example, lessening species diversity or diminishing the reproductive capacity of an ecosystem; or damaging health or property or by causing nuisance).

Describing the Significance of Effects Imperceptible An effect capable of measurement but without noticeable consequences. Not significant An effect which causes noticeable changes in the character of the environment but without significant Slight Effects An effect which causes noticeable changes in the character of the environment without affecting its ‘Significance’ is a concept sensitivities. that can have different meanings for different Moderate Effects topics – in the absence of An effect that alters the character of the environment in a manner that is consistent with existing and specific definitions for emerging baseline trends. different topics the Significant Effects following definitions may be useful. An effect which, by its character, magnitude, duration or intensity, alters a sensitive aspect of the environment. Very Significant An effect which, by its character, magnitude, duration or intensity, significantly alters most of a sensitive aspect of the environment. Profound Effects An effect which obliterates sensitive characteristics

Describing the Extent and Context of Effects

Context can affect the Extent perception of significance. Describe the size of the area, the number of sites and the proportion of a population affected by an effect. It is important to establish if the effect is unique or, Context perhaps, commonly or Describe whether the extent, duration or frequency will conform or contrast with established (baseline) increasingly experienced. conditions. (Is it the biggest, longest effect ever?)

Describing the Probability of Effects Likely Effects The effects that can reasonably be expected to occur because of the planned project if all mitigation Descriptions of effects measures are properly implemented. should establish how likely it is that the predicted Unlikely Effects effects will occur – so that The effects that can reasonably be expected not to occur because of the planned project if all mitigation the Competent Authority measures are properly implemented. can take a view of the

balance of risk over advantage when making a decision.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 6 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Describing the Duration and Frequency of Effects Momentary Effects Effects lasting from seconds to minutes Brief Effects Effects lasting less than a day Temporary Effects Effects lasting less than a year

‘Duration’ is a concept that Short-term Effects can have different Effects lasting one to seven years meanings for different Medium-term Effects topics – in the absence of specific definitions for Effects lasting seven to 15 years different topics the Long-term Effects following definitions may Effects lasting 15 to 60 years be useful. Permanent Effects Effects lasting over 60 years Reversible Effects Effects that can be undone, for example through remediation or restoration Frequency of Effects Describe how often the effect will occur. (once, rarely, occasionally, frequently, constantly – or hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, annually)

Describing the Types of Effects

Cumulative Effects The addition of many minor or significant effects, including effects of other projects, to create larger, more significant effects. ‘Do Nothing’ Effects The environment as it would be in the future should the subject project not be carried out. ‘Worst case’ Effects The effects arising from a project in the case where mitigation measures substantially fail. Indeterminable Effects When the full consequences of a change in the environment cannot be described. Describing the types of Irreversible Effects effects When the character, distinctiveness, diversity or reproductive capacity of an environment is permanently lost. Residual Effects The degree of environmental change that will occur after the proposed mitigation measures have taken effect. Synergistic Effects Where the resultant effect is of greater significance than the sum of its constituents. Indirect Effects (a.k.a Secondary Effects) Impacts on the environment, which are not a direct result of the project, often produced away from the project site or because of a complex pathway.

Impacts during the Construction Phase and Operational Phase which the Proposed Project may have on the material assets are also examined, and mitigation measures which may be required to minimise any adverse impacts of the Proposed Project are identified and considered. Following assessment of the predicted potential impacts of the Proposed Project, the Proposed Project was methodically reviewed so that mitigation methods could be conceived that will avoid, prevent or reduce any negative impacts as a result of the Proposed Project. These are described in further detail in Section 21.2.6.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 7 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

The evaluation is based on the fact that existing best practices in design, construction and operation are employed for the Proposed Project as set out in this EIAR.

21.2.4 Baseline Environment During the routing process of the proposed pipeline routes, major utilities and natural features were taken into consideration as outlined in Table 21.3. For a full list of routing constraints, refer to the GDD Routing Report (Jacobs Tobin 2018).

Table 21.3: Major Utility Routing Constraints

Description of Constraint Comment

James Connolly Memorial Hospital and grounds Provides a constraint to routing in a north or north-easterly direction. Connection to additional 9C Sewer catchment required which dictates the routing direction. Route available in direction of the M50 Motorway. Existing gas transmission infrastructure which lies Constraint to maintaining route in close proximity to the M50 Motorway. It is immediately north of, and runs parallel to, the M50 necessary to divert route slightly to the north. Motorway to west of Cappagh Road. Proposed Metro West route. Constraint to maintaining route in close proximity to the M50 Motorway. proposed orbital sewer route will now run parallel to the Metro West route through these lands

Electricity Supply Board (ESB) substation at N2 Critical Constraint. Constraint to maintaining route in close proximity to the M50 National Road/M50 Motorway interchange Motorway. This constraint, coupled with the proposed routing of the Metro West route in this area, forces the proposed orbital sewer route to the north around the substation. Metro West depot (proposed) Forms a northern boundary to any potential route. Available route to south of proposed depot. Metro Link depot (proposed) Forms a northern boundary to any potential route. Available route to south of proposed depot. Metro Link route (proposed) – particularly the Critical Constraint. As Metro Link will be constructed in tunnel from the depot section in tunnel from depot through the Dublin through the airport grounds, it is preferable to route the proposed orbital sewer Airport complex. route south of the proposed depot and cross the Metro Link route when it is at ground level. Satisfactory clearances can be achieved to the proposed Metro Link infrastructure to south of proposed depot.

Although care has been taken to align the proposed pipeline routes away from major utilities and natural features, the Construction Phase and Operational Phase of the proposed WwTP, Abbotstown pumping station, orbital sewer route and outfall pipeline route (land based section and marine section) will have some impact on material assets in the form of crossings as outlined below. Major Utilities Gas Transmission Infrastructure The high pressure gas transmission pipelines identified near the Proposed Project are shown on Figure 21.1 Gas Transmission Infrastructure – Location of Crossing Points with Proposed Pipeline Routes and include:

● A north–south transmission pipeline running from Blanchardstown to an above ground installation west of Lusk, with spurs serving Dublin Airport and DCC. The crossings of this transmission pipeline are identified as

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 8 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Locations 1, 2 and 3 on Figure 21.1 Gas Transmission Infrastructure – Location of Crossing Points with Proposed Pipeline Routes; and ● An east–west transmission pipeline routed from the landing point of the subsea interconnector, north of Rush, to the above ground installation west of Lusk and on westward. However, this will not be impacted upon by the Proposed Project. Power Transmission Infrastructure The existing power infrastructure identified near the Proposed Project consists of:

● Low voltage and medium voltage network (10 kilovolts (kV) to 20kV); ● High voltage network (38kV, 110kV, 220kV and 400kV); ● East-West Interconnector land section; and ● East-West Interconnector subsea section. The identified power infrastructure consists of a mix of overhead lines (OHLs) and underground cables. The high voltage network and the East-West Interconnector, together with the proposed orbital sewer route and the proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section), are shown on Figure 21.2 Power Transmission Infrastructure – Location of Crossing Points with Proposed Pipeline Routes and Wastewater Treatment Plant Site. The proposed orbital sewer route and outfall pipeline route (land based section) will have to cross under/over the 38kV, 110kV and 220kV infrastructure. However, this would be considered to be normal infrastructure which would be encountered in any civil engineering works in an urban environment. Furthermore, the preliminary design of the proposed pipeline routes will place them at a deeper level and will pass beneath the electricity infrastructure. The construction of the proposed WwTP at Clonshagh will require the diversion of the 38kV OHL at this location prior to works commencing at this site. No crossing of the East-West Interconnector is required. Rail Infrastructure The rail infrastructure identified near the Proposed Project includes:

● The existing Dublin to Belfast Railway; ● The proposed Metro Link and Metro West lines; ● Metro Link (a Railway Order is in place and the project has been tendered. The project is due to begin construction in 2021); and ● Metro West (no Railway Order in place). The existing Dublin to Belfast railway line, as shown in Figure 21.3 Railway Infrastructure – Location of Crossing Points with Proposed Pipeline Routes and Figure 21.4 Dublin to Belfast Railway – Proposed Trenchless Crossing, runs north to south across the proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section). The Proposed Project team made contact with Irish Rail in 2012 and 2014 and maintains contact through continuous wayleave negotiations since. Irish Rail have indicated that the current preliminary design of the proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section) and details at the crossing point are acceptable in principle. The Proposed Project team contacted TII in June 2017, and TII advised that it has no technical issues with the proposed orbital sewer route crossing under the Metro Link or Metro West Lines. The Metro Link infrastructure is identified in Figure 21.3 Railway Infrastructure – Location of Crossing Points with Proposed Pipeline Routes. The mitigation measures implemented in the design are outlined in Section 21.2.6.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 9 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Motorways, National Primary Roads and Other Roads Motorways and National Primary Roads identified near the Proposed Project include:

● Motorways: M1 Motorway and M2 Motorway; ● National Primary Roads: N2 National Road; ● Regional Roads: R135 Finglas Road, R122 Road, R108 Road, R132 Swords Road, R107 Malahide Road, R124 Road, R106 Coast Road; and ● Other roads as outlined in Table 21.4. Details of these crossings are shown in Figure 21.5 N2 National Road – Proposed Trenchless Crossing, Figure 21.6 Collinstown Cross – Proposed Trenchless Crossing and Figure 21.7 M1 Motorway – Proposed Trenchless Crossing. Table 21.4 provides a summary of the road crossings.

Table 21.4: Road Crossings

Feature Type Pipeline Route Description

Regional and other Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) Cappagh Road roads Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) R135 Finglas Road

Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) R122 Road

Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) R108 Ballymun Road Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) R132 Swords Road Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) Clonshaugh Road Proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section) R107 Malahide Road Proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section) R124 Road Proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) R106 Coast Road Proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) Golf Links Road

Local roads Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) Local road west of Premier Business Park Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) Access road to Premier Business Park Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) Dubber Cottages Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) Sillogue Green

Water Supply Infrastructure An overview of the strategic trunk water supply mains near the Proposed Project is provided in Figure 21.8 Water Supply Infrastructure – Crossing Points with Proposed Pipeline Routes. The proposed orbital sewer route and the proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section) associated with the proposed WwTP will require crossings of the following strategic trunk water supply mains:

● 24”, 450mm and 800mm North Fringe trunk main from Ballycoolin to Cappagh, Dublin City; ● Three instances of the 400mm supply to Dublin Airport along the R132 Swords Road; ● 24” trunk main between Swords and Clonshagh, Dublin City; and ● 450mm and 560mm trunk main between Swords and Donaghmede, Dublin City.

Wastewater Collection Infrastructure

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 10 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

The wastewater pipelines identified near the Proposed Project are:

● 9C Sewer (varying in diameter from 900mm to 1,350mm); ● Offtake from the NFS; and ● Rising main from Sutton pumping station. The 9C Sewer will be intercepted and diverted to the proposed WwTP. The catchment of the NFS will also be intercepted west of the proposed WwTP at Clonshagh at the junction of the proposed access road to the proposed WwTP. A number of existing branches of the NFS which originate north of the M50 Motorway, e.g. Dublin Airport, Coldwinters, Dubber and Clonshaugh Road, will be diverted to the proposed orbital sewer route. Communications Infrastructure There is a large amount of communications and telecoms infrastructure near the Proposed Project, and this would be considered to be normal infrastructure which would be encountered in any civil engineering works in rural and urban environments and the crossing of this infrastructure will be managed in the normal way. Also, during the course of the Proposed Project, the Hibernia Atlantic Ltd. Dublin to Southport subsea cable, which connects Ireland to the United Kingdom (UK), was identified in near the proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section), and this will require a crossing. Connolly Hospital Connolly Hospital is located adjacent to part of the Proposed Project. The proposed orbital sewer route begins in the public park to the west of the hospital and proceeds though the grounds of the hospital in a south-easterly and easterly direction (as indicated on Diagram 21.1) before crossing into the ground of the National Sports Campus.

Diagram 21.1: Connolly Hospital Crossing

Natural Features

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 11 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Significant Watercourses The Proposed Project will cross six rivers and streams, which generally flow from west to east. The locations at which the proposed orbital sewer route and outfall pipeline route (land based section) will cross these watercourses are shown on Figure 21.9 Watercourses – Crossing Points with Proposed Pipeline Routes. A summary of the watercourse crossing locations is provided in Table 21.5. The proposed access road to the proposed WwTP site and proposed NFS diversion sewer will require a crossing of the Mayne River. Much of the Proposed Project will be routed through agricultural lands, many of which will contain land drainage which may require diversion during the works. There are no canals or other significant manmade watercourses near the Proposed Project.

Table 21.5: Watercourse Crossing Locations

Feature Type Pipeline Route Description

Watercourses Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) Tributary of Tolka River Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) Santry River Proposed orbital sewer route (Blanchardstown – Clonshagh) Mayne River Proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section) Cuckoo Stream Proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section) Tributary of Mayne River Proposed NFS diversion sewer Mayne River

Baldoyle Bay and Portmarnock Beach The proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) will cross Baldoyle Bay and Portmarnock Beach and sand dunes. Following discussions with Portmarnock Golf Club, the proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) shall be located in a manner which will minimise intrusion on the golf course. The appointed contractor(s) shall be required to continue to liaise with Portmarnock Golf Club before and during construction works. Examination of the marine and coastal zone constraint mapping, mapped during the Preliminary Screening stage of the Alternative Sites Assessment process, identified that significant constraints are posed to the location of an outfall pipeline off the coast of north County Dublin by designated shellfish waters – the Balbriggan/Skerries Shellfish Area and the Malahide Shellfish Area. These designations are provided for under Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy (Water Framework Directive) and are to protect and improve shellfish waters in order to support shellfish life and growth. Two outfall locations were considered during the Alternative Sites Assessment:

● The undesignated area between the Balbriggan/Skerries Shellfish Area and the Malahide Shellfish Area (the northern outfall study area); and ● The undesignated area south of the Malahide Shellfish Area (the southern outfall study area). The southern outfall was chosen due to:

● The feasibility of tunnelling under the Baldoyle Bay Special Area of Conservation/Special Protection Area and termination within the Rockabill to Dalkey Island candidate Special Area of Conservation. The Proposed Project will be designed, constructed and operated to ensure that it will not adversely affect the integrity of any Natura 2000 sites;

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 12 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

● The southern outfall exhibits better initial dilution and mixing characteristics for the treated wastewater plume than the northern outfall; and ● Tunnelling of the southern outfall poses less technical difficulty than tunnelling of the northern outfall. The route of the proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) through these lands is indicated on Diagram 21.2.

Diagram 21.2: Baldoyle Bay and Portmarnock Beach Crossing Summary of Major Utilities and Natural Features Table 21.6 provides a summary of the number of crossings of major utilities and natural features by the Proposed Project.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 13 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Table 21.6: Crossings of Major Utilities and Natural Features by the Proposed Pipeline Routes

Feature Type Feature/Infrastructure No. of Crossings

Gas transmission 3

High voltage power transmission 23

Rail – existing 1

Rail – proposed (Metro Link) 3

M1 Motorway 1

Major utilities N2 National Road 1

Other significant roads 14

Water supply – trunk watermains 9

Wastewater collection – large diameter 3

Communications infrastructure 1

Connolly Hospital 1

Natural Rivers and streams 6 features Baldoyle Bay and Portmarnock Beach 1

21.2.5 Predicted Potential Impacts ‘Do Nothing’ Scenario Should the construction of the Proposed Project not occur, there will be no impact on any of the major utilities or natural features nearby. ‘Do Something’ Scenario Should the Proposed Project proceed as planned, it will impact upon the major utilities and natural features near the proposed pipeline routes, as detailed in Section 21.2.4. The implementation of the mitigation measures as outlined in Section 21.2.6 will ensure that the proposed pipeline routes and the proposed WwTP are designed to take account of the identified assets, major utilities and natural features. The proposed Abbotstown pumping station will not impact major utilities and natural features. The resulting predicted impact of the Proposed Project will be moderate, negative and short-term. Worst Case Scenario The worst case scenario would result if the design of the Proposed Project did not take account of the identified major utilities and natural features, or if the construction methodology employed impacts on the identified major utilities and natural features. The resulting predicted impact of the worst case scenario for the Proposed Project will be Significant, negative and short-term.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 14 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

21.2.6 Mitigation Measures As outlined in Section 21.2.4 major utilities and natural features were taken into consideration when routing the proposed pipeline routes to minimise impacts. Although care has been taken to align the proposed pipeline routes away from major utilities and natural features, the construction and operation of the Proposed Project will have some impact on these in the form of crossings. Following assessment of the potential impacts, the Proposed Project was methodically reviewed and mitigation methods were developed that will avoid, prevent or reduce any negative impacts on the environment as a result of the Proposed Project. The mitigation measures are described below. Major Utilities Gas Transmission Infrastructure The Proposed Project team has had discussions with the owner of the assets (Gas Networks Ireland) who have confirmed in principle that they do not see a major difficulty with the proposed pipeline routes crossing the gas transmission network. The preliminary design of the proposed pipeline routes takes account of the requirement to cross these assets without interfering with them during the Construction Phase or the Operational Phase. The proposed pipeline routes will be designed with a vertical separation distance of 2m to 3m from the crown of the proposed pipeline route to the underside of the gas transmission pipeline at these locations. Crossings will be carried out by means of trenchless techniques to minimise disruption to the services. Power Transmission Infrastructure The proposed pipeline routes have been designed, where possible, to avoid OHLs and their support structures, and the design is such that the proposed pipeline routes will be at a deeper level and will pass beneath the electricity infrastructure. OHLs shall be protected in accordance with the Code of Practice for Avoiding Danger from Overhead Electricity Lines (ESB Networks 2008). Should any equipment or machinery be required to pass underneath the OHL, a passageway through barriers will be created which ensures safe clearance distances. The 38kV power lines crossing the proposed WwTP will have to be diverted prior to works commencing at this site to avoid any disruption. An application has been made to ESB Networks for connection to the National Grid and diversion of the power line. This will be followed up at detailed design stage. Rail Infrastructure The proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section) crosses the Dublin-Belfast rail line. The Proposed Project team has had discussions with Irish Rail who have indicated that the proposed crossing point and details are acceptable in principle, subject to the following requirements being met with respect to any crossing of the Dublin- Belfast rail line:

● Crossings shall be a minimum of 4.7m from the crown of the pipe to track bed level; ● Crossings shall be perpendicular where possible; ● If two (or more) crossings are required, they shall be in a single conduit or there should be a separation between them (of the order of 5m); ● Crossings shall not be at track joint positions; ● Crossings shall take account of stanchion locations for OHLs associated with DART trains running on this line; and ● A survey of track position and level will be required.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 15 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

The current design of the crossing meets with the requirements of Irish Rail, and incorporates a trenchless crossing and a minimum distance of 4.7m from the crown of the proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section) to the rail track level. Metro Crossings TII advised that they have no difficulty with the proposed orbital sewer route crossing under the proposed Metro Link or Metro West lines. A depth of 3m below the track is sufficient to mitigate potential impacts and must be included in the final design. The actual construction methodology for this crossing will be dependent on the actual construction timeframes for the respective projects. However, the preliminary design of the proposed orbital sewer route is such that a trenchless method for crossing will be suitable and implemented, should the Metro infrastructure be in place prior to construction of the Proposed Project. Conventional open cut methods will be suitable at the crossing point should the timeframes of both projects permit. Motorways, National Primary Roads and Other Roads The proposed pipeline routes will require crossings of road infrastructure. Previous discussions with TII (formerly the National Roads Authority) confirmed that a formal application to the TII for permission to construct the proposed pipeline routes beneath national roads or motorways, in accordance with Section 53 of the Roads Act, 1993, will be required prior to seeking permission from An Bord Pleanála for planning consent. TII also confirmed that all crossings must be achieved by trenchless techniques such as tunnelling or directional drilling. Designs for crossings will take into account the road drainage and fibre optic infrastructure, and will mitigate any potential impact on this existing infrastructure. Exact details of each crossing is not required at this time. However, prior to construction, individual designs will be submitted by the appointed contractor(s) for each crossing to the TII for agreement. A meeting was held in June 2017 with TII, at which TII advised that a letter of support would be provided but that that these documents would not be signed/sealed until planning permission has been granted. Formal applications to TII have been made for the crossings of the N2 National Road and M1 Motorway as requested and in accordance with Section 53 of the Roads Act, 1993. Water Supply Infrastructure Following discussions with FCC water operations and DCC water operations, who operated the water supply infrastructure prior to handover to Irish Water, it was confirmed that the major water assets had been identified. FCC and DCC, and now subsequently Irish Water, advised that they do not have any objections in principle and that they would have no issue with the proposed pipeline routes passing beneath their infrastructure. However, normal good practice must be followed. Particular requirements which were identified include: The proposed orbital sewer route shall go beneath water mains with the following constraints:

● Vertical separation to be a minimum of 500mm; ● Horizontal separation to be 6m; and ● At crossings, there shall be no joints over joints. The preliminary design of the proposed pipeline routes has taken into account these requirements at all crossing points of water supply infrastructure. However, normal good practice must be followed.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 16 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Wastewater Collection Infrastructure Following discussions with FCC wastewater operations section, it was confirmed that the major wastewater collection infrastructure had been identified. The wastewater operations section did not have any objections to the proposals in principle and advised they would have no issue with the proposed pipeline routes passing beneath their infrastructure. Communications Infrastructure A required crossing of the proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) with the Hibernia Atlantic Ltd. Dublin to Southport submarine cable has been identified as illustrated in Diagram 21.3.

Diagram 21.3: Hibernia Atlantic Ltd. Dublin to Southport Submarine Cable Crossing Discussions with Hibernia Atlantic Ltd. indicate that there is no requirement for planned maintenance to this cable. Currently, only maintenance to repair damage to the cable is expected to be carried out, if necessary. It was advised that there are significant cost implications if the cable is out of service as the company must lease capacity from other providers to provide a service to their customers. Hibernia Atlantic Ltd. have indicated that the risks shall be mitigated by providing an engineering solution to protect the subsea cable during the construction of the proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section).

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 17 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

The exact nature of the crossing will be subject to detailed design and approval by Hibernia Atlantic Ltd. prior to the start of construction. However, the outline technical proposal and principles which shall be adhered to for the crossing are detailed below. The cable location shall be confirmed by the appointed contractor(s) with assistance from the asset owner (Hibernia Atlantic Ltd) by means of inducing a detectable frequency and experienced divers using a probe. The appointed contractor(s) will uncover and mark the cable to mitigate the risk of accidental damage. In order to construct the section of the proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) that will have to cross the subsea cable, the subsea cable shall be protected by means of a cable protection system, at which point it will be supported to allow the excavation beneath the cable and installation of the proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) beneath the cable. Further information on this crossing method is included in the Outline Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). The exact details of this technical proposal are subject to site investigation, detailed design and agreement with the asset owner (Hibernia Atlantic Ltd). It is also likely that Hibernia Atlantic Ltd. will have some supervisory presence during the works adjacent to the subsea cable. Connolly Hospital Following discussions with representatives from Connolly Hospital regarding the proposed orbital sewer route passing through their lands, it was indicated that maintaining access for emergency vehicles throughout the Construction Phase is the most significant issue. In order to ensure that vehicle access is maintained, the Proposed Project will be constructed using trenchless techniques at this location. This will reduce the impact on the lands and ensure emergency vehicle access is maintained to the hospital at all times. Other issues of concern raised by representatives from Connolly Hospital included potential impacts of the Proposed Project on future potential development. This was mitigated through the realignment of the pipeline and the use of a narrower proposed construction corridor width through the hospital lands, and dust and noise management which is covered in Chapters 14 Air Quality, Odour and Climate and Chapter 15 Noise and Vibration in Volume 3 Part A respectively. Natural Features Significant Watercourses Inland Fisheries Ireland indicated at a meeting that, in the first instance, all crossings of watercourses shall be undertaken using trenchless techniques where practicable. However, should this prove unworkable then each watercourse crossing technique must be agreed in advance with Inland Fisheries Ireland and shall be designed and planned to take place during a time that will minimise impacts on the aquatic environment and fish populations. The proposed NFS diversion sewer will be constructed using trenchless techniques and will be routed under the Mayne River. The proposed access road to the proposed WwTP will, however, require a crossing of the Mayne River. This will be achieved by installing a single box culvert in the Mayne River, ensuring that there will be minimal disruption to the Mayne River. An application for consent under Section 50 of the Arterial Drainage Act, 1945 is required for this crossing, and this is currently being progressed through Irish Water.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 18 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Land Drainage The proposed pipeline routes will cross agricultural lands, many of which will contain land drainage. There is no readily available mapping of such drainage. These drains will be identified during the Construction Phase by the appointed contractor(s). Affected land drains will be redirected in a manner that maintains existing land drainage, and these drains shall be reinstated appropriately. Any drains intercepted will be marked and mapped to allow for proper reinstatement of these drains at completion. Appropriate construction monitoring, including Agricultural Liaison Officers, will be employed during the Construction Phase. Baldoyle Bay and Portmarnock Beach The proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) will be tunnelled from a launch compound (proposed temporary construction compound no. 10) east of Baldoyle Bay to a reception shaft (proposed temporary construction compound no. 9) on the west of Baldoyle Bay. The proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) will also be tunnelled to a subsea interface east of Portmarnock Beach. The implementation of trenchless techniques mitigates the impact the proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) would otherwise have on these assets. The Proposed Project team undertook extensive consultation and detailed consideration of the proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) to ensure that the impact on Portmarnock Golf Club and public amenities were minimised. Following discussions with Portmarnock Golf Club, the proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) was located in a manner which will minimise intrusion on the golf course. The appointed contractor(s) shall be required to continue to liaise with Portmarnock Golf Club before and during construction works. The public amenities, such as the existing car park and public walkway to the beach, have been considered through the design process also. The majority of the carpark will be kept operational through the Construction Phase and the walkway to the beach will remain open.

21.2.7 Residual Impacts The potential for the Proposed Project to impact or interrupt utility supply has been assessed. All utility services near the Proposed Project have been identified and include transport infrastructure and natural features. Locations where the proposed pipeline routes cross existing infrastructure have been identified. Discussions have been held with all asset owners and their requirements have been identified and incorporated into the design. While there is interaction between the Proposed Project and existing infrastructure, the locations of interaction have been identified and planned for, and therefore, the potential for interruption is limited. As such, it is considered that the resulting predicted impacts to major utilities and natural features will be moderate, negative and short-term, as a result of the Proposed Project.

21.3 Raw Materials

21.3.1 Introduction In this Section, the baseline environment is examined with regards to raw materials which will be required throughout the Construction Phase of the Proposed Project. Potential impacts on the surrounding environment resulting from the Proposed Project are evaluated, and appropriate mitigation measures are proposed. The main types of materials that will be required during the Construction Phase of the Proposed Project include:

● Aggregates for pipe bedding and surround; ● Various pressure and gravity pipes for the proposed orbital sewer route and the proposed outfall pipeline route (land based section and marine section);

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 19 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

● Materials for chamber and manhole construction; ● Concrete: precast elements, concrete blocks and ready-mix concrete; ● Structural steel; ● Insulation materials; ● Glass, roof slates and other building materials; and ● Mechanical and electrical equipment. Materials required during the Construction Phase of the Proposed Project will be sourced from local suppliers, where possible. This will include the use of bedding material from local quarries and general construction materials.

21.3.2 Methodology This Section assesses the impacts that the import of materials for the Proposed Project will have on the surrounding environment. The type of materials required are outlined in Section 21.3.1. A desktop review was undertaken to determine which materials can be sourced from the area and those which will have to be imported from outside the vicinity of the Proposed Project. The predicted impacts are analysed in this Section in accordance with the criteria set out in Section 21.2.3 and the measures to mitigate these impacts are identified in this Section. Finally, the residual impacts of the Proposed Project on raw materials following implementation of the mitigation measures are discussed.

21.3.3 Baseline Environment There are various sources of materials in the Greater Dublin Area near to the proposed pipeline routes. There are various quarries where aggregates and concrete products can be sourced (refer to Figure 21.10 Quarry Locations in the Greater Dublin Region). Some of the materials required for the construction of the Proposed Project are not manufactured in Ireland, such as ductile iron pipes and polyethylene pipes, and will have to be imported. Natural Resources Stone will be used for pipe and bedding surround. It is estimated that approximately 84,200m3 of material will be sourced from quarries in the region. Efforts will be made to reuse and recycle as much of the generated excess material as practicable during construction to construct proposed temporary access roads, temporary working areas and temporary construction compounds. Topsoil will be stockpiled and stored on-site to be reused again for the same purpose. Any subsoil arising from the excavation will similarly be stored on-site to be reused as backfill. For further details, refer to Chapter 20 Waste in Volume 3 Part A of this EIAR. Bentonite, which will be required for tunnelling operations, will be imported and mixed with water on-site to the required consistency. The quantity of bentonite required will be minimised through the recycling of drilling fluid. Bentonite is classified as a hazardous material and will be treated as such. It will be stored and handled within a contained unit. Any surplus bentonite generated will be disposed of at a suitably licensed waste facility. Water will be required for various activities that occur during the Construction Phase, such as tunnelling operations, hydrostatic testing, welfare facilities and washing and cleaning of plant and machinery. Water will be

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 20 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

sourced locally from watermains or other sources. This will be recycled and disposed of appropriately in accordance with the Outline CEMP for construction. Other Resources Concrete will be required during the Construction Phase for a number of aspects of the work, including:

● The proposed Abbotstown pumping station; ● The proposed WwTP. ● Proposed temporary construction compounds utilised for tunnelling; ● Launch and reception shafts; ● Chambers; and ● Thrust and anchor blocks; There will also be structural steel imported for the construction of the proposed Abbotstown pumping station and the proposed WwTP along with concrete blocks, roof slates and wall and roof panels. Concrete segments for the proposed Abbotstown pumping station and tunnel access shafts will be manufactured off-site and delivered to the proposed temporary construction compound, when required. Any waste concrete generated during the Construction Phase is classified as a construction and demolition waste and will be crushed and used as backfill, where possible. Any excess material will be transported to a suitably licensed facility for recycling or disposal in accordance with the measures detailed in Chapter 20 Waste in Volume 3 Part A of this EIAR. Other materials, such as concrete blocks, structural steel, roof slates and roof and wall panels, will also be imported. The most significant impact resulting from the import of materials will be the increase in traffic on the roads surrounding the Proposed Project. The impacts and mitigation measures associated with traffic and transportation for the Proposed Project are described in more detail in Chapter 13 Traffic and Transport in Volume 3 Part A of this EIAR.

21.3.4 Predicted Potential Impacts ‘Do Nothing’ Scenario Should the construction of the Proposed Project not occur, there will be no impact on the raw materials nearby. ‘Do Something’ Scenario The sourcing of materials during the Construction Phase of the Proposed Project will have an imperceptible impact on the existing natural resources and other resources available. The quantities of raw material required will be reduced where possible through the reuse of suitable materials generated during the Construction Phase. There will be an increase in traffic on the surrounding roads due to the number of Heavy Goods Vehicles required to transport the material (refer to Chapter 13 Traffic and Transport in Volume 3 Part A of this EIAR). The resulting predicted impact of the Proposed Project will be Imperceptible, negative and permanent. Worst Case Scenario A significant impact on raw materials near the Proposed Project would result if there is no reuse of materials on- site or no mitigation measures employed throughout the Proposed Project. This would require the removal of all

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 21 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

excavated materials from site and the importation of material required for backfill and surround. There will be a much higher volume of traffic on the surrounding roads should the worst case scenario occur. Should there be a complete requirement for raw materials to be imported, this will have an increased Significant impact upon natural and other resources. The predicted impact in the worst case scenario is Significant, negative and permanent.

21.3.5 Mitigation Measures Consideration will be given to the sustainable sourcing of all materials. Materials arising from the excavation of the open cut and trenchless methods will be reused where possible. This, and the methodologies chosen at design stage, will result in a decrease in the amount of imported material, in turn reducing the impact of traffic on the surrounding roads and resulting in less demand on non-renewable sources such as quarries. Bentonite used for the tunnelling process will be recycled within a closed system during tunnelling, thereby minimising the quantity required. Other mitigation measures which will be employed in relation to raw materials are outlined below:

● Design will be optimised to minimise the requirements for raw materials; ● Materials will be reused where possible (such as excavated rock); ● Raw materials will be sourced locally where possible; and ● Raw materials will be managed in accordance with the Outline CEMP for construction.

21.3.6 Residual Impacts The potential for the Proposed Project to impact natural and other resources has been assessed, and it is noted that if the Proposed Project proceeds it will require the use of non-renewable materials. Mitigation measures, where materials generated during the course of the Proposed Project are reused on-site, have been identified and shall be adhered to. These measures include the use of surplus excavated material as landscaping material or sub-bases for the site roads and hardstanding or the crushing and screening of rock for use as aggregate. This approach will result in a significantly reduced requirement for the import of raw materials for the Construction Phase of the Proposed Project. For further details, refer to Chapter 20 Waste in Volume 3 Part A of this EIAR. The resulting residual impact upon raw materials near the Proposed Project will be Imperceptible, negative and permanent.

21.4 Difficulties Encountered in Compiling Required Information No difficulties were encountered when compiling information for this Chapter.

21.5 References Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (2013). Guidelines for Planning Authorities and An Bord Pleanála on carrying out Environmental Impact Assessment.

Environmental Protection Agency (2002). Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements.

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 22 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Environmental Protection Agency (2003). Advice Notes on Current Practice in the Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements.

Environmental Protection Agency (2015a). Advice Notes for Preparing Environmental Impact Statements.

Environmental Protection Agency (2015b). Revised Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements.

Environmental Protection Agency (2017). Draft Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Assessment Reports.

ESB Networks (2008). Code of Practice for Avoiding Danger from Overhead Electricity Lines.

Jacobs Tobin (2018). Greater Dublin Drainage Routing Report.

Directives and Legislation Arterial Drainage Act 1945

European Union (1985). Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment [1985].

European Union (2006). Directive 2006/113/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the quality required of shellfish waters [2006].

European Union (2014). Directive 2014/52/EU of 16 April 2014 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment [2014].

Planning and Development Regulations 2001 – S.I. No. 600 of 2001

Roads Act 1993

32102902/EIAR/21 Chapter 21 – Page 23

Greater Dublin Drainage Project Irish Water

Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Chapter 22 Risk of Major Accidents and/or Disasters June 2018

Envir onmental Impact Assessment Report: Vol ume 3 Part A of 6 Irish Water

Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Contents 22. Risk of Major Accidents and/or Disasters ...... 1 22.1 Introduction ...... 1 22.2 Risk of Major Accidents and/or Disasters ...... 3 22.3 Methodology ...... 3 22.3.1 Scope and Context ...... 3 22.3.2 Guidelines and Reference Material ...... 4 22.3.3 Risk Assessment Methodology ...... 5 22.4 Predicted Impacts ...... 7 22.5 Mitigation Measures ...... 11 22.5.1 Mitigation Measures Embedded in the Proposed Project Design ...... 12 22.5.2 Traffic Management Plans ...... 13 22.5.3 Environmental Incident Response Plan ...... 13 22.5.4 Odour Management Plan ...... 14 22.5.5 Surface Water Management Plan ...... 14 22.5.6 Vessel Management Plan ...... 14 22.6 Residual Impacts ...... 14 22.7 Monitoring ...... 14 22.8 Conclusion ...... 14 22.9 References ...... 15

32102902/EIAR/22 ii Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

22. Risk of Major Accidents and/or Disasters

22.1 Introduction The Greater Dublin Drainage Project (hereafter referred to as the Proposed Project) will form a significant component of a wider strategy to meet future wastewater treatment requirements within the Greater Dublin Area as identified in a number of national, regional and local planning policy documents. The plant, equipment, buildings and systems associated with the Proposed Project will be designed, equipped, operated and maintained in such a manner to ensure a high level of energy performance and energy efficiency.

The table below includes a summary of the Proposed Project elements. A full description of the Proposed Project is detailed within Volume 2 Part A, Chapter 4 Description of the Proposed Project of this Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR).

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 1 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Proposed Project Outline Description of Proposed Project Element Element

Proposed • WwTP to be located on a 29.8 hectare (ha) site in the townland of Clonshagh (Clonshaugh) in Fingal. • 500,000 population equivalent wastewater treatment capacity. Wastewater • Maximum building height of 18m. Treatment Plant • Sludge Hub Centre (SHC) to be co-located on the same site as the WwTP with a sludge handling and (WwTP) treatment capacity of 18,500 tonnes of dry solids per annum. • SHC will provide sustainable treatment of municipal wastewater sludge and domestic septic tank sludges generated in Fingal to produce a biosolid end-product. • Biogas produced during the sludge treatment process will be utilised as an energy source. • Access road from the R139 Road, approximately 400m to the southern boundary of the site. • Egress road, approximately 230m from the western boundary of the site, to Clonshaugh Road. • A proposed temporary construction compound to be located within the site boundary. Proposed • Abbotstown pumping station to be located on a 0.4ha site in the grounds of the National Sports Campus at Abbotstown. Abbotstown pumping • Abbotstown pumping station will consist of a single 2-storey building with a ground level floor area of 305m2 station and maximum height of 10m and a below ground basement 17m in depth with floor area of 524m2 incorporating the wet/dry wells. • The plan area of the above ground structure will be 305m2 and this will have a maximum height of 10m. • A proposed temporary construction compound to be located adjacent to the Abbotstown pumping station site. Proposed orbital • The orbital sewer route will intercept an existing sewer at Blanchardstown and will divert it from this point to the WwTP at Clonshagh. sewer route • Constructed within the boundary of a temporary construction corridor. • 13.7km in length; 5.2km of a 1.4m diameter rising main and 8.5km of a 1.8m diameter gravity sewer. • Manholes/service shafts/vents along the route. • Odour Control Unit at the rising main/gravity sewer interface. • Proposed temporary construction compounds at Abbotstown, Cappoge, east of Silloge, Dardistown and west of Collinstown Cross to be located within the proposed construction corridor. Proposed North • The NFS will be intercepted in the vicinity of the junction of the access road to the WwTP with the R139 Road in lands within the administrative area of Dublin City Council. Fringe Sewer (NFS) • NFS diversion sewer will divert flows in the NFS upstream of the point of interception to the WwTP. diversion sewer • 600m in length and 1.5m in diameter. • Operate as a gravity sewer between the point of interception and the WwTP site. Proposed outfall • Outfall pipeline route (land based section) will commence from the northern boundary of the WwTP and will run to the R106 Coast Road. pipeline route (land • 5.4km in length and 1.8m in diameter. based section) • Pressurised gravity sewer. • Manholes/service shafts/vents along the route. • Proposed temporary construction compounds (east of R107 Malahide Road and east of Saintdoolaghs) located within the proposed construction corridor. Proposed outfall • Outfall pipeline route (marine section) will commence at the R106 Coast Road and will terminate at a discharge location approximately 1km north-east of Ireland’s Eye. pipeline route • 5.9km in length and 2m in diameter. (marine section) • Pressurised gravity tunnel/subsea (dredged) pipeline. • Multiport marine diffuser to be located on the final section. • Proposed temporary construction compounds (west and east of Baldoyle Bay) to be located within the proposed construction corridor. Proposed Regional • Located on an 11ha site at Newtown, Dublin 11. • Maximum building height of 15m. Biosolids Storage • Further details and full impact assessment are provided in Volume 4 Part A of this EIAR. Facility

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 2 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

22.2 Risk of Major Accidents and/or Disasters Article 3 of Directive 2014/52/EU of 16 April 2014 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive) requires for the assessment of expected effects of major accidents and/or disasters within EIA. Article 3(2) of the Directive states that the ‘effects referred to in paragraph 1 on the factors set out therein shall include the expected effects deriving from the vulnerability of the project to risks of major accidents and/or disasters that are relevant to the project concerned’. The Revised Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements (EPA 2015a) refers to Accidents, recommending that ‘Aspects of the proposal that could cause accidents with a likelihood of creating significant environmental impacts should be considered’. The Draft Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Assessment Reports (EPA 2017) elaborate on risk assessment further under Section 3.7.3: ‘To address unforeseen or unplanned effects the Directive further requires that the EIAR takes account of the vulnerability of the project to risk of major accidents and/or disasters relevant to the project concerned and that the EIAR therefore explicitly addresses this issue. The extent to which the effects of major accidents and/or disasters are examined in the EIAR should be guided by an assessment of the likelihood of their occurrence (risk)’. This Chapter of the EIAR identifies how the potential for accidents and disasters relevant to the Proposed Project have been identified and how those risks have been managed. This Chapter considers:

• Major accidents and/or natural disasters (MANDs) that the Proposed Project may be vulnerable to; • The potential for significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from such a MAND; and • Existing and proposed mitigation measures to prevent or mitigate the likely significant adverse impacts of such events on the environment. For the purposes of this assessment, the following definitions have been adopted:

• Major Accident – incidents or events that threaten immediate or chronic serious damage to human health, welfare and/or the environment; • Natural Disaster – naturally occurring extreme weather events (e.g. storm, flood, temperature) with the potential to cause an event or incident; • Risk – defined as the likelihood of an incident occurring, combined with magnitude effect or consequence(s) of the impact on a receptor or surrounding area; and • Significance – Significant impact resulting from MANDs are adverse impacts if they meet the criteria for ‘Significant’, ‘Very Significant’ or ‘Profound’ under the Draft EPA Guidelines (EPA 2017).

22.3 Methodology

22.3.1 Scope and Context The identification, control and management of risk is an integral part of the design and assessment process throughout all stages of a project lifecycle. For example, a Flood Risk Assessment was carried out during the site selection process to ensure that the selected site for the proposed WwTP at Clonshagh and the proposed Abbotstown pumping station were not located in areas vulnerable to flood risk. The Proposed Project will be designed, built and operated in line with current international best practice and guidelines. The elements of the Proposed Project incorporate technologies and measures that are designed to reduce and eliminate the occurrence of accidents. Measures to control risks associated with Construction Phase activities are incorporated

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 3 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

into the Outline Construction Environmental Management Plan. Measures to control risks associated with Operational Phase activities will be incorporated into Operational Phase plans by the appointed contractor(s). The scoping criteria for this risk assessment is: • Identify MANDs (i.e. unplanned incidents) that the Proposed Project may be vulnerable to; and • Assess the consequent impacts and significance of such incidents in relation to the environmental, social and economic receptors that may be affected. Such risks may be present at the Construction Phase, Operational Phase and Decommissioning Phase of the Proposed Project.

22.3.2 Guidelines and Reference Material The development of the risk assessment methodology has been informed by the following guidelines: • Advice Notes for Preparing Environmental Impact Statements (EPA 2015b); • Draft Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Assessment Reports (EPA 2017); • National Risk Assessment 2017 Overview of Strategic Risks (Department of the Taoiseach 2017); • Guidance on Assessing and Costing Environmental Liabilities (EPA 2014); • A Guide to Risk Assessment in Major Emergency Management (Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government1 (DoEHLG) 2010); and • A National Risk Assessment for Ireland 2017 (Department of Defence 2017). The following plans and assessments have also informed the assessment: • Major Emergency Plan of Fingal County Council (Fingal County Council 2011); • Maximum Aircraft Movement Data and the Calculation of Risk and PSZs: Dublin Airport (Department of Transport and the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government 2005); • Huntstown Power Station – Accident Prevention and Emergency Response Plan (Huntstown Power Company Limited 2006); • Huntstown Quarry – Environmental Contingency Plan (Roadstone 2017); • Guide to Field Storage of Biosolids (United States EPA 2000); and • The Fire and Explosion Hazards of Dried Sewage Sludge (Manchester 2000). In addition to the above guidelines, the following Irish Water procedures and protocols also informed the development of the risk assessment: Irish Water Procedures: • HSQE-SOP-024 – Irish Water Incident Management Procedure (the main document from which all other procedures and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) derive) (Irish Water 2014); • HSQE-SOP-025 – Irish Water Emergency Response Plan (Irish Water 2014); • HSQE-SOP-036 – Irish Water Crisis Response Plan (Irish Water 2017); and

1 The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is now the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government, and the environment is now covered under the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 4 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

• CCS-SOP-01 – Communications Incident Management Procedure (Irish Water 2014). Irish Water Policies: • IW-PRT-IMT-001 – Incident Management Governance (Irish Water 2014); • IW-PRT-IMT-002 – Management of Drinking Water Incidents (Irish Water 2013); • IW-PRT-IMT-003 – Management of Wastewater Incidents (Irish Water 2016); • IW-PRT-IMT-004 – Management of Health & Safety Incidents (Irish Water 2013); and • IW-PRT-IMT-005 – Management of Environmental Incidents (Irish Water 2013).

22.3.3 Risk Assessment Methodology The assessment is set out in three stages: • Identification and Screening; • Risk Classification; and • Risk Evaluation. Identification and Screening The first stage of the assessment is to identify potential unplanned risks that the Proposed Project may be vulnerable to. An initial list of MANDs were sourced through consultation with relevant environmental specialists, and using the guidelines and reference documentation. The list of potential MANDs was subjected to an initial screening assessment to identify the potential risks that meet the scoping criteria. The risks were screened out of the assessment according to the following criteria: • MANDs addressed in the Design Risk Assessment for the design and planning phase of the Proposed Project; • MANDs that have already been assessed in other areas of this EIA. These are summarised and referenced in this Section; • MANDs associated with Construction Phase and Operational Phase activities that fall within the scope of health and safety legislation and associated obligations; • MANDs where no ‘Source-Pathway-Receptor’ linkage exists. Examples include incidents that cannot be plausibly associated with the Proposed Project, such as volcanic activity, earthquakes and risk of nuclear accidents; and • MANDs that possess low likelihood/low consequence, as they do not meet the criteria of the assessment. Risk Classification Following the initial identification and screening process, remaining MANDs were evaluated with regard to the likelihood of occurrence and the potential impact. The rating criteria adopted for the assessment follows that used in A Guide to Risk Assessment in Major Emergency Management (DoEHLG 2010). The Draft EPA Guidelines (EPA 2017) state that the risk assessment must be based on a ‘worst case’ approach. Therefore, the consequent rating assumes that all proposed mitigation measures and safety procedures have failed to prevent the MAND. The classification and rating of likelihood and consequence are provided in Table 22.1 and Table 22.2 below.

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 5 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Table 22.1: Classification of Likelihood

Rating Classification Impact Description

1 Extremely Unlikely May occur only in exceptional circumstances; once every 500 or more years

2 Very Unlikely Is not expected to occur; no recorded incidents or anecdotal evidence; and/or very few incidents in associated organisations, facilities or communicates; and/or little opportunity, reason or means to occur. May occur once every 100 to 500 years.

3 Unlikely May occur at some time; and/or few, infrequent, random recorded incidents or little anecdotal evidence; some incidents in associated or comparable organisations worldwide; some opportunity, reason or means to occur. May occur once every 10 to 100 years.

4 Likely Likely to or may occur; regular recorded incidents and strong anecdotal evidence. Will probably occur once every one to 10 years

5 Very Likely Very likely to occur; high level of recorded incidents and/or strong anecdotal evidence. Will probably occur more than once a year.

Table 22.2: Classification of Consequence

Rating Classification Impact Description

1 Minor Life, Health, • Small number of people affected; no fatalities and small number Welfare, of minor injuries with first aid treatment Environment, • No contamination, localised effects Infrastructure, Social • <0.5M Euro • Minor localised disruption to community services or infrastructure (<6 hours)

2 Limited Life, Health, • Single fatality; limited number of people affected; a few serious Welfare, injuries with hospitalisation and medical treatment required. Environment, Localised displacement of a small number of people for 6-24 Infrastructure, Social hours. Personal support satisfied through local arrangements • Simple contamination, localised effects of short duration • 0.5M-3M Euro • Normal community functioning with some inconvenience

3 Serious Life, Health, Welfare, • Significant number of people in affected area impacted with Environment, multiple fatalities (<5), multiple serious or extensive injuries (20), Infrastructure, Social significant hospitalisation. Large number of people displaced for 6-24 hours or possibly beyond; up to 500 evacuated. External resources required for personal support. • Simple contamination, widespread effects or extended duration • 3M-10M Euro • Community only partially functioning, some services available

4 Very Serious Life, Health, Welfare, • 5 to 50 fatalities, up to 100 serious injuries, up to 2,000 evacuated Environment, • Heavy contamination, localised effects or extended duration Infrastructure, Social • 10M-25M Euro • Community functioning poorly, minimal services available •

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 6 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Rating Classification Impact Description

5 Catastrophic Life, Health. Welfare, • Large numbers of people impacted with a significant number of Environment, fatalities (>50), injuries in the hundreds, more than 2000 Infrastructure, Social evacuated. • Very heavy contamination, widespread effects of extended duration. • >25M Euros • Serious damage to infrastructure causing significant disruption to, or loss of, key services for prolonged period. Community unable to function without significant support

Risk Evaluation In accordance with the DoEHLG’s (2010) guidelines, the evaluated MANDs will be subject to a risk matrix to determine the level of significance of each risk for each scenario. These have been grouped according to three categories: High Risk

Scenarios that have an evaluation score of 15 to 25, as indicated by the Red Zones in Table 22.3.

Medium Risk

Scenarios that have an evaluation score of 8 to 12, as indicated by the Amber Zone in Table 22.3.

Low Risk

Scenarios that have an evaluation score 1 to 6, of as indicated by the Green Zones in Table 22.3.

Table 22.3: Levels of Significance

5 – V. Likely

4 – Likely

3 – Unlikely

2 – V. Unlikely Likelihood 1 – Ext. Unlikely

1 – Minor 2 – Limited 3 – Serious 4 – V. Serious 5 – Catastrophic

Consequence of Impact

Significant impacts resulting from MANDs are adverse impacts that are described as ‘Significant’, ‘Very Significant’ or ‘Profound’ under the Draft EPA Guidelines (EPA 2017). Consequently, MANDs that fall within the Amber or Red Zones (‘Medium’ or ‘High’ risk scenarios) are brought forward for further consideration and assessment for further mitigation.

22.4 Predicted Impacts As mentioned in Section 22.3 the predicted impacts in this Section assume a worst-case scenario, which does not consider the implementation of mitigation measures or Emergency Plans that are implemented to reduce the impact of any MANDs.

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 7 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

A Risk Register has been developed which contains all the plausible scenarios identified during the Construction Phase and Operational Phase of the Proposed Project, and has been evaluated using the criteria in Section 22.3. This is provided in Table 22.4.

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 8 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Table 22.4: Rating of Major Accidents and Disasters in the Absence of Mitigation

Risk ID Event Proposed Project Likelihood Rating Consequence Rating Element

Construction Phase and Operational Phase

A Tunnelling during Various crossings along Unlikely 3 Potentially Serious with potential 3 construction leading the proposed orbital fatalities and injuries to subsidence of sewer route and the land, with the proposed outfall potential to lead to pipeline route (land an accident, based section) particularly on major roads and rail lines traversed by the proposed pipeline routes

B Fire resulting in Proposed Unlikely 3 Potentially Serious with 3 significant or WwTP/Abbotstown potential fatalities and injuries widespread damage pumping station/RBSF. Potential to discharge on-site deleterious material to adjacent watercourse Hazards associated with smoke to neighbouring residents, businesses and activities

C Damage to high All elements of the Unlikely 3 Potentially Serious with 3 voltage overhead Proposed Project potential fatalities and injuries, lines that cross the Potential to lead to fire and Proposed Project associated effects

D Pollution event Elements of the Likely 4 Potentially Serious with the 3 leading to Proposed Project near potential to cause environmental to watercourses environmental damage to the damage, particularly aquatic environment and associated with the associated species and to potential release of designated Natura 2000 sites silt to the aquatic environment

E Road traffic All land based elements Likely 4 Potentially Serious, resulting in 3 accidents on-site or of the Proposed Project a number of fatalities and/or resulting from injury Construction Phase Simple localised contamination and Operational of area or minor structural Phase traffic damage

F Discharge of Proposed outfall Likely 4 Limited – the potential impact 2 untreated pipeline route (marine as a result of this scenario has wastewater during section) discharge point been modelled as part of the Commissioning and in the Irish Sea water quality assessment for Operational Phase Chapter 8 Marine Water Quality in Volume 3 Part A of this EIAR.

G Incident at adjacent Proposed RBSF. Unlikely 3 Limited – potentially localised 2 Industrial Emissions displacement of a small number Directive sites of people or simple leading to shutdown/ contamination, localised effects evacuation of short duration

H Gas explosion due Proposed WwTP Likely 4 Potentially Serious with 3

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 9 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Risk ID Event Proposed Project Likelihood Rating Consequence Rating Element to the release of potential fatalities and injuries biogas generated Potential to discharge on-site during the deleterious material to adjacent anaerobic digestion watercourse Hazards associated with explosion to neighbouring residents, businesses and activities

I Significant release Proposed WwTP and Likely 4 Limited – potentially localised 2 of odour during the Abbotstown pumping release of odours from the Operational Phase station proposed Abbotstown pumping station which will convey untreated wastewater and from the treatment of untreated wastewater at the proposed WwTP

J Aircraft related Proposed WwTP Extremely Unlikely 1 Potentially Very Serious 4 accident

K Marine accident Proposed outfall Likely 4 Potentially Serious, resulting in a 3 resulting from pipeline route (marine number of fatalities and/or injury collision of section) construction vessels with local fishing/ leisure vessels during Construction Phase

The results from the evaluation have been applied to Table 22.5 below to determine the Levels of Significance.

Table 22.5: Evaluation of Levels of Significance in the Absence of Mitigation

5 – V. Likely

4 – Likely [F][I] [D][E][H][K]

3 – Unlikely [G] [A][B][C]

2 – V. Unlikely Likelihood 1 – Ext. Unlikely [J]

1 – Minor 2 – Limited 3 – Serious 4 – V. Serious 5 – Catastrophic

Consequence of Impact

From examining the plausible risks presented in Table 22.4, Risk IDs G and J are considered as being below the threshold of significance set for the purposes of this assessment. It is noted that for Risk ID J (aircraft related accidents), the site fringes the southern boundary of the outer public safety zone and is consequently not considered significant. The scenarios with the highest risk score relate to pollution from the potential release of silt, traffic accidents, gas explosions and marine accidents associated with the Proposed Project. Risk IDs A, B, C, D, E, F, H, I and K fall within Amber Zone (‘Medium’ risk scenario) and are therefore brought forward for further consideration and assessment of mitigation measures.

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 10 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

22.5 Mitigation Measures The design of the Proposed Project incorporates mitigation measures that have been embedded into the design of the Proposed Project elements. No ‘High’ risk (Red Zone) scenarios have been identified for the Proposed Project. Risk IDs A, B, C, D, E, F, H, I and K have been identified as being of ‘Medium’ risk (Amber Zone) and, as a result, are subject to further assessment and determination of risk, post-implementation of mitigation measures. The results are presented in Table 22.6 and Table 22.7.

Table 22.6: Major Accidents and/or Disasters – Assessment of Mitigation Measures

Risk Event Pre-Mitigation Mitigation Measures Post-Mitigation Post-Mitigation ID Risk Score [Including Confirmatory Likelihood Consequence of Studies] Impact

A Tunnelling during construction Medium Refer to Section 22.5.1. 3 2 leading to subsidence of land, Unlikely Limited with the potential to lead to an accident, particularly on major roads and rail lines traversed by the proposed pipeline routes

B Fire resulting in significant or Medium Refer to Section 22.5.1. 2 2 widespread damage on-site Very Unlikely Limited

C Damage to high voltage Medium Refer to Section 22.5.1. 3 2 overhead lines that cross the Unlikely Limited Proposed Project

D Pollution event leading to Medium Refer to Sections 22.5.1 and 2 2 environmental damage, 22.5.5. Very Unlikely Limited particularly associated with the potential release of silt to the aquatic environment

E Road traffic accidents on-site Medium Refer to Section 22.5.2. 2 3 or resulting from Construction Very Unlikely Serious Phase and Operational Phase traffic

F Discharge of untreated Medium Refer to Sections 22.5.1 and 3 2 wastewater during 22.5.5. Unlikely Limited Commissioning and the Operational Phase

H Gas explosion due to the Medium Refer to Section 22.5.1. 2 3 release of biogas generated Very Unlikely Serious on-site during the anaerobic digestion of sludge

I Significant release of odour Medium Refer to Section 22.5.4. 2 2 during the Operational Phase Very Unlikely Limited

K Marine accident resulting from Medium Refer to Section 22.5.6. 2 3 collision of construction Very Unlikely Serious vessels with local fishing/leisure vessels during Construction Phase

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 11 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Table 22.7: Evaluation of Levels of Significance Post-Mitigation

5 – V. Likely

4 – Likely

3 – Unlikely [A][C][F]

2 – V. Unlikely [B][D][I] [E][H][K] Likelihood 1 – Ext. Unlikely

1 – Minor 2 – Limited 3 – Serious 4 – V. Serious 5 – Catastrophic

Consequence of Impact

22.5.1 Mitigation Measures Embedded in the Proposed Project Design Regulation 15 of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (Construction) Regulations 2013 (S.I. No. 291 of 2013) places a duty on designers carrying out work related to the design of a project to take account of the General Principles of Prevention as listed in Schedule 3 of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005.

In addition to the duties imposed by Regulation 15 of the Health and Welfare at Work (Construction) Regulations 2013 (S.I. No. 291 of 2013), designers must comply with Section 17(2) of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 which requires persons who design a project for construction work to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that the project is designed and is capable of being constructed to be safe and without risk to health, can be maintained safely and without risk to health during use, and complies in all respects, as appropriate, with other relevant legislation. This includes the Building Regulations 2012 (S.I. No. 138 of 2012) and, if the works being designed are intended for use as a workplace, the relevant parts of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (General Application) Regulations 2007 (S.I. No. 299 of 2007). In accordance with these requirements, the Proposed Project design team established a consistent and appropriate means of assessing the risks that may arise from design decisions and of applying the General Principles of Prevention, mitigation measures that are to be embedded into the design and operational activities through Design Risk Assessments.

Embedded Mitigation by Design for Tunnelling Works The potential for subsidence as a result of tunnelling works will be mitigated by design and selection of appropriate construction methodologies. Subsidence and vibration monitoring will be undertaken before the commencement of the Construction Phase, during the tunnelling works and for a period of time after the completion of the tunnelling works. Embedded Mitigation for a Total Failure Event at the Proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant

To mitigate against total or partial failure events at the proposed WwTP, a number of embedded measures have been included in the design of the Proposed Project:

• Power supply at the proposed WwTP: the proposed WwTP will have three power supply sources (electricity, natural gas and biogas) and will be capable of running off any single one or off a combination of sources; • Power supply at proposed Abbotstown pumping station: a standby/backup diesel generator will be provided; • Planned maintenance: the proposed WwTP will be designed to accommodate a planned maintenance regime whereby individual treatment units can be taken offline for maintenance without impacting treatment capacity;

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 12 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

• Backup equipment: all pumps will be installed in duty/standby configurations in case of pump failure; • Telemetry system: a telemetry system will be installed within the control room located in the proposed WwTP. This will allow operators to control the flows passed forward from the proposed Abbotstown pumping station and the existing Ballymun pumping station. As a result, in the event of a problem arising at the proposed WwTP, flows from the two pumping stations can be slowed or stopped for a period of time, with the large storage volumes available in the network mobilised to retain flows; and • Alarm system: all key items of mechanical plant will incorporate alarms to warn of malfunction/failure.

Embedded Mitigation for a Failure of Sludge Treatment at the Proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant To mitigate against total or partial failure of the sludge treatment stream at the proposed WwTP, a number of embedded measures have been included in the design of the Proposed Project. In the event of a problem with the sludge treatment stream, all imports of sludge will be halted. Sludge will be temporarily stored at the satellite centres and the WwTP also will have the facility to store its own sludge temporarily on-site.

Embedded Mitigation by Design for Pipelines The construction of all proposed pipeline routes will be carried out in accordance with best practice and design. Appropriate watertight pipeline materials for the safe transfer of wastewater will be utilised during the construction of the proposed pipeline routes and pipelines will have a limited number of joints to minimise potential leaks. The rising main will be pressurised and will be fitted with a pressure monitor that will stop flows in the event of a burst along the proposed orbital sewer route. A flow meter will be included in the design at the proposed Abbotstown pumping station and at the inlet works for the proposed WwTP, which will allow for flow balance calculations to be monitored. This will aid in the early detection of any potential leaks or bursts along the proposed orbital sewer route. 22.5.2 Traffic Management Plans

The risk of MANDs resulting from a road traffic accident associated with the Proposed Project will be reduced by the development and implementation of Traffic Management Plans as detailed in Section 13.11.1 of Chapter 13 Traffic and Transport in Volume 3 Part A of this EIAR and in Section 13.5 of Chapter 13 Traffic in Volume 4 Part A of this EIAR.

22.5.3 Environmental Incident Response Plan An Environmental Incident Response Plan will be developed by the appointed contractor/operator of the facility, in consultation with the emergency services and other relevant third parties, and will be submitted to Irish Water for approval. The Environmental Incident Response Plan will contain Incident Response Procedures which will outline the detailed procedures for dealing with any potential emergency and shall include the following:

• Initial response procedures; • List of emergency numbers; • Records and sharing of records with prescribed bodies; • Training; and

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 13 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

• Emergency response equipment list on-site. The Environmental Incident Response Plan will ensure that resources necessary to make safe and/or deal with situations in the first instance are available to respond to emergencies at all times during the Construction Phase and Operational Phase. It will also ensure that suitably qualified personnel (‘Duty Officers’) will be available at all times to manage the response of the contractor/operator to emergencies. A schedule of the telephone numbers for Duty Officers shall be provided to an Garda Síochána and other relevant authorities so that contact can be made with the Duty Officers at all times.

22.5.4 Odour Management Plan

The risk of MANDs resulting from the release of odours associated with the Proposed Project will be reduced by ensuring that all gases pass through Odour Control Units prior to venting to the atmosphere. This will be augmented by the development and implementation of an Odour Management Plan as detailed in Section 14.8 of Chapter 14 Air Quality, Odour and Climate in Volume 3 Part A of this EIAR and Section 10.2.7 of Chapter 10 Odour in Volume 4 Part A of this EIAR.

22.5.5 Surface Water Management Plan The risk of MANDs resulting from the potential release of pollutants associated with the Proposed Project to watercourses, including the potential release of sediments and untreated wastewater, will be reduced by the development and implementation of a Surface Water Management Plan as appended to the Outline Construction Environmental Management Plan which forms part of the planning application for the Proposed Project.

22.5.6 Vessel Management Plan

The risk of MANDs resulting from potential marine accidents will be reduced by the implementation of the Proposed Project Vessel Management Plan which is included in Appendix A10.2 in Volume 3 Part B. The Vessel Management Plan includes an exclusion zone for fishing vessels and leisure craft during the Construction Phase.

22.6 Residual Impacts There are no identified incidents or examples of MANDs that present a sufficient combination of risk and consequence that would lead to significant residual impacts or environmental effects.

22.7 Monitoring The Environmental Incident Response Plan is a live document that undergoes monitoring, review and update throughout the lifetime of the Proposed Project. The risk management assessment of MANDs will be continued on an ongoing basis throughout the planning, design, Construction Phase and Operational Phase of the Proposed Project. Activities on-site will be monitored to ensure that risk does not increase over time on the site.

22.8 Conclusion Table 22.4 lists 11 plausible MAND incidents that have the potential to occur during both the Construction Phase and Operational Phase of the Proposed Project. In a worst-case scenario (i.e. without the implementation of mitigation measures), two were determined to be of ‘Low’ risk and nine were determined to be of ‘Medium’ risk. The nine potential ‘Medium’ risk scenarios were subsequently assessed with regard to the embedded mitigation measures, including those in the design phase and the implementation of a Traffic Management Plan,

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 14 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Environmental Incident Response Plan, Odour Control Plan, Surface Water Management Plan and Vessel Management Plan.

These Management Plans contain mitigation measures and action plans designed to limit the loss of life or injury to employees, appointed contractor(s), visitors and local residents, damage to facilities and damage to the environment.

Through the implementation of mitigation measures, there are no identified incidents or examples of MANDs that present a sufficient combination of risk and consequence that would lead to significant residual impacts or environmental effects.

22.9 References Department of Defence (2017). A National Risk Assessment for Ireland 2017.

Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (2010). A Guide to Risk Assessment in Major Emergency Management.

Department of the Taoiseach (2017). National Risk Assessment 2017 Overview of Strategic Risks.

Department of Transport and the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (2005). Maximum Aircraft Movement Data and the Calculation of Risk and PSZs: Dublin Airport. Environmental Protection Agency (2014). Guidance on Assessing and Costing Environmental Liabilities.

Environmental Protection Agency (2015a). Revised Guidelines on Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements.

Environmental Protection Agency (2015b). Advice Notes for Preparing Environmental Impact Statements.

Environmental Protection Agency (2017). Draft Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Assessment Reports.

Fingal County Council (2011). Major Emergency Plan of Fingal County Council.

Huntstown Power Company Limited (2006). Huntstown Power Station – Accident Prevention and Emergency Response Plan.

IW-PRT-IMT-003 – Management of Wastewater Incidents (Irish Water 2016).

Manchester, S.J. (2000). The Fire and Explosion Hazards of Dried Sewage Sludge. IChemE Symposium Series, No. 148: 241–254.

Roadstone (2017). Huntstown Quarry – Environmental Contingency Plan.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (2000). Guide to Field Storage of Biosolids.

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 15 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Directives and Legislation European Union (2014). Directive 2014/52/EU of 16 April 2014 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment [2014].

Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005

Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (Construction) Regulations 2013 – S.I. No. 291 of 2013

Building Regulations 2012 - S.I. No. 138 of 2012

Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (General Application) Regulations 2007 - S.I. No. 299 of 2007

32102902/EIAR/22 Chapter 22 – Page 16

Greater Dublin Drainage Project Irish Water

Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Chapter 23 Cumulative Impacts and Environmental Interactions June 2018

Envir onmental Impact Assessment Report: Vol ume 3 Part A of 6 Irish Water

Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Contents 23. Cumulative Impacts and Environmental Interactions ...... 1 23.1 Introduction ...... 1 23.2 Methodology and Impact Assessment ...... 1 23.2.1 Stage 1 – Identification of ‘Other Developments’ ...... 2 23.2.2 Stage 2 – Shortlisting ...... 2 23.2.3 Stage 3 – Information Gathering ...... 8 23.2.4 Stage 4 – Assessment ...... 8 23.3 Summary of Cumulative Impacts ...... 20 23.4 Mitigation Measures ...... 20 23.5 Residual Impacts ...... 20 23.6 Environmental Interactions ...... 20 23.7 Difficulties Encountered in Compiling Required Information ...... 21 23.8 References ...... 27

32102902/EIAR/23 ii Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

23. Cumulative Impacts and Environmental Interactions

23.1 Introduction This Chapter considers and assesses the potential for cumulative impacts arising from the Greater Dublin Drainage Project (hereafter referred to as the Proposed Project) in association with other development, and considers the potential interactions between environmental aspects arising from the Proposed Project. The cumulative impacts of a development refer to the way in which an environmental resource may be subject to a particular type of impact from more than one proposed development. The impacts from multiple projects may overlap or act in combination at a particular location or upon a particular resource, thereby leading to more significant environmental impacts than if the impacts were considered in isolation. For example, two visually intrusive projects proposed within a sensitive landscape may lead to more significant landscape and visual impacts than just one of the projects considered in isolation. Directive 2014/52/EU of 16 April 2014 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (Environmental Impact Assessment Directive) requires that, ‘The description of the likely significant effects on the factors specified in Article 3(1) should [among other things] cover the … cumulative … effects of the project’. In addition to cumulative impacts, Article 3 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive requires that the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) should identify, describe and assess the interactions between the other environmental factors (human beings, fauna and flora, soil, water, air, climate, landscape, material assets and cultural heritage). An interaction of impacts can occur when two or more types of environmental impacts associated with a proposed development arise at a particular location or act upon an environmental resource. For example, a residential property may be subject to air quality and noise impacts, a village may experience temporary severance of local rights of way as well as increased construction vehicle movements on local roads, and a watercourse may be subject to alterations in flow regime, geomorphology and water quality, which would interact with the aquatic ecology of the watercourse. The scope of the proposed developments and development plan land allocations that have been considered as part of this cumulative assessment have been identified through a desk study involving general internet searches and, in particular, scrutiny of local planning authority websites. The developments were either registered in the planning system, are future Irish Water developments that client and project staff were aware of, or formed land allocations in Development Plans. Developments or land allocations, whose impacts could foreseeably overlap with the construction or operation of the Proposed Project or where construction impacts may be consecutive but cumulative, were included in the final list. The cut-off date for the developments considered was 15 March 2018. There are no prescriptive techniques used in the evaluation of the significance of cumulative impacts or the interaction of impacts. Professional judgement and consideration of standards, guidelines and environmental carrying capacities have been applied to determine whether in-combination impacts give rise to additional levels of significance. The European Commission and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines referenced below were considered.

23.2 Methodology and Impact Assessment The following guidelines and publications were considered in undertaking this assessment:

• Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements (EPA 2002) (and revised and draft guidelines (EPA 2015b; 2017));

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 1 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

• Advice Notes on Current Practice in the Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements (EPA 2003) (and revised advice notes (EPA 2015a)); and • Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impacts as well as Impact Interactions (European Commission 1999).

23.2.1 Stage 1 – Identification of ‘Other Developments’ The first step in determining cumulative impacts comprised the identification of a long list of ‘other developments’ which may have the potential to overlap with the Proposed Project based on available information. This involved a desk study of planning applications, development plan documents, relevant development frameworks and any other available sources to identify other developments which may have the potential to interact with the Proposed Project. A ‘tier’ (1 or 2) was assigned to the development to indicate the level of certainty associated with its implementation, as detailed in Table 23.1 below.

Table 23.1: Tier 1 and Tier 2 Classification for Other Developments

Tier 1 Under construction Decreasing level of detail likely to be available Permitted application(s) but not yet implemented

Submitted application(s) but not yet determined

Tier 2 Identified in the relevant Development Plan (and emerging Development Plans, with appropriate weight being given as they move closer to adoption) recognising that much information on any relevant proposals will be limited

Identified in other plans and programmes (as appropriate) which set the framework for future development consents/approvals, where such development is reasonably likely to come forward.

The long list was scrutinised to identify which of the other developments were within the ‘zone of influence’ of the Proposed Project. The ‘zone of influence’ for the purposes of this assessment was developments within 20km of the Proposed Project. This involved the determination of which environmental factors have the potential to lead to overlap. This determination was used to screen out other developments where no overlap with the Proposed Project was considered. This allowed a ‘short list’ of potentially applicable developments for further assessment to be derived.

23.2.2 Stage 2 – Shortlisting Inclusion or exclusion threshold criteria were applied to the shortlisted other developments to determine whether they had any potential to give rise to significant cumulative impacts with respect to the following:

• Temporal Scope – Is there any overlap and potential for interaction due to the construction, operation and decommissioning programmes of the ‘other development’? • Scale and Nature – Due to the scale and nature of the developments, are they likely to interact with the Proposed Project to result in a cumulative impact? Statutory definitions and Environmental Impact Assessment screening thresholds were considered in determining issues of scale. Professional judgement was used in applying these threshold criteria.

The identification and shortlisting process is documented in Table 23.2. The reasons for excluding any development from further consideration are recorded. Where other developments with the potential to give rise to significant cumulative effects were identified, these were taken forward to Stage 3.

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 2 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Table 23.2: Stage 1 and 2 Assessment – Identification and Shortlisting

‘Other Development’ Details Stage 1 Stage 2

ID Application Applicant for ‘Other Approximate Distance Status Tier Within Zone of Influence? Progress to Overlap in Temporal Scope? Scale and Nature of Development Likely Progress to Reference Development’ and from Proposed Stage 2? to Have a Significant Effect? Stage 3/4? Brief Description Development Infrastructure

1 F15A/0141 Fingleton White: Various. Pipeline crosses Permission granted in 1 Yes, generally north-south orientation Yes 10-month construction period expected but Yes, geographical overlap could result in Yes Aviation fuel pipeline the proposed orbital sewer October 2015. This decision but crossing to west of proposed timescales for commencement of development cumulative impacts if construction phases from Dublin Airport to route approximately 200m was appealed but granted WwTP have not been confirmed. coincided. Dublin Port west of the proposed permission in April 2016. Wastewater Treatment Plant (WwTP) site.

2 FW16A/0123 Garlandbrook Limited: Approximately 6km north- Permission granted by Fingal 1 No, due to distance between No Residential west of the proposed County Council (FCC) in April Proposed Project and this proposed development Abbotstown pumping 2017 development at its closest point consisting of 219 station and associated dwellings pipeline route

3 F16A/0542 ROXTIP Limited: Approximately 6km north of Permission granted by FCC 1 No, due to distance between No A residential proposed outfall pipeline in June 2017. An appeal was Proposed Project and this proposed development of 36 route (land based section) subsequently lodged in July development at its closest point dwellings and proposed outfall 2017 and is now under pipeline route (marine consideration by An Bord section) Pleanála (ABP).

4 F16A/0561 Hazel Rorke: Approximately 19km north Permission granted by FCC 1 No, due to distance between No An on-site wastewater of proposed outfall pipeline in May 2017 Proposed Project and this proposed treatment unit, route (land based section) development at its closest point percolation area and and proposed outfall associated site works pipeline route (marine section)

5 F15A/0609 Gannon Properties: Approx. 750m from the Planning permission granted 1 Yes Yes Likely, as development commenced construction Yes, Apartments and housing including new Yes Belcamp Housing south-east corner of the by ABP in June 2017 in 2017 and the Proposed Project is due to buildings and refurbishment of existing Development involving proposed WwTP commence in 2021. Unlikely to be significant Belcamp College buildings the redevelopment of overlap of operational impacts. Belcamp Hall to provide 34 apartments and development of a further 63 apartments and 166 houses and associated works

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 3 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

‘Other Development’ Details Stage 1 Stage 2

6 Dumping at Dublin Port Company: Dumping site is approx. Planning application 1 Yes. However, 9km from proposed Yes Unlikely; EPA permit only allows for dumping to No No Sea permit Capital Dredging 9km from proposed outfall submitted 25 Apr 2015, outfall pipeline route (marine occur up to March 2021. Proposed Project not S0024-01 Dublin Port – pipeline route (marine granted with conditions 7 Jul section), so distance likely too far for due to commence construction until 2021, so Alexandra Basin section) 2015. significant cumulative impact. overlap unlikely. Planning Redevelopment permission Project Application for Dumping at 29N.PA0034 Works include Sea permit submitted 13 Jul dredging of the Liffey 2015; permit granted 13 Sep Channel from East 2016. Link to Dublin Buoy over six-year period; dumping of dredged materials at entrance to Dublin Bay to west of Burford Bank.

7 F08A/1217/E1 IDA Ireland: Approximately 300m south Extension of duration of 1 Yes Yes Potentially; new planning permission to be sought Potentially during Construction Phase of the Yes (lapsed with Remediation of 1.5ha of the proposed WwTP permission granted until May with timeline unknown at present (works to last Proposed Project new planning of land in the 2017 (now lapsed with new eight months once commenced). permission to Clonshaugh/Belcamp planning permission to be be sought) area. sought)

8 F16A/0412 Joint Statutory Approx. 400m south of Planning permission granted 1 Yes Yes Potentially Potentially in Construction Phase Yes Receivers: proposed outfall pipeline July 2017 The Coast route (land based section) Development – Baldoyle Growth Area 1 (550 residential units (379 apartments and 171 houses))

9 29S.PA0043 National Paediatric Immediately adjacent to Planning permission granted 1 Yes Yes The Paediatric Outpatients and Urgent Care Currently insufficient details available to Yes Hospital Development western extent of proposed in April 2016 Centres at Connolly is planned to open on a enable assessment; ongoing liaison between Board: orbital sewer route phased basis from 2018. Proposed Project and hospital required Connolly Hospital throughout the Construction Phase. Development – Paediatric Outpatients and Urgent Care Centres

10 29S.PA0043 Children’s Hospital To be located on a shared Planning permission granted 1 No, due to distance between No Dublin campus with St. James’s in April 2016 Proposed Project and this proposed Hospital, approximately development at its closest point 8km south of the proposed orbital sewer route

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 4 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

‘Other Development’ Details Stage 1 Stage 2

11 02.VA0017 EirGrid: Approximately 20km north- Planning permission granted 1 No, due to distance between the No North South 400kV west at its closest in December 2016 proposed projects at their closest Interconnector point

12 FW17A/0083 Irish Water: The eastern end of the Planning permission granted 1 Yes Yes Unlikely to be significant overlap in Proposed Project to commence (pending Yes Blanchardstown BRDS in Blanchardstown in July 2017 Construction Phase, as BRDS due to be planning permission) in 2021, so potential for Regional Drainage is planned to link into the completed by the end of 2021 consecutive construction impacts Scheme (BRDS) for proposed orbital sewer development in the route at its western end Tolka River Valley Park

13 F14A/0132 Shannon Homes Adjacent to north of Permission granted 2015, 1 Yes Yes Potential for cumulative impact during Potentially in Construction Phase Yes (Dublin) Limited: proposed orbital sewer application for amendments Construction Phase Drumnigh Estate route submitted 2016, and granted comprising 270 new in February 2017 houses, car parking, vehicular and pedestrian access and a new sewage pumping station

14 F04A/1755/E1 daa (formerly Dublin Approximately 1.9km north In March 2017, the decision 1 Yes – proposed orbital sewer route Yes Unlikely to be significant overlap in construction Yes, could be combined effects if Yes Airport Authority Plc): of proposed orbital sewer to grant extension of passes to the south of Dublin Airport activities. This new runway is due to be completed construction periods overlap Construction on airport route permission was made by in 2020-2021. lands of a runway, FCC. Works on the North 3,110m in length and Runway began in Q4 2016 75m in width. with expected completion date in 2020-2021

15 N/A Malahide Road R107 Malahide Road No current implementation 2 Yes, road improvement works to Yes Not currently known Yes, could be combined effects if No Realignment Scheme junction is approximately date R132 Swords Road from which construction periods overlap. No planning or Realignment of the 1.4km to east of proposed access to proposed WwTP detailed design information available at this R107 Malahide Road, WwTP construction access construction site will be made. stage to allow further assessment and the East-West point along R132 Swords Improvements also planned to R107 identify potential for cumulative impacts. Distributor Road from Road Malahide Road which will carry some Balgriffin to Proposed Project construction traffic. Clonshaugh Road and the upgrade of the N32 National Primary Road.

16 N/A Transport Crosses proposed orbital Currently part of long-term 2 Yes, liaison was undertaken with Yes Likely, as construction is likely to take place from Potential for cumulative impacts if No Infrastructure Ireland: sewer route to south of transport strategy. regard to Metro Link and was 2021 with an estimated completion date in construction phases coincided; however, no Metro Link airport accounted for during development of 2026/2027. planning permissions granted. There is Proposed Project insufficient information available to allow further assessment and identify potential for cumulative impacts.

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 5 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

‘Other Development’ Details Stage 1 Stage 2

17 F15A/0074 Helsingor Limited: Approx. 650m to south- Currently under construction; 1 Yes Yes Potentially during Construction Phase of the Potential cumulative impacts if overlap in Yes and Red Arches, The east of proposed application for modifications Proposed Project construction phases F03A/1162 Coast Development, Abbotstown pumping granted in 2015 Baldoyle – 205 station residential units

18 N/A Irish Water: Ringsend WwTP and Planning application to be 1 Yes Yes Unlikely to be overlap in construction activities. Potential significant cumulative impacts in Yes Ringsend WwTP proposed WwTP are lodged in 2018 Concurrent operational phases. terms of marine discharges Upgrade Project geographically approximately 8.5km apart

19 PL06F.PA0048 Padraig Thornton Approximately 2km north of Planning permission granted 1 Yes Yes Unlikely to be overlap in construction activities. No due to distance between the two projects No Waste Disposal proposed temporary with conditions in May 2017. Concurrent operational phases. Limited: construction compound No. Materials Processing 2 near Cappoge and Transfer Facility at Millennium Business Park, Cappagh Road

20 VA0019 EirGrid Plc.: Approximately 15km south Planning permission granted 1 No, due to distance between No West Dublin of the proposed with conditions in June 2016 Proposed Project and this other substation and Abbotstown pumping development at its closest point associated works in station the Grange Castle area

21 F07A/0947 Sherman Oaks Proposed outfall pipeline Planning has been granted 1 Yes Yes Yes, assuming construction of housing Yes, particularly during Construction Phase Yes Limited: route (land based section) by FCC. development continues to coincide with of the Proposed Project Station Manor, passes immediately to the Construction commenced in construction of Proposed Project Portmarnock Housing south of the housing 2017 on Phase 1 of the Development development development comprised of 684 residential units

22 F06A/1463/E1 daa (formerly Dublin Within 1km north of the Currently under construction, 1 Yes – proposed orbital sewer route Yes Unlikely to be significant overlap in construction No No Airport Authority Plc): proposed orbital sewer to be completed in 2020 passes to the south of Dublin Airport activities. This project is due to be completed in A general route mid-2020 refurbishment of the fuel storage facility including extension of site and increase in storage capacity

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 6 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

‘Other Development’ Details Stage 1 Stage 2

23 N/A Fingal County Council: Proposed outfall pipeline Currently under public 1 Yes Yes Not currently known Potential for cumulative impacts if Yes Sutton to Malahide route (marine section) consultation. Intended to be construction phases coincided; however, Greenway – crossed by proposed submitted to ABP for planning proposed route has not been finalised, no pedestrian and cycle greenway approval in 2018 planning application lodged. route along the Fingal Coast

24 N/A Dublin Port Company: Proposed orbital sewer Currently forming part of the 2 Yes Yes Unlikely to be significant overlap in Proposed Project to commence (pending No 44 hectares of lands route runs just south of the Dublin Port Masterplan Construction Phase with Dublin Inland Port planning permission) in 2021 so potential for near Dublin Airport proposed Dublin Inland Review which went out for due to be completed by 2021. consecutive construction impacts which have been Port sites, with the route public consultation in 2017. acquired in order to running along the southern The consultation paper lists develop Dublin Inland edge in parts the development of the Inland Port to facilitate the Port to take place during the relocation of non-core period of 2017 to 2021. activities from the port

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 7 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

23.2.3 Stage 3 – Information Gathering For the shortlisted developments, sufficiently detailed information was compiled to inform the Stage 4 assessment. This included information such as:

• Proposed design and location; • Proposed programme of construction, operation and decommissioning; and • Environmental assessments that set out baseline data and effects arising from the other development. The relevant information was sourced from the websites of relevant local planning authorities and through general internet searches and project team knowledge. Figure 23.1 Developments Considered during Detailed Cumulative Impacts Assessment shows the locations of each of the developments taken forward for cumulative impact assessment.

23.2.4 Stage 4 – Assessment The cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project with the ‘other development’ were assessed to a level of detail commensurate with the information that was available at the time of assessment. Where information regarding proposed developments was limited, these gaps were acknowledged within the assessment and the associated uncertainty in these cases is documented. It is acknowledged that certain assessments, such as transport and associated operational assessments for vehicular emissions (including air and noise), are inherently cumulative assessments. This is because they have incorporated modelled traffic data growth for future traffic flows. As these assessments are comprehensive, no additional cumulative assessment of these topics has been undertaken.

The significance criteria used to assess likely cumulative impacts considered the capacity of environmental resources and receptors to accommodate changes that are likely to occur. These include:

• The duration of impact, i.e. would it be temporary or permanent; • The extent of impact, e.g. its geographical area; • The type of impact, e.g. whether additive (i.e. the loss of two pieces of woodland of 1ha, resulting in 2ha cumulative woodland loss) or synergistic (i.e. two discharges combine to have an effect on a species not affected by discharges in isolation); • The frequency of the impact; • The ‘value’ and resilience of the receptor affected; and • The likely success of mitigation. The results of the assessment are documented in Table 23.3.

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 8 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Table 23.3: Stage 3 and 4 Assessment – Information Gathering and Assessment

ID Tier Application Applicant for ‘Other Assessment of Cumulative Effect with Proposed Project Proposed Mitigation Residual Cumulative Effect Reference Development’ and Brief Description

1 Tier 1 – F15A/0141 Fingleton White: The Environmental Impact Statement for a Proposed Aviation Fuel Pipeline Management of the crossing of the fuel pipeline and proposed orbital sewer Mitigation would be effective in avoiding or reducing impacts permission Aviation fuel pipeline from from Dublin Port to Dublin Airport (Fehily Timoney & Company 2015) was route will require liaison between the Proposed Project and aviation fuel pipeline during the Construction Phase as detailed in this EIAR. Some granted Dublin Airport to Dublin Port; reviewed for possible cumulative impacts. Due to temporary nature of pipeline project teams. In particular, the project teams will ensure that the proposed cumulative impacts from traffic may be expected during the pipeline route crosses the construction, potential impacts would be short-term. There will be potential orbital sewer route works crossing Clonshaugh Road do not coincide with the Construction Phase, but these are already accounted for in proposed orbital sewer route negative cumulative impacts with Proposed Project if timescales for aviation fuel pipeline works at this location. the growth factors built into the traffic models and are not approx. 200m west of Construction Phase overlap. Apart from this, mitigation measures already included in this EIAR are considered significant. proposed WwTP site Proposed Project Construction Phase considered appropriate and sufficient to avoid, reduce or mitigate cumulative • Population and human health: temporary cumulative impacts from impacts: traffic, noise, dust and combustion-related emissions. These will • Adherence to Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) only potentially be significant in the event that the construction and implementation of effective surface water management works overlap or occur consecutively in that area; procedures and watercourse crossing methodologies; • Hydrology, hydrogeology and aquatic biodiversity: potential • Adherence to traffic management plan; and temporary increase in suspended sediment loaded surface runoff, only potentially significant if construction phases overlap or are • Noise monitoring and use of acoustic screens for noisy operations consecutive in the crossing area; (e.g. rock breaking) where required. • Aquatic biodiversity: additional crossings of the Cuckoo Stream and Mayne River. Unlikely to be significant unless construction phases overlap or are consecutive; • Terrestrial biodiversity: potential for cumulative effects of noise and visual disturbance on protected species where this project intersects the Proposed Project. Estimated duration of construction of the aviation fuel pipeline project is less than one year, and much less at the points of intersection with the Proposed Project. Protected species likely to be affected are common farmland bird species. No high value protected species located at the points of intersection. Cumulative effects of consecutive or simultaneous construction do not significantly increase the duration of the potential noise and visual disturbance at these locations. Hedgerow and grassland habitat will be lost as a result of both projects, and cumulatively, the amount of habitat which will be lost will increase. The cumulative loss does not however increase the magnitude of effect of the resulting hedgerow and grassland habitat loss. No significant cumulative habitat loss, noise and visual disturbance or displacement effects are predicted. • Landscape and visual: potential for temporary in-combination visual effects to occur if the construction periods coincide. Such effects are likely to be most noticeable for receptors along Clonshaugh Road where the aviation fuel pipeline will be laid and from where the most noticeable visual effects from the proposed WwTP will be experienced. Due to the temporary and transient nature of construction stage effects, particularly from the aviation fuel pipeline, these effects will not be significant; • Traffic: increase in traffic volume which could affect nearby R139 Road/Clonshaugh Road roundabout, which is already above capacity. However, comparably small volumes of additional traffic expected to be generated by pipeline construction, and this EIAR already allows for increase in traffic as part of growth predictions which would account for this. Therefore, cumulative impacts are not predicted to be significant; • Air quality, odour and climate: temporary increase in emissions of dust and construction activity related combustion emissions to air in the event that construction phases overlap. Potentially impacted receptors are identified as R18, R19, R20, R21, R22, R23 and R24; • Noise and vibration: increase in noise and vibration related impacts and associated nuisance. There is potential for both projects to interact along the Clonshaugh Road in the unlikely event of the proposed orbital sewer route construction works occurring at the same time as the aviation fuel pipeline works at this location. The

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 9 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

ID Tier Application Applicant for ‘Other Assessment of Cumulative Effect with Proposed Project Proposed Mitigation Residual Cumulative Effect Reference Development’ and Brief Description potential cumulative noise impact upon the nearest noise sensitive receptors (NSRs) (R19 and R20) is considered additive and could result in a Temporary (two-days maximum) Significant impact at these locations. The noise emissions associated with the construction works at the proposed WwTP site will not be of sufficient magnitude to result in an additive cumulative impact with the aviation fuel pipeline project; • Waste: potential increase in availability of surplus soils within the area in excess of volumes required by other construction projects, leading to greater volumes requiring disposal. Robust waste management plans will be required to ensure the potential impact is not significant; and • Material assets: management of the crossing between fuel pipeline and proposed orbital sewer route will be required.

5 Tier 1 – F15A/0609 Gannon Properties: The Environmental Impact Statement for the Lands at Belcamp (Downey Mitigation measures already included in this EIAR are considered appropriate Mitigation would be effective in avoiding or reducing impacts permission Belcamp Housing Planning 2016) was reviewed for possible cumulative impacts. Belcamp and sufficient to avoid, reduce or mitigate cumulative impacts: during Construction Phase as detailed in this EIAR. Some granted Development involving the Housing Development located approx. 750m to south-east of the proposed • Adherence to CEMP and implementation of effective surface water cumulative impacts from traffic may be expected during the management procedures; redevelopment of Belcamp WwTP. Access to housing development will be from the R107 Malahide Road, Operational Phase but are already accounted for in the • Adherence to traffic management plan; and Hall to provide 34 apartments although this will be north of main identified pinch point at the junction with growth factors built into the traffic models and are not and development of a further R139 Road. • Noise monitoring and use of acoustic screens for noisy operations considered significant. (e.g. rock breaking) where required. 63 apartments and 166 houses Proposed Project Construction Phase

and associated works • Population and human health: cumulative impacts from traffic, noise, combustion emissions; • Hydrology, hydrogeology and aquatic biodiversity: if there is overlap between housing development and Proposed Project construction, the combined area of exposed ground could lead to increased risk of impacts to surface water (Mayne River) from suspended solids in runoff. Unlikely to be significant unless construction phases overlap or are consecutive; • Terrestrial biodiversity: protected species are not predicted to be displaced from the zone of influence of the Proposed Project into the zone of influence of the Belcamp Housing Development. Hedgerow and grassland habitat will be lost as a result of both projects, and cumulatively, the amount of habitat which will be lost will increase. The cumulative loss does not however increase the magnitude of effect of the resulting hedgerow and grassland habitat loss. No significant cumulative habitat loss, noise and visual disturbance or displacement effects are predicted; • Landscape and visual: potential for temporary/short-term in- combination visual effects to occur if the construction periods coincide. Due to mature intervening treelines and hedgerows, there is a relatively low degree of intervisibility between these sites and cumulative construction stage effects are not considered to be significant; • Traffic: increase in traffic volume which could affect surrounding roads, including the junction of R139 Road/R107 Malahide Road, which is already above capacity (note that this EIAR already allows for increase in traffic as part of growth predictions); • Air quality, odour and climate: increase in emissions of combustion gases from construction plant and vehicles. Unlikely to be significant unless construction phases overlap or are consecutive; • Noise and vibration: the nearest NSRs that could potentially be impacted as a result of concurrent construction activities from both projects are NSR R21, NSR R22 and NSR R26. However, given the extended distances between these NSR locations and the Belcamp Hosing Development project, and also the existing baseline noise environment at these NSR locations, it is considered that there is no potential for an additive cumulative noise impact between these two projects; and • Waste: potential increase in availability of surplus excavation

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 10 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

ID Tier Application Applicant for ‘Other Assessment of Cumulative Effect with Proposed Project Proposed Mitigation Residual Cumulative Effect Reference Development’ and Brief Description materials in the area in excess of volumes required by other construction projects, leading to greater volumes requiring disposal. Robust waste management plans will be required to ensure the potential impact is not significant. Proposed Project Operational Phase • The proposed housing development is relatively close to the proposed WwTP, which may result in some increases from Operational Phase traffic. However, the impact should not be significant as neither impact assessment highlighted any significant impacts; • Landscape and visual: cumulative increase in the intensity of built development in this peri-urban landscape setting. However, this is in keeping with this dynamic urban fringe; and • The increased wastewater treatment capacity once the Proposed Project is operational will ensure that there will be no adverse cumulative impacts to wastewater systems caused by the increased demand from proposed new housing developments and population growth in the area.

7 Tier 1 – F08A/1217/E1 IDA Ireland: The Environmental Impact Statement (O’Laoire Russell Associates with RPS Mitigation measures already included in this EIAR are considered appropriate Mitigation would be effective in avoiding or reducing impacts permission (now lapsed, Remediation of 1.5ha of land 2008) was reviewed for possible cumulative impacts. The area of land subject and sufficient to avoid, reduce or mitigate most cumulative impacts: during Construction Phase as detailed in this EIAR. Some was but new Clonshagh, Belcamp – to proposed remediation is located approx. 300m to the south of the proposed • Adherence to CEMP and implementation of effective dust, noise and cumulative impacts from traffic may be expected but are vibration control and surface water management procedures; extended planning excavation and off-site WwTP site, the main access road for which will be located approx. 650m to already accounted for in the growth factors built into the traffic • Adherence to traffic management plan; and to May permission to disposal of historically the east of the existing Belcamp waste body. models and are not considered significant. 2017; be sought) deposited waste and Proposed Project Construction Phase • Noise monitoring and use of acoustic screens for noisy operations (e.g. rock breaking) where required. however, restoration of the area. A • Traffic and transport: considered the most significant area of as this temporary site compound will potential cumulative impact. The remediation project would involve the movement of up to 180 Heavy Goods Vehicles per day, similar permission be constructed. to the proposed WwTP, accessing the site from the R132 Road. has This would likely exacerbate the predicted impacts on surrounding lapsed, a roads, some of which are already above capacity (note that this new EIAR already allows for increase in traffic as part of growth planning predictions); permission • Population and human health: cumulative impacts from traffic, noise and vibration, dust and construction activity combustion emissions will be (see below). Unlikely to be significant unless construction phases sought by overlap or are consecutive; IDA • Hydrology, hydrogeology and aquatic biodiversity: potential impacts Ireland associated with concurrent exposed ground (leading to risk of impacts to surface water (Mayne River) from suspended solids in runoff), although both projects include adequate mitigation measures; • Terrestrial biodiversity: protected species are not predicted to be displaced from the zone of influence of the Proposed Project into the zone of influence of the Clonshagh Belcamp remediation project. No additional significant cumulative noise and visual disturbance or displacement effects are predicted; • Landscape and visual: potential for temporary/short-term in- combination visual effects to occur if the construction period for the proposed WwTP coincides with the rehabilitation period for the Belcamp waste body. There is considerable screening to the south of the proposed WwTP site and such cumulative effects and not considered to be significant; • Air quality, odour and climate: temporary increase in emissions to air of construction activity combustion gases from concurrent activities. Potentially impacted receptors during construction are identified as R21 and R22; • Noise and vibration: the nearest NSRs that could potentially be impacted as a result of concurrent construction activities from both projects are NSRs R18, R19, R20, R21, R22 and R23. However,

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 11 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

ID Tier Application Applicant for ‘Other Assessment of Cumulative Effect with Proposed Project Proposed Mitigation Residual Cumulative Effect Reference Development’ and Brief Description given the proposed locations of the two project sites, the only location where an additive cumulative impact could be experienced is NSR R23. The significance of the noise levels predicted at NSR R23 as a result of construction activities at the proposed WwTP site are rated as Imperceptible, and consequently, the cumulative noise impact between these two projects is also considered Imperceptible; • Waste: remediation project comprises removal for subsequent off- site treatment of current wastes, with retention and reuse of inert materials. Therefore, there is considered little potential for negative cumulative impact. May actually be positive impact if surplus material from the Proposed Project can be used in restoration of remediated site; and • Material assets: concurrent activities would need to take account of the presence of associated infrastructure. Proposed Project Operational Phase • Remediation project has no Operational Phase, and therefore no cumulative impacts.

8 Tier 1 – F16A/0412 Joint Statutory Receivers: The Environmental Impact Statement for Growth Area 1, Baldoyle-Stapolin, Mitigation measures already included in this EIAR are considered appropriate Mitigation would be effective in avoiding or reducing impacts permission The Coast Development – Baldoyle, Dublin 13 (RPS 2016) was reviewed for possible cumulative impacts and sufficient to avoid, reduce or mitigate cumulative impacts: during Construction Phase as detailed in this EIAR. Some granted Baldoyle, Growth Area 1 with the Proposed Project. Potential negative cumulative impacts with the • Adherence to CEMP and implementation of effective surface water cumulative impacts from traffic may be expected during the Proposed Project have been identified as follows. management procedures; Construction Phase, but these are already accounted for in Construction of 550 residential • Adherence to traffic management plan; and the growth factors built into the traffic models and are not units, a village centre and Proposed Project Construction Phase • Noise monitoring and use of acoustic screens for construction of • Population and human health: cumulative impacts from traffic, noise considered significant. surface water wetlands launch shafts and other noisy operations (e.g. rock breaking) where and vibration and combustion gases; required. • Hydrology, hydrogeology and aquatic biodiversity: potential for larger area of exposed ground, increasing risk of impacts on Mayne River from suspended solids in surface runoff. Unlikely to be significant unless construction phases overlap or are consecutive; • Terrestrial biodiversity: protected species are not predicted to be displaced from the zone of influence of the Proposed Project into the zone of influence of the housing development project. No additional significant cumulative noise and visual disturbance or displacement effects are predicted; • Landscape and visual: potential for temporary in-combination visual effects to occur if the construction period for the proposed outfall pipeline route (land based and marine sections) coincides with the construction of this development. Due to the temporary nature of such cumulative effects, these will not be significant; • Traffic: increase in traffic volume which could affect nearby R106 Coast Road which is already above capacity; however, this EIAR already allows for increase in traffic as part of growth predictions which would at least partially account for this already; • Air quality, odour and climate: temporary increase in emissions to air of construction activity combustion gases if overlap in construction activities in the area. Potentially impacted receptors are identified as R29, R30, R31, R32, R47 and R48; and • Noise and vibration: the nearest NSRs that could potentially be impacted as a result of concurrent construction activities from both projects are NSR R32, NSR R33 and NSR R34. However, given the extended distances between these NSR locations and the Coast Development project, and the existing baseline noise environment at these NSR locations, it is considered that there is no potential for an additive cumulative noise impact between these two projects. Proposed Project Operational Phase • The increased wastewater treatment capacity once the Proposed Project is operational will ensure that there will be no adverse cumulative impacts to wastewater systems caused by the increased demand from proposed new housing developments and population

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 12 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

9 Tier 1 – 29S.PA0043 National Paediatric Hospital The Environmental Impact Statement for the National Paediatric Hospital Management of the construction works at Connolly Hospital will require liaison Mitigation would be effective in avoiding or reducing impacts permission Development Board: Project (Bilfinger and GVA 2015) was reviewed for possible cumulative between the Proposed Project, Connolly Hospital and the Paediatric Outpatients during Construction Phase as detailed in this EIAR. Some granted Connolly Hospital impacts with the Proposed Project. Potential negative cumulative impacts with and Urgent Care Centre project teams. In particular, the project teams will cumulative impacts from traffic may be expected during the Development – Paediatric the Proposed Project have been identified as follows. ensure that the noisiest elements of each project do not occur concurrently and Construction Phase, but these are already accounted for in Outpatients and Urgent Care Proposed Project Construction Phase that launch shaft construction works are carried out at an agreed time with the growth factors built into the traffic models and are not Centres • Population and human health: cumulative impacts from traffic, noise Connolly Hospital management. considered significant. and vibration and combustion gases; Mitigation measures already included in this EIAR are considered appropriate • Hydrology, hydrogeology and aquatic biodiversity: potential for and sufficient to avoid, reduce or mitigate cumulative impacts: larger area of exposed ground, increasing risk of impacts on the • Adherence to CEMP and implementation of effective surface water Tolka River from suspended solids in surface runoff; management procedures; • Landscape and visual: potential for temporary in-combination visual • Adherence to traffic management plan; and effects to occur if the construction period for the proposed Abbotstown pumping station and proposed orbital sewer route • Noise monitoring and use of acoustic screens for construction of coincides with the construction of this development. Due to the launch shafts and other noisy operations (e.g. rock breaking) where temporary nature of such cumulative effects, these will not be required. significant; • Terrestrial biodiversity: potential for cumulative effects from habitat loss and noise and visual disturbance on protected species where this project abuts the Proposed Project. Cumulative effects of consecutive or simultaneous construction do not significantly increase the duration of the potential noise and visual disturbance at these locations. Woodland and grassland habitat will be lost as a result of both projects, and cumulatively, the amount of habitat which will be lost will increase. The cumulative loss does not however increase the magnitude of effect of the resulting habitat loss. No additional significant cumulative habitat loss, noise and visual disturbance or displacement effects are predicted; • Traffic: increase in traffic volume which could affect nearby R843 Snugborough Road which is already above capacity; however, this EIAR already allows for increase in traffic as part of growth predictions which would at least partially account for this; • Air quality, odour and climate: temporary increase in potential emissions to air of construction activity combustion gases which could result in a temporary significant impact if not properly mitigated. Potentially impacted receptors are identified as R1, R2 and R3; and • Noise and vibration: there is potential for both projects to interact as a result of concurrent construction activities at Connolly Hospital during daytime hours only, as there will be no construction activity during night-time hours for the Paediatric Outpatients and Urgent Care Centre project. The noise emissions from the TBM works and, in particular, from the launch shaft construction works in conjunction with the Paediatric Outpatients and Urgent Care Centre project construction works is considered additive and could result in a Temporary Significant impact at the southern face of the western wing at Connolly Hospital. Proposed Project Operational Phase • The increased wastewater treatment capacity once the Proposed Project is operational will ensure that there will be no adverse cumulative impacts to wastewater systems caused by the increased demand from proposed new housing developments and population growth in the area; and • Landscape and visual: minor increase in the intensity of built development in this hospital/parkland landscape.

12 Tier 1 – FW17A/0083 Irish Water: The Environmental Impact Statement for the BRDS 9C Sewer Duplication and Mitigation measures already included in this EIAR are considered appropriate Mitigation would be effective in avoiding or reducing impacts permission Blanchardstown Regional Storage Scheme, incorporating Tolka Valley Park Pumping Station (Byrne and sufficient to avoid, reduce or mitigate cumulative impacts: during Construction Phase as detailed in this EIAR. granted Drainage Scheme (BRDS) for Looby and ARUP 2017) was reviewed for possible cumulative impacts with • Adherence to Construction CEMP and implementation of effective

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 13 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

ID Tier Application Applicant for ‘Other Assessment of Cumulative Effect with Proposed Project Proposed Mitigation Residual Cumulative Effect Reference Development’ and Brief Description development in the Tolka River the Proposed Project. Potential negative cumulative impacts are most likely to surface water management procedures; Valley Park occur with the Proposed Project where there is construction being completed • Adherence to traffic management plan; and at the eastern end of the BRDS, leading into construction beginning at the • Noise monitoring and use of acoustic screens for noisy operations (e.g. rock breaking) where required. western end of the proposed orbital sewer route. Potential negative cumulative impacts with Proposed Project are as follows. Proposed Project Construction Phase • Population and human health: cumulative impacts from traffic, noise and vibration and combustion gases; • Landscape and visual: potential for temporary in-combination visual effects to occur if the construction period for the proposed Abbotstown pumping station and western end of the proposed orbital sewer route coincides with the construction of the BRDS. Due to the temporary nature of such cumulative effects, these will not be significant; • Terrestrial biodiversity: potential for cumulative effects from habitat loss and noise and visual disturbance on protected species where this project abuts the Proposed Project. Two key ecological features impacted by the BRDS (otter and kingfisher) are not adversely affected by the Proposed Project. Cumulative effects not to arise in relation to those features. Consecutive or simultaneous construction does not significantly increase the duration of the potential noise and visual disturbance at these locations. Low value habitats will be lost as a result of the BRDS project, and cumulatively, the amount of habitat which will be lost will increase. The cumulative loss does not however increase the magnitude of effect of the resulting habitat loss. No additional significant cumulative habitat loss, noise and visual disturbance or displacement effects are predicted; • Traffic: increase in traffic volume which could affect nearby R843 Snugborough Road which is already above capacity; however, this EIAR already allows for increase in traffic as part of growth predictions which would at least partially account for this already; • Air quality, odour and climate: potential temporary increase in emissions to air of construction activity combustion gases from overlapping or concurrent construction activities. Potentially impacted receptors are identified as R1, R2 and R3; • Noise and vibration: the nearest NSRs that could potentially be impacted as a result of concurrent construction activities from both projects is Connolly Hospital. However, given the extended distances between Connolly Hospital and the BRDS development project, and the existing baseline noise environment at Connolly Hospital, it is considered that there is no potential for an additive cumulative noise impact between these two projects at the Hospital. The combined effects of the BRDS project with the Proposed Project are not considered to have any greater effect on nearby NSRs than that outlined in Chapter 15 of this EIAR, and therefore, no significant cumulative effect is predicted; and • Hydrology, hydrogeology and aquatic biodiversity: potential for larger area of exposed ground at the overlapping ends of the two projects, should there be any overlap in construction works in that area, which may affect the Tolka River. Proposed Project Operational Phase • No significant cumulative impacts.

13 Tier 1 – F14A/0132 Shannon Homes (Dublin) Southern extent of development site includes wayleave for proposed orbital Mitigation measures already included in this EIAR are considered appropriate Mitigation would be effective in avoiding or reducing impacts permission Limited: sewer route. Timescales for construction of the housing development have not and sufficient to avoid, reduce or mitigate cumulative impacts: during Construction Phase as detailed in this EIAR. Some granted Drumnigh Housing been confirmed but could overlap with construction of the proposed orbital • Adherence to CEMP and implementation of effective surface water cumulative impacts from traffic may be expected during the management procedures; Development sewer route. Potential negative cumulative impacts with Proposed Project are Construction Phase, but these are already accounted for in as follows. • Adherence to traffic management plan; and the growth factors built into the traffic models and are not Housing development • Noise monitoring and use of acoustic screens for construction of considered significant. immediately to the north of the Proposed Project Construction Phase

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 14 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

ID Tier Application Applicant for ‘Other Assessment of Cumulative Effect with Proposed Project Proposed Mitigation Residual Cumulative Effect Reference Development’ and Brief Description proposed orbital sewer route • Population and human health: cumulative impacts from traffic, launch shafts and other noisy operations (e.g. rock breaking) where Residual negative impact during Operational Phase noise, vibration, dust and emissions of combustion gases; required. associated with sterilisation of wayleave for future • Hydrology and hydrogeology: dependent upon works to proposed development, but not considered significant because affected open space area, there could be an increase of exposed ground leading to increase in suspended sediment loaded surface runoff. area is identified as open space without development. Unlikely to be significant unless construction phases overlap or are consecutive; • Terrestrial biodiversity: potential for cumulative effects from habitat loss and noise and visual disturbance on protected species where this project intersects the Proposed Project. Cumulative effects of consecutive or simultaneous construction do not significantly increase the duration of the potential noise and visual disturbance. Hedgerow and grassland habitat will be lost as a result of both projects, and cumulatively, the amount of habitat which will be lost will increase. The cumulative loss does not however increase the magnitude of effect of the resulting habitat loss. No additional significant cumulative habitat loss, noise and visual disturbance or displacement effects are predicted; • Landscape and visual: potential for temporary in-combination visual effects to occur if the construction period for the proposed orbital sewer route coincides with the construction of this housing development. Due to the temporary and transient nature of such cumulative effects, these will not be significant; • Traffic: increase in traffic volume which could affect nearby road junction of the R123 Moyne Road/R106 Coast Road, which is already above capacity; however, this EIAR already allows for increase in traffic as part of growth predictions which would at least partially account for this already; • Air quality, odour and climate: potential temporary increase in emissions of dust and emissions to air of construction activity combustion gases should there be an overlap in the construction phase in that location; • Noise and vibration: there is potential for both projects to interact in the event of the proposed orbital sewer route construction works occurring at the same time as the Drumnigh Housing Development construction works. The potential cumulative noise impact upon the nearest NSRs (R31 and R32) is considered additive and could result in a Temporary (three weeks maximum) Moderate impact at these locations; • Waste: potential increase in availability of surplus soils within the area in excess of volumes required by other construction projects, leading to greater volumes requiring disposal. Robust waste management plans will be required to ensure the potential impact is not significant; and • Material assets: depending on timing of proposed orbital sewer route and proposed Abbotstown pumping station construction, construction activities would need to take account of the presence of the proposed orbital sewer route and proposed Abbotstown pumping station and infrastructure associated with it. Proposed Project Operational Phase • Population and human health: sterilisation of wayleave; however, no significant impact considered likely because affected area is identified as open space without development; and • The increased wastewater treatment capacity once the Proposed Project is operational will ensure that there will be no adverse cumulative impacts to wastewater systems caused by the increased demand from proposed new housing developments and population growth in the area.

14 Tier 1 – F04A/1755/E1 daa (formerly Dublin Airport The Environmental Impact Statement for the Dublin Airport Northern Parallel Mitigation measures already included in this EIAR are considered appropriate Mitigation would be effective in avoiding or reducing impacts under Authority Plc): Runway (Mouchel Parkman 2004), which was drafted for the original planning and sufficient to avoid, reduce or mitigate cumulative impacts: during Construction Phase as detailed in this EIAR. Some

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 15 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

ID Tier Application Applicant for ‘Other Assessment of Cumulative Effect with Proposed Project Proposed Mitigation Residual Cumulative Effect Reference Development’ and Brief Description constructio Construction on airport lands application, was reviewed for possible cumulative impacts with the Proposed • Adherence to CEMP and implementation of effective surface water cumulative impacts from traffic may be expected during the management procedures; n of a runway, 3,110m in length Project. Potential negative cumulative impacts with Proposed Project are as Construction Phase, but these are already accounted for in • Adherence to traffic management plan; and and 75m in width. follows. the growth factors built into the traffic models and are not • Noise monitoring and use of acoustic screens for construction of considered significant. Proposed Project Construction Phase launch shafts and other noisy operations (e.g. rock breaking) where • Population and human health: cumulative impacts from traffic, required. noise, vibration, dust and emissions of combustion gases; • Terrestrial biodiversity: protected species are not predicted to be displaced from the zone of influence of the Proposed Project into the zone of influence of the North Runway project. No additional significant cumulative noise and visual disturbance or displacement effects are predicted. The runway project’s Environmental Impact Statement states that 29km of hedgerows are to be removed for the North Runway project. The cumulative loss of approx. 29km of hedgerow and further removal of <1.5km of hedgerow associated with the Proposed Project does not increase the magnitude of effect of the resulting cumulative habitat loss. No additional significant cumulative habitat loss, noise and visual disturbance or displacement effects are predicted; • Aquatic biodiversity: potential for cumulative impacts to the Cuckoo Stream from operational impacts such as surface water drainage and discharges; however, this will be subject to a discharge licence consent procedure; • Traffic: possible increase in traffic volumes around the airport; • Air quality, odour and climate: temporary increase in emissions to air of construction activity combustion gases in the event of overlap of construction phases. However, site of proposed northern runway at opposite side of the airport from the Proposed Project, meaning that cumulative impacts are unlikely to be significant. Potentially impacted receptors are identified as R41, R42, R43, R14, R15, R16 and R17; and • Noise and vibration: slight increase in noise and vibration around the airport should construction for the Proposed Project (south of the airport) coincide with runway construction. Possible cumulative noise impact related to aircraft should operations on the new runway commence during the Proposed Project’s Construction Phase. Proposed Project Operational Phase • No significant cumulative impacts.

17 Tier 1 – F15A/0074 and Helsingor Limited: Potential negative cumulative impacts with Proposed Project are as follows. Mitigation measures already included in this EIAR are considered appropriate Mitigation would be effective in avoiding or reducing impacts under F03A/1162 Red Arches Housing Proposed Project Construction Phase and sufficient to avoid, reduce or mitigate cumulative impacts: during Construction Phase as detailed in EIAR. Some constructio Development, The Coast • Population and human health: cumulative impacts from traffic; • Adherence to CEMP and implementation of effective surface water cumulative impacts from traffic may be expected during the n; management procedures; Construction Phase, but these are already accounted for in Construction of 205 residential • Terrestrial biodiversity: protected species are not predicted to be application displaced from the zone of influence of the Proposed Project into • Adherence to traffic management plan; and the growth factors built into the traffic models and are not units for the zone of influence of the housing development project. No • Noise monitoring and use of acoustic screens for noisy operations considered significant. modificatio additional significant cumulative noise and visual disturbance or (e.g. rock breaking) where required. displacement effects are predicted; ns granted • Landscape and visual: potential for temporary in-combination visual 2015 effects to occur if the construction period for the proposed outfall pipeline route (land based and marine sections) coincides with the construction of this development. Due to the temporary nature of such cumulative effects, these will not be significant; • Traffic: increase in traffic volume which could affect nearby R106 Coast Road which is already above capacity; however, this EIAR already allows for increase in traffic as part of growth predictions which would at least partially account for this already; • Air quality, odour and climate: potential temporary increase in emissions to air of construction activity combustion gases if overlap in construction, unlikely to be significant; • Hydrology, hydrogeology and aquatic biodiversity: potential for

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 16 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

ID Tier Application Applicant for ‘Other Assessment of Cumulative Effect with Proposed Project Proposed Mitigation Residual Cumulative Effect Reference Development’ and Brief Description larger area of exposed ground, increasing risk of impacts on Mayne River from suspended solids in surface runoff should construction overlap; and • Noise and vibration: the nearest NSRs that could potentially be impacted as a result of concurrent construction activities from both projects are NSR R32, NSR R33 and NSR R34. However, given the extended distances between these NSR locations and the Coast Development project, and the existing baseline noise environment at these NSR locations, it is considered that there is no potential for an additive cumulative noise impact between these two projects. Proposed Project Operational Phase • No significant cumulative impacts.

18 Tier 1 – N/A Irish Water: Cumulative impacts during the Construction Phase will not occur. Cumulative N/A N/A planning Ringsend WwTP Upgrade impacts during the Operational Phase would be associated with discharge of application Project treated wastewater into the Irish Sea from both WwTPs. to be Extension of Ringsend WwTP, Ringsend WwTPs discharge/hydraulic flows were modelled within the submitted use of AGS technology Proposed Project marine water quality numerical model (together with those to An Bord of the WwTPs at Shanganagh, Swords, Malahide, Portrane, Barnageeragh), Pleanála in to assess the potential in-combination effects with the proposed outfall 2018 pipeline route (marine section). Average flow and flow to full treatment for the existing Ringsend WwTP discharge were taken from the Ringsend WwTP Upgrade Project EIAR (TJ O’Connor & Associates et al 2018). Average flow and flow to full treatment for the proposed Ringsend WwTP’s discharge were provided by the proposed Ringsend WwTP Project Team. Average discharge rates for the remaining WwTPs were taken from their respective published annual environmental reports. Modelling of the proposed WwTP wastewater showed quick dispersion and only Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen impacts within the immediate mixing zone. Based on this, and the distance to Ringsend WwTP discharge, cumulative impacts on water quality are not considered likely.

21 Tier 1 – F07A/0947 Sherman Oaks Limited: The Environmental Impact Statement for the Portmarnock Local Area Plan Mitigation measures already included in this EIAR are considered appropriate Mitigation would be effective in avoiding or reducing impacts planning Station Manor Portmarnock Lands Residential Development (Simon Clear & Associates 2007) was and sufficient to avoid, reduce or mitigate cumulative impacts: during Construction Phase as detailed in this EIAR. Some granted Housing Development reviewed for potential cumulative impacts. Potential negative cumulative • Adherence to CEMP and implementation of effective surface water cumulative impacts from traffic may be expected during the and impacts with Proposed Project have been identified as follows. management procedures; Construction Phase, but these are already accounted for in Housing development, • Visual and noise screening of proposed temporary construction constructio Proposed Project Construction Phase the growth factors built into the traffic models and are not comprising 684 residential compound no. 9, west of Baldoyle Bay; n • Population and human health: cumulative impacts from traffic, noise considered significant. units, north of proposed outfall • Adherence to traffic management plan; and commence and vibration, dust and combustion gases; Minor residual negative impact during Operational Phase pipeline route; proposed outfall • Noise monitoring and use of acoustic screens for construction of d in 2017 • Hydrology, hydrogeology and aquatic biodiversity: dependent upon pipeline route crosses launch shafts and other noisy operations (e.g. rock breaking) where associated with sterilisation of wayleave for future timing of distributor road construction, area of exposed ground required. development cannot be avoided and would need to be distributor road of Phase A of could be larger, increasing risk of impacts on Mayne River from development. suspended solids in surface runoff; included during master planning for any potential future • Marine flora and fauna: area north of proposed temporary developments. construction compound no. 7 proposed for open space development could increase area of exposed ground and risk of sediment-containing runoff affecting Baldoyle Bay; potential increase in noise and visual impacts on birds; • Terrestrial biodiversity: potential for cumulative effects from habitat loss and noise and visual disturbance on protected species where this project intersects the Proposed Project. Cumulative effects of consecutive or simultaneous construction do not significantly increase the duration of the potential noise and visual disturbance. Hedgerow and grassland habitat will be lost as a result of both projects, and cumulatively, the amount of habitat which will be lost

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 17 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

ID Tier Application Applicant for ‘Other Assessment of Cumulative Effect with Proposed Project Proposed Mitigation Residual Cumulative Effect Reference Development’ and Brief Description will increase. The cumulative loss does not however increase the magnitude of effect of the resulting habitat loss. No significant cumulative habitat loss, noise and visual disturbance or displacement effects are predicted; • Landscape and visual: potential for temporary in-combination visual effects to occur if the construction period for the proposed outfall pipeline route coincides with the construction of this development. Due to the temporary nature of such cumulative effects, these will not be significant; • Traffic: increase in traffic volume which could affect nearby road junction of the R123 Road/R106 Coast Road, which is already above capacity. However, this EIAR allows for increase in traffic as part of growth predictions which would at least partially account for this already; • Air quality, odour and climate: potential temporary increase in emissions of dust and emissions to air of construction activity combustion gases if there is an overlap in construction activities in the area, though unlikely to be significant; • Noise and vibration: slight increase in noise and vibration related impacts and associated nuisance; • Waste: potential increase in availability of surplus soils within the area in excess of volumes required by other construction projects, leading to greater volumes requiring disposal. Robust waste management plans will be required to ensure the potential impact is not significant; and • Material assets: depending on timing of distributor road construction, construction activities would need to take account of the presence of the roads and infrastructure associated with it. Proposed Project Operational Phase • Population and human health: sterilisation of wayleave; no development during future phases of housing development; and • The increased wastewater treatment capacity once the Proposed Project is operational will ensure that there will be no adverse cumulative impacts to wastewater systems caused by the increased demand from proposed new housing developments and population growth in the area.

23 Tier 1 – N/A Fingal County Council: Due to the temporary nature of pipeline construction, potential impacts would Mitigation measures already included in this EIAR are considered appropriate Mitigation would be effective in avoiding or reducing impacts planning Sutton to Malahide Greenway be short-term. There will be potential negative cumulative impacts with and sufficient to avoid, reduce or mitigate cumulative impacts: during Construction Phase as detailed in this EIAR. Some application – pedestrian and cycle route Proposed Project if timescales for Construction Phase overlap. • Adherence to CEMP and implementation of effective surface water cumulative impacts from traffic may be expected during the management procedures; to be along the Fingal Coast Proposed Project Construction Phase Construction Phase, but these are already accounted for in • Adherence to traffic management plan; and submitted • Population and human health: cumulative impacts from traffic, the growth factors built into the traffic models and are not to An Bord noise, dust and combustion-related emissions; • Noise monitoring and use of acoustic screens for construction of considered significant. launch shafts and other noisy operations (e.g. rock breaking) where Pleanála in • Hydrology and hydrogeology: potential temporary increase in required. 2018 suspended sediment loaded surface runoff to the marine environment if construction overlaps; • Landscape and visual: potential for temporary in-combination visual effects to occur if the construction period for the proposed outfall pipeline route coincides with the construction of this development. Due to the temporary and transient nature of such cumulative effects, these will not be significant; • Biodiversity: there is no potential for cumulative effects from habitat loss, as the Greenway project does not result in loss of habitats. There is potential for cumulative effects from noise and visual disturbance on protected species where this project passes by the nearest construction (microtunnelling) compound of the Proposed Project. Cumulative effects of consecutive or simultaneous construction do not significantly increase the duration of the potential noise and visual disturbance. The noise and disturbance effects of the Proposed Project are mitigated to the point where no

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 18 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

ID Tier Application Applicant for ‘Other Assessment of Cumulative Effect with Proposed Project Proposed Mitigation Residual Cumulative Effect Reference Development’ and Brief Description significant residual effect is predicted. No significant cumulative noise and visual disturbance effects are predicted; • Traffic: increase in traffic volume which could affect nearby R106 Coast Road. However, comparably small volumes of additional traffic expected to be generated by construction of the proposed outfall pipeline routes (land based and marine sections), and this EIAR already allows for increase in traffic as part of growth predictions which would account for this; • Air quality, odour and climate: potential temporary increase in emissions of dust and construction activity combustion emissions to air if there is an overlap in construction, though unlikely to be significant; and • Noise and vibration: slight increase in noise and vibration related impacts and associated nuisance. Proposed Project Operational Phase • No significant cumulative impacts.

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 19 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

23.3 Summary of Cumulative Impacts Of the initial long list of 23 ‘other developments’ considered to have the potential to overlap with the Proposed Project, 12 developments were assessed for potential cumulative impacts with the Proposed Project.

The environmental factors for which there were considered to be potential cumulative impacts with the Proposed Project were population and human health, hydrology and hydrogeology, terrestrial and marine flora and fauna, water quality, landscape and visual, traffic and transport, air quality and odour, noise and vibration, waste and material assets. The potential for cumulative impacts during the Operational Phase is expected to be less, on the basis that fewer impacts are anticipated during this phase. Potential cumulative impacts comprise:

• population and human health: cumulative impacts from increases in traffic; sterilisation of the land along the proposed 20m wayleave where it passes through areas of other development; and • traffic and transportation: increase in traffic volume, which could affect surrounding roads, including areas which are already near, at or over-capacity.

23.4 Mitigation Measures The results of the assessment presented in Table 23.3 indicate that no additional mitigation measures other than those provided in the EIAR and summarised in Chapter 24 Summary of Mitigation Measures in Volume 3 Part A have been found necessary to mitigate adverse cumulative impacts.

23.5 Residual Impacts With the implementation of the specified mitigation measures, the majority of the identified potential cumulative impacts will be avoided or reduced to a not significant level. The exceptions to this are:

• Traffic during both the Construction Phase and Operational Phase, which may continue to represent a negative impact (although it should be noted that this is accounted for in the traffic growth factors built into models); and • The sterilisation from future development of the proposed 20m wayleave, which would have to be accounted for during the master planning phases of such development.

23.6 Environmental Interactions The potential interactions between environmental aspects arising from the Proposed Project were considered and are addressed in more detail within the applicable chapters of the EIAR. A summary of the general interactions is presented in Table 23.4, and a detailed description of the interactions is included in Table 23.5.

The assessment has considered both the Construction Phase and Operational Phase. The mechanisms for interaction during the Construction Phase can be summarised as follows:

• Population and human health: impacts from traffic, noise and dust; • Hydrology, hydrogeology and aquatic biodiversity: risks of increased surface water runoff containing suspended solids from areas of exposed soils and risks associated with the crossing of watercourses; • Terrestrial flora and fauna: increased disturbance and direct harm or mortality to more mobile species such as birds and bats, particularly through the loss of a larger extent of hedgerows or greater number of trees;

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 20 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

• Marine flora and fauna: larger cumulative area of exposed soils, in particular adjacent to Baldoyle Bay, could result in greater risk of sediment-laden runoff entering the sea; potential increase in noise and visual impacts on birds from concurrent construction activities; • Landscape and visual: greater visual impact and temporary landscape intrusion from concurrent activities; • Traffic and transport: increase in traffic volume, which could affect surrounding roads, including areas which are already near, at or over-capacity; • Air quality, odour and climate: increased levels of dust and emissions from construction plant and vehicles, particularly from activities in close proximity to each other; • Noise and vibration: increased noise and vibration related impacts, including nuisance; • Waste: potential increase in availability of surplus construction/excavation arisings that require disposal due to demand for reuse being satisfied from another source; however, in one instance this may present an opportunity and therefore be a positive impact if arisings from the Proposed Project can be used in land restoration; and • Material assets: potential conflicts of infrastructure where developments are in close vicinity to each other.

23.7 Difficulties Encountered in Compiling Required Information There were no specific difficulties encountered when carrying out this assessment.

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 21 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Table 23.4: Environmental Interactions Matrix

and and

and

Visual

and

Vibration

Odo

and

Typical Inter- ,

Policy Waste

and Transport and and

Quality

Climate (Marine)

Relationship Matrix

Agronomy

Biodiversity Biodiversity Biodiversity

Planning Planning Water Marine

Human Health Human Hydrogeology Hydrology and and Hydrology

– Environmental Population

(Terrestrial (Terrestrial

Material Assets Material

Archaeological, Archaeological,

Cultural Heritage Cultural

Architectural Architectural

Soils and Geology Soils and

Noise Noise Freshwater Aquatic) Freshwater

Elements Traffic

Landscape Landscape

Air Air Quality

Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op. Con. Op.

Planning and

Policy

Population and ✓ ✓ Human Health

Marine Water ✓ ✓ Quality

Biodiversity ✓ ✓ (Marine)

Biodiversity (Terrestrial and ✓ ✓ Freshwater Aquatic)

Landscape and ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Visual

Traffic and ✓ ✓ Transport

Air Quality, Odour ✓ ✓ and Climate

Noise and ✓ ✓ ✓ Vibration

Archaeological, Architectural and ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Cultural Heritage

Hydrology and ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Hydrogeology

Soils and Geology ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Agronomy ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Waste ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Material Assets ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 22 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Table 23.5: Interactions Between Environmental Aspects

Typical Inter-

and

Odour and and

Relationship ,

Matrix –

Policy Visual Waste

Quality

(Marine) Aquatic)

Environmental Vibration

Transport

Noise and and Noise

Agronomy

Traffic

Freshwater Freshwater

and and Climate

Biodiversity Biodiversity Biodiversity

Planning and and Planning Water Marine

Human Health Human Hydrogeology

Hydrology and and Hydrology

Population and and Population

(Terrestrial (Terrestrial and Landscape Material Assets Material

Elements Archaeological,

Cultural Heritage Cultural

Architectural and and Architectural

Air Air Quality Soils and Geology Soils and

Planning and

Policy

Land zoning near the proposed WwTP including Green Belt and residential development Population zoning. and Human Socio-economic connection Health between county development plans/water services and infrastructure strategies and the Proposed Project.

Negative impacts to water quality due to proposed outfall pipeline route (marine section) construction could have the potential to impact Marine Water bathing water quality and Quality hinder diving and other marine sports. Once operational, the proposed WwTP will have a positive impact on water quality

Impact of suspended and accumulated sediments on Biodiversity populations of sensitive reef

(Marine) habitats and shellfish species; impact on marine ecology if discharge reduced water quality

Freshwaters will act as a Biodiversity Freshwaters will act as a direct direct pathway for (Terrestrial pathway for pollutants and pollutants and sediment to and sediment to the marine the marine environment as Freshwater environment as a consequence of a consequence of the Aquatic) the works, if not mitigated works, if not mitigated

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 23 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

Typical Inter-

and

Odour and and

Relationship ,

Matrix –

Policy Visual Waste

Quality

(Marine) Aquatic)

Environmental Vibration

Transport

Noise and and Noise

Agronomy

Traffic

Freshwater Freshwater

and and Climate

Biodiversity Biodiversity Biodiversity

Planning and and Planning Water Marine

Human Health Human Hydrogeology

Hydrology and and Hydrology

Population and and Population

(Terrestrial (Terrestrial and Landscape Material Assets Material

Elements Archaeological,

Cultural Heritage Cultural

Architectural and and Architectural

Air Air Quality Soils and Geology Soils and

Removal of trees and Visual impact of the Landscape sensitivity zones hedgerows affecting Proposed Project on the closely related to Fingal County Disturbance of birds due to habitats of bats and birds. Landscape landscape and local Landscape Character visual impact of Planting proposed to and Visual amenities and resulting Assessment and Green construction compounds screen the proposed impact on tourism and Infrastructure zonings. WwTP site would enhance leisure in the area habitats.

Impacts on local residents and business created by Visual impacts nuisance and stress from from heavy increase in traffic and Traffic and machinery and delays, particularly at Transport heavy goods junctions which are already vehicle over capacity; impact on construction traffic human health from vehicle emissions

Impact on human health receptors from emissions, Impacts associated with Air Quality, particularly aspergillus, creation of dust during Odour and dust and particulate matter; construction and Climate nuisance impacts generation of vehicle associated with dust and emissions odour

Potential for noise and Impact of noise and vibration related impacts Impacts from vibration resulting from Noise and from works near sensitive noise/vibration due to dredging and piling works Vibration receptors (Connolly construction/operational on sensitive marine Hospital, St. Francis’ traffic mammals and birds Hospice and Schools)

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 24 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

and

and and

tectural tectural

Typical Inter-

Relationship

Odour

Matrix – ,

Waste

Health

and Transport and Climate

Environmental Agronomy

Elements Assets Material

Soils and Geology Soils and

Noise and Vibration and Noise

Planning and Policy and Planning

Freshwater Aquatic) Freshwater

Biodiversity (Marine) Biodiversity

Marine Water Quality Water Marine

Traffic

and Cultural Heritage and Cultural

Landscape and Visual and Landscape

Air Air Quality

Population and Human Human and Population

Biodiversity (Terrestrial (Terrestrial Biodiversity

Archaeological, Archi Archaeological, Hydrology and Hydrogeology and Hydrology

Potential for Potential impact vibrations to Impact on to heritage Archaeological, cause structural population/society features such Architectural damage to through loss of as designated and Cultural buildings, cultural heritage heritage Heritage including built sites demesne cultural heritage landscapes sites

Impacts on surface Impacts on Impact on flood risk Impacts on watercourses and marine water from Proposed marine water ecology from runoff quality from Project; quality and containing suspended runoff assessment of marine ecology solids or hazardous containing Hydrology and impact on from runoff substances from spills, suspended Hydrogeology groundwater containing etc. solids or abstraction suspended solids Wayleave includes one hazardous boreholes from or hazardous pond with smooth newts substances dewatering substances from that require from spills, operations spills, etc. translocation and etc. draining of pond

Impact on marine ecology through Assessment Impact of Some release of of impact on excavated excavations into sediments from Generation of groundwater contaminated Impacts from runoff from Impact of rock may involve Assessment disturbance of dust from abstractions. ground on human exposed ground and construction rock-breaking included Soils and seabed; exposed Groundwater health, particularly construction areas traffic on techniques, which consideration Geology generation of ground and availability at affecting surface water land/wayleave create greater of geological noise/vibration construction and Balseskin/Ballymun resources and ecology soils noise than heritage sites from tunnelling activities vulnerability historical landfill traditional operations dependent sites excavations affecting marine upon geology mammals

Impact of the loss Nuisance of 31.8ha of impacts from Excessive noise Impact of dust Impacts on agricultural land on Impacts from increase in can cause Potential spread of particles from private Reduction in soil local famers and change of traffic and need distress to farm noxious weeds, animal- construction groundwater fertility due to the agricultural industry landscape to change animals. Tonal Agronomy and soil-borne diseases on farm abstractions loss of topsoil, soil in the area character and farming and impulsive such as potato eelworm animals and from mixing and soil Impact of public loss of operations, e.g. noise can impact through exposed soil produce (milk dewatering compaction perception on agricultural land to use breeding and the and crops) operations uptake/costs of temporary training of horses produce access points

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 25 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

and

and and

tectural tectural

Typical Inter-

Relationship

Odour

Matrix – ,

Waste

Health

and Transport and Climate

Environmental Agronomy

Elements Assets Material

Soils and Geology Soils and

Noise and Vibration and Noise

Planning and Policy and Planning

Freshwater Aquatic) Freshwater

Biodiversity (Marine) Biodiversity

Marine Water Quality Water Marine

Traffic

and Cultural Heritage and Cultural

Landscape and Visual and Landscape

Air Air Quality

Population and Human Human and Population

Biodiversity (Terrestrial (Terrestrial Biodiversity

Archaeological, Archi Archaeological, Hydrology and Hydrogeology and Hydrology

Waste arising from the excavation of Waste Impacts soils/rock and the management associated with potential for spread to follow Potential impact need for off-site of waste sludge on Increased traffic waste upon available disposal of soils. due to the hierarchy in waste management surplus soils Mobilisation of presence of accordance capacities of reduced contaminants from Waste heavy goods with licensed landfills through historical landfills at vehicles European, may impact on material Balseskin and transporting national and collection of balance Ballymun can waste material regional domestic waste included in impact surrounding legislation landscape soils; need to and policies design. dispose of surplus soils if unsuitable for use

Impact on waste generation Impact on Excavations in from choice population from Increase in areas of potential of road closures and traffic on roads future aggregate construction infrastructure surrounding the reserves leading to technique, interruptions; Material Assets Proposed sterilisation of including impacts associated Project due to potential future need for with availability of the import of resource. Potential trenchless raw materials used materials for slope failures techniques in the construction due to excavations. at major process infrastructure crossing points

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 26 Environmental Impact Assessment Report: Volume 3 Part A of 6

23.8 References

Bilfinger and GVA (2015). National Paediatric Hospital Project: Environmental Impact Statement.

Byrne Looby and ARUP (2017). BRDS 9C Sewer Duplication and Storage Scheme, incorporating Tolka Valley Park Pumping Station: Environmental Impact Statement.

Downey Planning (2016). Environmental Impact Statement for Lands at Belcamp.

Environmental Protection Agency (2002). Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements.

Environmental Protection Agency (2003). Advice Notes on Current Practice in the Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements.

Environmental Protection Agency (2015a). Advice Notes for Preparing Environmental Impact Statements.

Environmental Protection Agency (2015b). Revised Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements.

Environmental Protection Agency (2017). Draft Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Assessment Reports.

European Commission (1999). Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impacts as well as Impact Interactions.

Fehily Timoney & Company (2015) Environmental Impact Statement for a Proposed Aviation Fuel Pipeline from Dublin Port to Dublin Airport.

Mouchel Parkman (2004). Dublin Airport Environmental Impact Statement Northern Parallel Runway.

O’Laoire Russell Associates in association with RPS (2008). Environmental Impact Statement for Environmental Remediation of Historic Landfill at Clonshagh, Belcamp, Dublin 15.

RPS (2016). Growth Area 1, Baldoyle-Stapolin, Baldoyle, Dulin 13: Environmental Impact Statement.

Simon Clear & Associates (2007). Portmarnock Local Area Plan Lands Residential Development Environmental Impact Statement.

TJ O’Connor & Associates, Barry & Partners, Royal Haskoning DHV (2018). Ringsend Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade Project Environmental Impact Assessment Report.

Directives and Legislation

European Union (2014). Directive 2014/52/EU of 16 April 2014 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment [2014].

32102902/EIAR/23 Chapter 23 – Page 27