DOCSLIB.ORG

Inspector's Report HA0053 MA0014

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Inspector's Report HA0053 MA0014 Inspector’s Report HA0053 MA0014 File References 04.HA0053 – M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Motorway Scheme 04.MA0014 – Cork to Ringaskiddy Motorway Scheme, Protected Road Scheme and Service Area 2017 Development M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Road Project and Motorway Scheme with Service Area at Ringaskiddy Applicant Cork County Council Type of Applications HA0053 – Strategic Infrastructure Development, S51(2) Roads Act 1993 MA0014 – Local Authority Projects – M28 Motorway Scheme Project Cork to Ringaskiddy; Protected Road Scheme; and Service Area Scheme Dates of Oral Hearing 7th-10th November; 14th to 17th th st November; 28 Nov.to 1 December th th th th 24 July, 25 July, 18 October, 26 th th Date of Site Inspections October, 27 October, 11 November, HA0053 and MA0014 Inspector’s Report Page 1 of 425 13th November, 2017 Inspector Mary Kennelly Appendices Appendix 1 Summary of Observations Appendix 2 Report of Traffic and Transport Consultant appointed by the Board HA0053 and MA0014 Inspector’s Report Page 2 of 425 Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 9 2 Site Location and Description ............................................................................ 10 3 Proposed Development ..................................................................................... 11 3.1 TEN-T Core Route ...................................................................................... 11 3.2 Declassified N28 ......................................................................................... 14 3.3 Structures and associated roads ................................................................. 14 3.4 Relocation of pylons .................................................................................... 15 3.5 Service Area................................................................................................ 15 4 Planning History ................................................................................................. 15 4.1 PA0003 – Port of Cork ................................................................................ 15 4.2 HA0039 – Dunkettle Interchange Improvement Motorway Scheme ............ 16 4.3 PA0035 – Port of Cork Redevelopment ...................................................... 17 4.4 PM0010 – Revisions to Port of Cork permission PA0035 ........................... 18 4.5 PA0045 – Waste to Energy Facility at Ringaskiddy .................................... 19 5 Policy Context .................................................................................................... 19 5.1 Transport policy ........................................................................................... 19 5.2 National and Regional Planning Policy ....................................................... 22 5.3 Local Planning Policy .................................................................................. 24 6 Submissions and Observations ......................................................................... 27 6.1 Submissions from Prescribed Bodies .......................................................... 27 6.2 Observers on proposed M28 Motorway Scheme, Protected Road Scheme and Service Area .................................................................................................. 36 6.3 Compulsory Purchase Order ....................................................................... 37 6.4 Objections to the Compulsory Purchase Order ........................................... 39 7 Oral Hearing ...................................................................................................... 54 8 Planning Assessment ........................................................................................ 54 HA0053 and MA0014 Inspector’s Report Page 3 of 425 9 Legal and procedural issues .............................................................................. 56 9.1 Environmental Impact Statement ................................................................ 56 9.2 Issues raised by observers during the course of the application and the oral hearing regarding legal and procedural issues ..................................................... 57 9.3 Oral hearing ................................................................................................ 58 9.4 Assessment of legal and procedural issues ................................................ 60 10 Justification and Need for Development and policy context ............................... 69 10.1 Environmental Impact Statement ............................................................. 69 10.2 Issues raised by observers during the course of the application and during the oral hearing regarding need for the development ........................................... 69 10.3 Oral hearing ............................................................................................. 72 10.4 Assessment of Need for the Development ............................................... 74 11 Alternatives Considered ..................................................................................... 95 11.1 Environmental Impact Statement ............................................................. 95 11.2 Issues raised by observers during the course of the application and during the oral hearing regarding alternatives considered ............................................... 96 11.3 Oral hearing ............................................................................................. 98 11.4 Evaluation of alternatives ......................................................................... 99 12 Traffic and Transport ....................................................................................... 106 12.1 Environmental Impact Statement ........................................................... 106 12.2 Issues raised by observers during the course of the application and during the oral hearing regarding traffic and transport ................................................... 106 12.3 Oral hearing ........................................................................................... 113 12.4 Assessment of Traffic and Transport issues .......................................... 115 13 Noise and vibration .......................................................................................... 137 13.1 Environmental Impact Statement ........................................................... 137 13.2 Issues raised by observers during the course of the application and during the oral hearing regarding noise and vibration .................................................... 137 HA0053 and MA0014 Inspector’s Report Page 4 of 425 13.3 Oral hearing ........................................................................................... 142 13.4 Assessment of noise and vibration ........................................................ 143 14 Air and climate ................................................................................................. 163 14.1 Environmental Impact Statement ........................................................... 163 14.2 Issues raised by observers during the course of the application and during the oral hearing regarding air and climate .......................................................... 164 14.3 Oral hearing ........................................................................................... 167 14.4 Assessment of air and climate ............................................................... 168 15 Health and general amenity ............................................................................. 180 15.1 Environmental Impact Statement ........................................................... 180 15.2 Issues raised by observers .................................................................... 181 15.3 Oral hearing ........................................................................................... 182 15.4 Assessment Health and general amenity ............................................... 183 16 Landscape and visual impact........................................................................... 197 16.1 Environmental Impact Statement ........................................................... 197 16.2 Issues raised by observers during the course of the application and during the oral hearing regarding landscape and visual impact ..................................... 199 16.3 Oral hearing ........................................................................................... 202 16.4 Assessment of landscape and visual impact ......................................... 204 17 Flora and Fauna .............................................................................................. 232 17.1 Environmental Impact Statement ........................................................... 232 17.2 Issues Raised during the course of the application and oral hearing ..... 233 17.3 Oral hearing ........................................................................................... 236 17.4 Assessment Flora and Fauna ................................................................ 237 18 Water quality .................................................................................................... 274 18.1 Environmental Impact Statement ........................................................... 274 18.2 Issues raised during the course of the application and oral hearing ...... 274 18.3 Oral hearing ..........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Inspector's Report ABP-302843-18
    Inspector’s Report ABP-302843-18 Development Vehicle & HGV Fuelling Station, Convenience Store, Food Court, External Dining & Children's Play Area, Car Parking & Extensive Road Upgrade Works Location Kiely's Cross, Mwelling & Reankeha, County Waterford Planning Authority Waterford City and County Council Planning Authority Reg. Ref. 18534 Applicant Michael Ryan Type of Application Permission Planning Authority Decision Refuse Type of Appeal First Party v Refusal Appellant Michael Ryan Observer Transport Infrastructure Ireland Date of Site Inspection 12th, December 2018 Inspector Paddy Keogh ABP-302843-18 Inspector’s Report Page 1 of 26 1.0 Site Location and Description 1.1. The site of the proposed development has a stated area of 5.9 ha. The site is located c. 6.5 km north-east of Ardmore, 9km south-west of Dungarvan and 12 km north- east of Youghal. The location of the site is at Kiely’s Cross which is defined by the junction of the N25 with the R673. The site which is traversed by the N25 is predominantly in agricultural use. The bulk of the site is located on the eastern side of the N25. The site includes a Public House located on Kiely’s Cross (Kiely’s Cross Bar) together with an associated poorly surfaced car parking area opening onto the N25. The site also includes a house with vehicular access onto the R673. 1.2. The appeal site incorporates the junction of the Local Primary Road L2023 and the N25 (northern end of N25 frontage), the junction of the Local Secondary Road L6090 and the N25 (joining N25 from the west), the junction of the regional road R673 and the N25 (southern end of N25 road frontage) and the junction of a local tertiary road with the R673.
    [Show full text]
  • Noise Is Generally Defined As Sound with an Intensity Greater Than the Ambient Or Background Sound Pressure Levef (SPL)
    5.5.3 Noise Noise is generally defined as sound with an intensity greater than the ambient or background sound pressure levef (SPL). SPL is determined by measuring the noise emissions in terms of sound pressure in a relationship defined as a decibel (dB). The type of decibel unit commonly used in sound level measurements is the A-weighted decibel dE(A). This scale is almost universally used to describe environmental noise because it simulates the variation with frequency (through the audible range of the sensitivity to sound of the typically healthy human ear (Cunniff 1977, Kryter 1970, May 1978). Outdoor noise levels change continually because of the temporal and spatial variations of noise sources. The temporal variation in the resulting sound levels is described by statistical levels in the form L,, where L, designates a sound that exceeds the level L for x percent of the sampling duration, or by equivalent sound levels in the form Le,, defined as the stationary (constant) level with the same acoustic energy as the actual time-varying sound level over the given sampling period. Areas that will be traversed by the proposed collection sewers include urban, commercial, industrial, and rural residential lands. Typical outdoor sound levels for these areas are shown in Fig. 5.5.1. As the figure indicates, ambient sound levels in the land uses that will be! affected by construction of the sewers range from 38 dBA in rural residential areas to 79 dBA in heavily urbanised areas. The proposed For treatment inspection purposes plant only. site is located on pastureland; adjacent Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.
    [Show full text]
  • N11/N25 Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour Option Selection Newsletter - March 2021 N11/N25 Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour L Option Selection L Newsletter March 2021 Page 1
    N11/N25 Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour Option Selection Newsletter - March 2021 N11/N25 Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour l Option Selection l Newsletter March 2021 Page 1 Dear local resident, First and foremost, we hope this finds you safe and well in these challenging times. We are getting in touch to update you on the current status of the N11/N25 Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour project. Currently, Wexford County Council is in the process of studying feasible options for the development of the project, taking into account the feedback we received from local residents and community groups during the public consultation phase in July and August last year. The main objective of this stage is to identify a preferred scheme option that will deliver a safe, sustainable, high-quality and effective solution to meet the future transport needs of County Wexford, the South East region, and the country generally. The selected scheme option will then be developed further and in more depth, before it is submitted for planning approval. These are times of uncertainty and transformation, and the project must respond to these changes in order to ensure the development of a proposed scheme that meets the future needs of society in a sustainable and effective manner and in line with changing government policy. As a result, the option selection process is taking longer than was initially anticipated. This newsletter describes some of the complexities and challenges that have extended the option selection process, and presents some of the studies that are being carried out to assess the potential impacts that these changes may have on the project’s development.
    [Show full text]
  • 7. Roads and Traffic
    Indaver Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre Environmental Impact Statement 7. Roads and Traffic Introduction This section of the EIS identifies and evaluates the likely significant impacts of the traffic generated by the proposed Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre, both during its construction and operational phases. This section describes the existing traffic situation in the area surrounding the site and provides a description of the local road network. Existing traffic levels are quantified and existing facilities for public transport, cyclists and pedestrians are described. Brief details of the proposed development are provided and the trip generation and distribution methodologies are explained. The impact of the generated traffic on the local road network is assessed and mitigation measures which Indaver intend to include in their development proposals are investigated where necessary. It is clear from the extensive consultations which Indaver have carried out with both the local community and the statutory authorities that traffic congestion on the main N28 approaches to Ringaskiddy and to the site, and how this congestion should be managed during the peak hours, is a major concern. Indaver welcomes the recent announcement of the inclusion of the N28 upgrade and the pending implementation of the proposed improvements to the Dunkettle Interchange as part of the Government Capital Budget to 2021 announced recently, although these are not necessary for this project. While these road upgrades will facilitate the free flow of all strategic traffic when complete, Indaver also recognise that peak hour capacity on this strategic route will require ongoing management into the future to ensure that the corridor continues to have capacity at critical periods.
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligent Transportation Systems.Pdf
    M8 Cashel Service Area Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1 Non-Technical Summary February 2009 National Roads Authority An tÚdarás um Bóithre Náisiúnta PROJECT: M8 Cashel Service Area DOCUMENT: Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1: Non Technical Summary DATE: February 2009 M8 Cashel Service Area EIS Volume 1 M8 Cashel Service Area EIS Volume 1 Preface The structure of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed M8 Cashel Service Area, is laid out in the preface of each volume for clarity. The document consists of the following four volumes: Volume 1 – Non Technical Summary A non technical summary of information contained in Volume 2 Volume 2 - Environmental Impact Statement This volume describes the environmental impact of the proposed development including the layout, structure, access / egress points and associated auxiliary works to the proposed developments. Volume 3 – Drawings A dedicated volume of drawings that further describe the information set out in Volume 2 Volume 4 – Technical Appendices Data that is supplemental to the information in Volume 2. M8 Cashel Service Area EIS Volume 1 M8 Cashel Service Area EIS Volume 1 Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Consultation 2 2 Background to the Proposed Development 4 2.1 NRA Policy 4 2.2 Procurement Approach 4 2.3 Function of the Proposals on a National, Regional and Local Level 4 2.4 Existing Conditions 5 2.5 Alternatives Considered 5 3 Description of the Proposed Development 6 3.1 Introduction 6 3.2 Site Layout Principles 6 3.3 Roads and Parking 6 3.4 Service Area Building 7 3.5 Fuel Station Facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Inquiry Into the Derailment of a Freight Train at Cahir Viaduct on 7Th October 2003
    Inquiry into the Derailment of a Freight Train at Cahir Viaduct on 7th October 2003 (Cover image courtesy of Radio Teilifís Éireann) Inquiry into Derailment at Cahir Viaduct on 7th October 2003 – Report (version 1.2) 22/12/2005 Contents Contents .............................................................................................................................. 3 Tables.................................................................................................................................. 4 Illustrations ......................................................................................................................... 5 Illustrations ......................................................................................................................... 5 1 Executive Summary:................................................................................................... 6 2 Referencing Convention: ............................................................................................ 8 3 The accident:............................................................................................................. 10 4 Background............................................................................................................... 12 4.1 The Railway:..................................................................................................... 12 4.2 The Site:............................................................................................................ 13 4.3 The Service: .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Clan Gathering Itinerary
    2019 CLAN GATHERING ITINERARY Friday 13th September 16:00 PROMPTLY COACH DEPARTS FROM ROCHESTOWN HOTEL TO CASTLE HOTEL IN MACROOM WITH CROWLEYS RESIDING THERE. If ROCHESTOWN residents wish, they may drive themselves to Macroom and take the coach back, leaving their cars at the Castle Hotel 14:00 - 18:00 Registration at Castle Hotel in Macroom Note: FOOD ON YOUR OWN AT CASTLE HOTEL IS AVAILABLE ALL EVENING. 18:00 - 20:00 Cheese and Wine Reception at Castle Hotel followed by welcoming Ceremony 20:00 – 22:00 Castle Hotel with Dick Beamish, Guest entertainer followed by Irish Dancing Demonstration, concluding with an evening of Irish music by our own Larry Crowley and Kevin. COACH WILL RETURN TO ROCHESTOWN HOTEL ABOUT 12:30 AM IRISH TIME!! Saturday 14th September 9:00 PROMPTLY COACH DEPARTS FROM ROCHESTOWN HOTEL TO CASTLE HOTEL IN MACROOM WITH CROWLEYS RESIDING THERE. 9:30 - 10:30 Business Meeting and Website Information Meeting at CASTLE HOTEL 11:00 Departing on Buses from CASTLE HOTEL FOR TOURING. 11:30 Stop off at Kilmichael Ambush. Address by Local Historian. The Kilmichael Ambush was an ambush near the village of Kilmichael in County Cork on 28 November 1920 carried out by the Irish Republican Army (IRA) during the Irish War of Independence. Thirty-six local IRA volunteers commanded by Tom Barry killed seventeen members of the Royal Irish Constabulary's Auxiliary Division. The Kilmichael ambush was politically as well as militarily significant. It occurred one week after Bloody Sunday, marking an escalation in the IRA's campaign. 12:30 - 13:30 Visit to Barrett’s Bar in Coppeen for Drinks and Sandwiches 14:30 Mass at O’ Crowley Castle 16:30 Returning to CASTLE AND ROCHESTOWN HOTELS.
    [Show full text]
  • 0554 Port of Cork 3
    CORK TO THE WORLD Updated Economic Assessment of the N28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Scheme. June 2014 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements v Executive Summary vi 1. Introduction and Background 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Terms of Reference 1 1.3 Background and Economic Context 1 2. Methodology 4 2.1 Introduction 4 2.2 Consultation Programme and Primary Research 4 2.3 Analytical Methodologies 5 3. Transportation Benefits of N28 Upgrade 7 3.1 Introduction and Description of Scheme 7 3.2 Net Transportation Benefits of N28 Upgrade 8 3.3 Summary of Key Conclusions 12 4. External Connectivity and Port-related Impacts 13 4.1 Introduction 13 4.2 Context and Port Sector Trends 13 4.3 Importance of the N28 Upgrade 15 4.4 Implications of Failure to Meet Port Capacity Needs 16 4.5 Summary of Key Conclusions 20 5. Enhancement of the Ringaskiddy Industry and Research Cluster 21 5.1 Introduction 21 5.2 FDI-related Benefits of N28 Upgrade 21 5.3 Role of N28 Upgrade in Development of IMERC 25 5.4 Summary of Key Conclusions 29 6. N28 as Catalyst for Wider Regional Development 31 6.1 Introduction 31 6.2 Tourism Sector Development 31 6.3 Potential Influential Role of N28 in Development of Cork Docklands 34 6.4 Summary of Key Conclusions 36 7. Views of the Business Community 37 7.1 Introduction 37 7.2 Key Research Findings 37 8. Conclusions and Recommendations 46 8.1 Introduction 46 8.2 Sectoral Impacts of N28 Upgrade 46 8.3 Overall Conclusions and Recommendations 49 Annex 1 List of Consultees 51 Annex 2 Additional Findings from Survey of Businesses 52 i Tables, FIGures
    [Show full text]
  • Report to Inform Screenings for Appropriate Assessment
    Report to inform Screening for Appropriate Assessment Glanmire Road Improvements and Sustainable Transport Works, Co. Cork Project Number: 60559532 3 May 2018 Revision 4 Report to Inform Screening for Appropriate Assessment Quality information Prepared by Checked by Approved by Robert Fennelly Dr Miles Newman Dr Eleanor Ballard Principal Ecologist Consultant Ecologist Associate Director (of Ecology) Revision History Revision Revision date Details Authorized Name Position Rev0 27 Feb 2018 Draft issue for CCC Yes Robert Fennelly Principal Ecologist comment Rev1 13 Mar 2018 Minor changes to Yes Robert Fennelly Principal Ecologist address client comments Rev2 13 April 2018 Revised for Cork Yes Robert Fennelly Principal Ecologist County Council comments; version for planning purposes Rev3 26 April 2018 Revised for Yes Robert Fennelly Principal Ecologist drainage input statement Rev4 03 May 2018 Minor revisions Yes Robert Fennelly Principal Ecologist prior to planning issue Distribution List # Hard Copies PDF Required Association / Company Name Prepared for: AECOM Report to Inform Screening for Appropriate Assessment Prepared for: Prepared for: Cork County Council Prepared by: AECOM Ireland Limited 1st Floor, Montrose House Douglas Business Centre Carrigaline Road Douglas, Co. Cork T12H90H T +353-(0)21-436-5006 aecom.com © 2018 AECOM Ireland Limited. All Rights Reserved. This document has been prepared by AECOM Ireland Limited (“AECOM”) for sole use of our client (the “Client”) in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the terms of reference agreed between AECOM and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document.
    [Show full text]
  • DT\682330EN.Doc PE 393.883V01 EN EN Introduction
    EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ««« « « 2004 « « 2009 « « ««« Committee on Petitions 30.9.2007 REPORT on fact finding visit to Ireland 26-29 June 2007 Committee on Petitions Rapporteurs: Marcin Libicki, Radu Podgorean. DT\682330EN.doc PE 393.883v01 EN EN Introduction: The objectives of the mission to Ireland were to investigate and respond to several petitions submitted by Irish citizens, while at the same time allowing the Committee to consult the authorities at national and local level about ways in which certain issues raised by the petitioners might be best resolved. The members of the delegation were pleased to be able to count on the support and advice from Irish members of the Committee who, as our guidelines preclude members from the country visited forming part of the official delegation, joined at various points in an ex officio capacity: Kathy Sinnott - 3rd Vice-Chairman of the Committee, Mairead McGuinness, Proinsias de Rossa and Marian Harkin. The timing of the visit, which took place shortly after the appointment of a new government in Ireland, allowed members of the delegation to meet with Dick Roche TD, Minister for European Affairs, and John Gormley TD, Minister for the Environment and very constructive exchanges concerning the rights of European citizens were held with both. Prior to these meetings, in depth discussions with senior officials from several ministries, coordinated by the European Affairs ministry, allowed members of the delegation to obtain comments and explanations on all the topics which had been chosen by the Committee for investigation. Members of the delegation wish, from the outset, to place on record their sincere thanks to all the officials involved who devoted a considerable amount of time and effort, and indeed patience, in order to respond to the many questions and issues raised by members on behalf of petitioners.
    [Show full text]
  • Cork Harbour Special Protection Area
    Cork Harbour Special Protection Area (Site Code 4030) ≡ Conservation Objectives Supporting Document VERSION 1 National Parks & Wildlife Service November 2014 T AB L E O F C O N T E N T S SUMMARY PART ONE - INTRODUCTION ..................................................................... 1 1.1 Introductiion to the desiignatiion of Speciiall Protectiion Areas ........................................... 1 1.2 Introductiion to Cork Harbour Speciiall Protectiion Area ................................................... 2 1.3 Introductiion to Conservatiion Objjectiives........................................................................ 2 PART TWO – SITE DESIGNATION INFORMATION .................................................................... 4 2.1 Speciiall Conservatiion Interests of Cork Harbour Speciiall Protectiion Area ...................... 4 PART THREE – CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES FOR CORK HARBOUR SPA ........................... 9 3.1 Conservatiion Objjectiives for the non-breediing Speciiall Conservatiion Interests of Cork Harbour SPA ............................................................................................................. 9 PART FOUR – REVIEW OF THE CONSERVATION CONDITION OF WATERBIRD SPECIAL CONSERVATION INTERESTS ................................................................... 13 4.1 Popullatiion data for waterbiird SCI speciies of Cork Harbour SPA ................................. 13 4.2 Waterbiird popullatiion trends for Cork Harbour SPA ..................................................... 14 4.3 Cork
    [Show full text]
  • HIDDEN VOICES Time, Not All Stories Are Preserved
    Every place has a story to tell but, with the passing of Dr Penny Johnston is a graduate of University VOICES HIDDEN time, not all stories are preserved. The archaeological College Cork and the University of Sheffield. discoveries presented in this book afford a rare chance Her research interests include a broad range of to hear from people whose voices would be lost were it topics in cultural heritage, from oral history to not for the opportunities for discovery presented by the environmental archaeology. She worked on the construction of the M8 Fermoy–Mitchelstown motorway M8 Fermoy–Mitchelstown motorway project HIDDEN in north County Cork. while a post-excavation manager at Eachtra Archaeological Projects. Hidden Voices documents a major programme of archaeological investigations at 24 sites on the route of the Jacinta Kiely is a graduate of University College motorway, which traverses broad plains of rich pastureland Cork. She is a founder member of Eachtra VOICES and the western foothills of the Kilworth Mountains. Archaeological Projects and has worked on a A diverse range of archaeological sites was discovered, number of national road schemes including the representing the day-to-day life, work and beliefs of the M8 Fermoy–Mitchelstown motorway. communities who occupied this landscape over the last 10,000 years. Readers will learn of Mesolithic nomads fishing the and Jacinta Johnston Penny Kiely River Funshion and of Neolithic farmsteads excavated at Gortore, Caherdrinny and Ballinglanna North. Bronze Age houses were found at Ballynamona, Gortnahown and Kilshanny, and a rare Iron Age example at Caherdrinny. Life in prehistory was precarious.
    [Show full text]