An Bord Pleanála
Inspector’s Report
Development : Ardfert Sewerage Scheme, Ardfert, Co. Kerry.
Case Type: Environmental Impact Assessment Approval.
Observer(s): Department of Arts, Heritage & the Gaeltacht An Taisce (Natural Environment Office) An Taisce (Kerry Association) Frances Carmody Mairéad O’Sullivan Bat McElligott Environmental Protection Agency
Date of site inspection : 3rd December 2011.
Inspector: Michael Dillon
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 1 of 32 1.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
1.1 Ardfert is a village located some 8km due northwest of Tralee. The R551 Regional Road linking Tralee with Ballyheige comprises the principal thoroughfare through the village. The village is dominated by the remains of Ardfert Cathedral and two associated churches and graveyard. On the edge of the village to the east are the ruins of Ardfert Friary. There are extensive boundary stone walls in evidence throughout the village – associated with the now demolished Ardfert Abbey – home of the Crosbie family. An attractive stone gate house remains standing. The village is characterised by diffuse settlement of largely single- and two-storey buildings. The Tyshe River flows through the village, with two road crossings – Tyshe Bridge (to Abbeydorney) and West Bridge (the R551 to Ballyheige).
1.2 The site for the waste water treatment plant, with a stated area of 1.4ha, is located to the northwest of the village, within an agricultural setting. The new site will replace the existing waste water treatment plant serving Ardfert – located closer to the village on its northwestern side. The area is characterised by wet grassland. There are rushes and irises growing over the site and parts of it were waterlogged on the date of site inspection. A low hedgerow is located just to the east of the proposed access road. To the north of the waste water treatment plant site, there is a shallow drain in which there was a small flow of water. There is a poor- quality hedgerow just to the east of the proposed eastern boundary of the plant. This hedgerow does not form the boundary of the site. To the south, there is a dry shallow drain with some gorse bushes and briars growing along it. The western boundary is undefined. The new access road to the treatment plant is located at a junction of a county road with the R551 Ballyheige Road, at a point where the 80kph speed restriction applies. The road is straight at this location and sight visibility is good in either direction.
1.3 The Tyshe River and its tributaries has been subject to some drainage works in the recent past. The area comprises flat farmland, crisscrossed by a number of canal- like drains filled with water. These drains are bridged in places to allow for movement of farm animals and vehicles. Other bridges have been abandoned and are in a state of collapse. The Tyshe River joins another watercourse which drains Akeragh Lough just prior to discharging into the sea through a gap in the sand dunes at Banna Strand. This gap has recently been reconfigured, and the channel dredged and rock-armoured. The outfall of the Tyshe River and the watercourse draining Akeragh Lough to the north – both have sluice gates to control tidal flooding of lands behind the dune system.
1.4 The closest premises to the proposed waste water treatment plant are two houses located on the R551 immediately to the east – approximately 200m. The Kerry Agri-Business premises are located beside these two houses, within an old creamery building. There is a recently-constructed small housing development (Radharc na hEaglaise) on the opposite side of the R551, together with 3 no.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 2 of 32 detached houses, and the Atlantic Oils business. There was no significant noise audible at either the Kerry Agri-Business Premises or the Atlantic Oils premises on the date of site inspection. The dominant source of noise in the area was from the considerable amount of traffic on the R551.
1.5 The existing waste water treatment plant is located on the southern bank of the Tyshe River – to the northwest of the village. It is just possible to make it out from the R551 road as one leaves the village on the road to Ballyheige. The site is surrounded by agricultural land. There is no dedicated access to the plant – general access being across grass fields. There was no noise audible from the plant on the date of site inspection. There was no odour from the plant, other than from a standing position directly above the stormwater overflow (within the plant itself). The plant was discharging to the Tyshe River on the date of site inspection. There is some screening afforded by scrub trees on the northern and southern boundaries of the plant. There is a recently-constructed box culvert bridge across the Tyshe River just beside the plant – facilitating agricultural access.
1.6 The existing village surface water discharge pipe to the Tyshe River is located between Tyshe Bridge and West Bridge – to the northeast of the ruins of Ardfert Cathedral. The outfall pipe is 12” diameter and was flowing on the date of site inspection. This outfall is located within a small field.
1.7 The Cloghmackirkeen Stream is crossed by the R551 on the approach to Ardfert from Tralee. There was a fast flow of water in this stream on the date of site inspection.
2.0 THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Kerry County Council sought approval from the Board on 25 th October 2011, for an Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the Ardfert Sewerage Scheme. The scheme has a number of components as follows- • Effluent treatment plant to be constructed on the ‘Design, Build and Operate’ model (on a site of approximately 0.6ha). The new plant will cater from a population equivalent (p.e.) of 2,040. Provision is made for a second phase of development for an additional 2,040 p.e should such be required. The site is large enough to accommodate both Membrane Bioreactor and Activated Sludge with Tertiary Sand Filtration. The latter option is the preferred one. • The plant will be constructed in two phases – each phase catering for a p.e. of 2040. The average flow through the plant will be 551 cubic metres per day for phase 1. The unit will comprise a storm overflow chamber, storm tanks, splitter chamber, twin aeration tanks, sludge thickening tank and sludge holding tank, twin clarifier tanks, tertiary sand filter and pump chamber for rising main to discharge point. • Single-storey management/maintenance building of 12.5sq.m.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 3 of 32 • Security fencing around the waste water treatment plant. • New vehicular access to the site from the R551 Ardfert-Ballyheige Regional Road, at a T-junction on that road. • New 400m long hard-core access road – approximately 3-4m wide. • Pumped outfall pipe (1,300m in length) to discharge to the Tyshe River to the west of the waste water treatment plant. • Upgraded foul sewer network in village to include new sewered areas, replacement pipes and manholes, discontinuance of sewer to old waste water treatment plant and new sewer to proposed waste water treatment plant. There are two phases of development – to the existing village development and then future development lands. • Upgraded surface water sewer network in village to include two phases – the first to service existing development. Two discharge points to the Tyshe River are proposed in phase 1 with and one discharge to the Tyshe River and one to the Cloghmackirkeen Stream as part of phase 2. The new layout will provide for 4 no. surface water attenuation tanks with capacities ranging from 480-1050 cubic metres. Hydrocarbon interceptors are to be fitted to all discharges. Sections of open drain area proposed as part of the network.
3.0 DEVELOPMENT PLANS
3.1 The relevant document is the Kerry County Development Plan 2009-2015. The plan is silent in relation to Ardfert and its waste water treatment plant. The centre of the village contains a number of Protected Structures and is an Area of Archaeological Potential.
3.2 Ardfert is within the boundary of the Land Use and Transportation Study (LUTS) for the Electoral Area of Tralee (2002). This is an extensive area. Chapter 20 deals with Ardfert, which functions as a commuter suburb of Tralee. Section 20.2.14 states in relation to ‘Sewerage’ that ‘ The treatment plant is currently overloaded due to pressure from new development and is currently being examined by KCC ’. Section 20.4.4, under the heading ‘Constraints’, states that ‘For any further development to occur at Ardfert, highways and sewage infrastructure needs to be enhanced ’.
3.3 The Tralee/Killarney Hub Settlements Local Area Plan 2006, includes the village of Ardfert within the settlement hierarchy. It is stated that- ‘ The existing foul and surface water sewer system is at capacity and future development will not be favourably considered until a new waste water treatment scheme is constructed. The existing system is a combined foul and storm drainage system and measures to deal with storm waters are required ’. The Plan goes on to state that- ‘ The Council is awaiting approval from the Department of the Environment to appoint consultants to prepare a preliminary report for a waste water scheme. The lack of waste water treatment and surface water drainage capacity will continue to limit development over a significant portion of the life of this plan ’.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 4 of 32
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY
Ref. 08.JD0009: By Order dated 26 th September 2008, the Board decided that the Ardfert Sewerage Scheme required an Environmental Impact Assessment.
Ref. 08.CH3059: Refers to a Compulsory Purchase Order file which accompanied the above Ardfert Sewerage Scheme file. Arising from a change in the location of the proposed waste water treatment plant, the Council withdrew the CPO application in November 2011.
5.0 OBSERVATIONS OF PRESCRIBED BODIES
5.1 Bodies Notified by Kerry County Council
By letters dated 12 th October 2011, Kerry County Council issued notification of its intention to seek approval from the Board for an Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the Ardfert Sewerage Scheme, and that comments received by the Board on or before the 30 th November 2011, would be taken into consideration. The bodies notified were- • Department of Arts, Heritage & Gaeltacht. • Inland Fisheries Ireland. • Environmental Protection Agency. • Heritage Council. • An Chomhairle Ealaíon. • Fáilte Ireland. • An Taisce. • National Monuments Service, Department of Arts, Heritage and Gaeltacht.
5.2 Responses Received
5.2.1 Department of Arts, Heritage & Gaeltacht The response, received by the Board on 25 th November 2011, can be summarised in bullet point format as follows- • There are no available records of breeding lapwing from the vicinity of the proposed development. The carrying out of a survey ‘post development’ is not best practice. Appropriate mitigation measures should be proposed as part of the EIS. It is suggested that any works likely to disturb breeding lapwing (if any be discovered in close proximity to the site) should be discontinued until the end of the breeding period. • It is possible that sub-surface archaeological remains could be unearthed during the scheme – regard being had to its extent. Archaeological monitoring should be required by way of condition attached to any grant of planning permission. [Wording of appropriate condition is suggested].
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 5 of 32
5.2.2.1 An Taisce The response of An Taisce (Natural Environment Office), received by the Board on 28 th November 2011, can be summarised in bullet point format as follows- • An Taisce welcomes the upgrade of the waste water treatment plant for this area. • A bird survey should be carried out for lapwing and barn owl in this wet grassland area. • The EIS sent to An Taisce did not contain a section 12.6.3. There appears to be a discrepancy in relation to the amount of hedgerow to be affected by this development – 700m or 140m (with mitigation). Where possible, hedgerows should be planted to replace lost hedgerows. • A bat survey should be carried out to see if trees in the area are being used as bat roosts. Bats are protected under the Wildlife Acts and the Habitats Directive. Clear mitigation measures to avoid disturbance to bats should be included in the EIS. • There is no indication given as to whether the waste water treatment plant will be lit at night. Daubenton bat species generally avoid light. If lighting is needed, it should be kept to a minimum. • As the site is wet grassland, flooding risk should have been examined in the EIS.
5.2.2.2 An Taisce The response of An Taisce (Kerry Association), received by the Board on 30 th November 2011, can be summarised in bullet point format as follows- • The existing waste water treatment plant is entirely inadequate. The proposed plant is a vast improvement on what exists. • The new waste water treatment plant is more acceptable, provided that screen planting is undertaken. • The Tyshe River is a valuable salmonid water. It can best be described as a stream, because flow rate is so low. • The Tyshe River has no assimilative capacity for total ammonia, suspended solids or phosphate. • Tidal effects are noticeable as far upstream as Ardfert Bridge. • Considerable amounts of water are discharged to the Tyshe River from Ardfert Quarry – upstream of the waste water treatment plant. • The discharge point has been described as a swamp. • Surface water is to be discharged upstream of the waste water treatment plant outfall. • A balance must be maintained between surface water outfall and flooding. • The discharge from Ardfert Quarry must be monitored in terms of quantity and quality. If the quarry were to close, the flow in the Tyshe River might be reduced, with consequent loss of assimilative capacity. • There is a possibility of flooding where the discharge point is tidal.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 6 of 32 5.3 Board Requests Comment from Environmental Protection Agency
5.3.1 By letter dated 9 th December 2011, the Board requested the EPA to comment on five issues as follows-
1. The status of the Waste water Discharge Licence Application. 2. The choice of effluent treatment system. 3. The capacity of the effluent treatment plant. 4. Likely improvements in water quality in the Tyshe River. 5. The final choice of discharge point from the five options examined.
5.3.2 The response of the EPA, received by the Board on 7 th February 2012, can be summarised in bullet point format as follows- • The proposed development is not an activity for which an IPPC or Waste Licence is required. • An application for a Waste Water Discharge Licence (D0282-01), received on 2 nd March 2009, is still under assessment, and a licence has not been issued. • The stated population equivalent in the application for the Waste Water Discharge Licence is 1,100. • The Waste Water Discharge Licence relates to the discharges from the agglomeration. The EPA does not consider alternative technologies. The EPA notes that the main advantage to membrane bioreactor over conventional activated sludge plant is that tit is a compact facility (up to five times more compact) that produces significantly less excess sludge. However, the energy consumption is significantly higher that a conventional sludge process. • In setting emission limit values on any discharge from a waste water treatment plant, the EPA aims to achieve the objectives and standards specified in the European Communities Environmental Objectives (Surface Waters) Regulations 2009 in relation to the receiving water.
6.0 OTHER OBSERVATIONS
6.1.1 The observation from Frances Carmody, Brandonwell House, Ardfert, received by the Board on 29 th November 2011, can be summarised in bullet point format as follows- • The observer is a farmer with lands at Brandonwell. The existing waste water treatment plant is located on her lands. • The choice of location for the waste water treatment plant is the best of the four options examined by consultants for Kerry County Council. • Both foul and surface water discharges should be at discharge option point 5 and not option point 2 as is proposed. • The Tyshe Stream is not capable of handling such a large volume of water as is now proposed.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 7 of 32 • Ardfert Quarry extracts aggregate from below the water table and considerable pumping is needed to facilitate this – in excess of 1million gallons per day pumped to the Tyshe Stream. This pumping is causing erosion to the observer’s lands and degradation of the environment. • In the past, during dry summers, the Tyshe Stream used to dry up. What will happen if Ardfert Quarries ceases pumping to the Tyshe Stream? • The new waste water treatment plant will cater for a 500% increase over and above the existing waste water treatment plant. • Such massive development (over 239ha of development land) will result in flooding of farm land. • The water table adjacent to the Tyshe River is already waterlogged and the water table is high. All the land from Brandonwell to Black Rock is low- lying (1-3m above sea level), and it is inevitable that flooding will result. • The tidal reach extends into the observer’s property. Flooding is extensive during high tides – from both fluvial and tidal sources. No flood alleviation measures are proposed. • The observer is concerned about the wayleave through her land for the connecting pipe to the new treatment plant, which runs along the boundary between her land and Kerry Agri-Business. • The foul sewer should be extended down the road to the proposed access road and then back up to the proposed waste water treatment plant. • The observer is concerned about the stormwater pipe being diverted back the bohereen and down through the Rock Field to Tank 2. • Stormwater from all three tanks should be piped in the same route as the sewer pipe, and after treatment, both could be amalgamated at the exit from the proposed road, and taken down the road to discharge point 5 by the Black Rock. This would save the Council the expense of purchasing a wayleave, erecting and servicing attenuations tanks and would provide easy access for maintenance and repair.
6.1.2 The observation is accompanied by the following- • 6 no. colour photographs of Tyshe River and flooding in the area. • Letter from Malone O’Regan McGillycuddy, Consulting Engineers (agent on behalf of Frances Carmody) to Water Services Department of Kerry County Council – dated 25 th November 2002 – in relation to existing waste water treatment plant. • Letter from Ger O’Keeffe, Consulting Engineers (agent on behalf of Frances Carmody) to Water Services Capital Unit of Kerry County Council – dated 13 th September 2007 – being a submission in relation to the proposed Ardfert Sewerage Scheme. • Letter from Frances Carmody to Kerry County Council – dated 10 th September 2007 – objecting to location of proposed new waste water treatment plant on her land. • Letter from Ger O’Keeffe, Consulting Engineer (agent on behalf of Frances Carmody), to An Bord Pleanála – dated 25 th March 2008 – in
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 8 of 32 relation to compulsory purchase of lands for new waste water treatment plant • Letter from Frances Carmody to An Bord Pleanála – dated 25 th March 2008 – objecting to compulsory purchase of her lands for new waste water treatment plant. • Highlighted extracts from Kerry County Development Plan 2009-2015 – Volumes 1 & 3. • Annotated maps extracted from EIS and Ordnance Survey – illustrative of levels in the area of the proposed discharge point. • Annotated composite aerial photograph for Ardfert and the Tyshe River.
6.2.1 The observation from Mairead O’Sullivan, Banna South, Ardfert, received by the Board on 29 th November 2011, can be summarised in bullet point format as follows- • This observation is made in support of Frances Carmody, who is an active farmer in the area. • The position chosen for the waste water treatment plant is the best option. The proposed outfall point 2 is not acceptable because of the low-lying nature of the lands in the area. • Multiple discharge points from the waste water treatment plant would be preferable (points 4 & 5). Discharges from points 2 or 3 are into areas which are already subject to tidal flooding and poor drainage. • MBR is a better treatment option and requires a smaller footprint. Whilst it is initially more expensive, it would ultimately be more economical in the long term. • The zoning of lands along the R551 road from Ardfert to Tralee must be questioned. It is acknowledged that the waste water treatment plant must be large enough to accommodate future growth. However, there are already adequate lands zoned for development with the 2006 village boundary. The nearby villages of Ballyheige and Lixnaw have ghost estates. • Increased discharge to the Tyshe River will result in additional flooding. • Stormwater from the 3 no. attenuation tanks should be collected and routed to a pipeline along the R551 road. The discharge could be at the proposed discharge from the waste water treatment plant or upstream of it, to assist in flushing. • Care needs to be taken to ensure that there is no contamination of the public water supply extraction at Skrillagh. • The waste water treatment plant should not have to treat discharge water from Ardfert Quarries. Water from the quarry should be pumped to a point downstream of the new waste water treatment plant.
6.2.2 The observation is accompanied by the following- • Historical booklet about Ardfert. • Black & white photocopy of Ardfert Plan from the Tralee/Killarney Hub Settlements Local Area Plan 2006.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 9 of 32 • Annotated extract maps from earlier Ardfert Sewerage Scheme and newer Ardfert Sewerage Scheme • Map extract from EIS showing 5 no. alternative discharge points for waste water treatment plant. • Composite aerial photograph of Tyshe River from EPA website. • Map extract from EIS in relation to fluvial flooding on Tyshe River. • Aerial photograph of Tralee waste water treatment plant. • Map showing location of Skrillagh public water abstraction site, and 1km buffer zone. • Map showing sewerage proposed for small housing development at Atlantic Oils premises on R551. • Figure 2.1 – Ardfert Development Plan map. • 4 no. colour photographs of areas affected by pipes.
6.3 The observation from Bat McElligott, Skirlough, Ardfert, received by the Board on 30 th November 2011, can be summarised in bullet point format as follows- • Objection to the waste water treatment plant west of the creamery. Kerry County Council has behaved badly over the past 40 years. • New sewers are not wanted on New Line Road. • Houses are not wanted on the sports field. • The Council has no appreciation of archaeology.
7.0 WASTE WATER DISCHARGE LICENCE APPLICATION
On 2 nd March 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a Waste Water Discharge Application under the Waste water Discharge (Authorisation) Regulations 2007, from Kerry County Council, for the agglomeration of Ardfert (ref. D0282-01). By letter dated 1 st June 2011, the EPA sought additional information from Kerry County Council. This request does not appear to have been complied with to date. The South Western Regional Fisheries Board (SWRFB) wrote to the EPA (12 th February 2010) in relation to this licence application. The thrust of the letter relates to the on-going pollution of the Tyshe River as a result of discharges from the existing waste water treatment plant for the previous 10 years, and legal proceedings instituted in the District Court by the SWRFB against Kerry County Council. The speedy construction of a new waste water treatment plant is seen as the solution to the problem. [Copy of letter included in photograph pouch accompanying this Inspector’s Report]. Correspondence from the EPA, received by the Board on 7 th February 2012, indicates that the application for a Waste Water Discharge Licence for Ardfert is still under assessment.
8.0 ASSESSMENT
The principal issues of this appeal relate to the need for the development, water quality in the Tyshe River, proximity to Natura 2000 sites and a proposed Natural Heritage Area, odour, archaeology, and noise.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 10 of 32
8.1 Rationale for Development
8.1.1 The existing waste water treatment plant serving Ardfert is overloaded and is causing pollution to the Tyshe River. There does not seem to be any disagreement on this point, as per the submissions on the file. Discharges exceed the COD, BOD and suspended solids thresholds set down in the Urban Waste water Treatment Regulations 2001. The Tyshe River (at West Bridge) upstream of the outfall from the existing waste water treatment plant is moderately polluted, with a Biotic Index of 3 recorded consistently since 1989. This is even before any discharge is made to the river from the existing waste water treatment plant. The waste water treatment plant is to be replaced by a new waste water treatment plant at a site further away from the centre of the village – some 450m to the north of the existing plant. The existing system was constructed in the 1960’s and comprises a storm overflow chamber, primary settlement tank, two rotating biological contactors, and one submerged aerated filter. Details and photographs of the existing waste water treatment plant are contained at section 8 of the EIS (and in photographs accompanying this Inspector’s Report). The site is located on the southern bank of the Tyshe River, and the waste water treatment plant discharges to the river at this location. There is concern that the existing plant may be subject to fluvial flooding. There is no dedicated vehicular access to the existing waste water treatment plant site, and there is no room for expansion. The proposed new treatment plant will be located away from the Tyshe River in an area which will not be subject to fluvial flooding – OS maps indicate a spot height of 5m OD in the immediate vicinity of the new site. In addition, it is proposed to discharge to the Tyshe River approximately 1.25km further downstream at a point where dilution levels are greater. This discharge will be via pumped rising main – wayleave being required through agricultural land.
8.1.2 The sewers in the village date from the 1960’s. Some sewers are combined surface water and foul waste – in particular carrying surface water run-off from roads. This is an undesirable situation by any standards – placing severe strain on the treatment capacity at the plant, particularly during periods of heavy rainfall.
8.1.2.1 Foul Sewerage : The northeastern part of the village cannot be served by gravity sewers, and houses are served by septic tanks. Houses in the southwestern part of the village are also served by septic tanks. It is desirable that septic tanks be taken out of service and the houses connected to the mains sewer. CCTV surveys have revealed cracks, lateral intrusions, root ingress, blocked connections and defective connections in sewers. Some 1,462m of foul sewer is 150mm diameter only, less than the 225mm minimum diameter necessary for maintenance. Manhole F12 overflows onto the Fenit road during surcharge conditions.
8.1.2.2 Surface Water Sewerage : The single storm sewer through the village discharges to the Tyshe River some 100m downstream of Tyshe Bridge. CCTV surveys have revealed cracks, obstructions, collapsed culverts, intrusion of other pipes and
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 11 of 32 watermains. Road gullies discharge to the sewer. One farm is discharging washwater to the sewer. Gradients on some stretches are negative. There are surcharges during periods of heavy rainfall. Surface water from fields discharges onto the Tralee-Ardfert Road and onto the Commons East Road. The increase in proposed outfall points to the Tyshe River from one to three will reduce dependence on just one pipeline – particularly in the event of a blockage.
8.1.3 The population of Ardfert was 691 in 2002 and 729 in 2006. Preliminary census returns for 2011 indicate a population for Ardfert DED of 924, a decrease of 1.2% on the 2006 figure of 935. It is recognised that the Ardfert DED figure includes a rural hinterland for the village of Ardfert, and that there is a possibility that the village population could be growing whilst the population of the adjoining hinterland was declining. The development boundary set within the Preliminary Report for the Ardfert Sewerage Scheme (June 2009) includes extensive lands to the south, southwest and west – [indicated at Figure 10.2 of the EIS]. This expanded development boundary of the village contains some 239ha of land. However, using the population figures above, it is difficult to justify the proposed capacity of the waste water treatment plant – to ultimately cater for a village population equivalent of 4,080. By any rational examination, the population equivalent expansion envisaged by the Council for Ardfert to the year 2026 is extraordinary – particularly in the prevailing economic circumstances. Even allowing for the phasing of development, Phase 1 will still cater for a p.e. of 2,040. This is more than double the likely existing population of the village in 2011. There are no large scale industries within Ardfert which would require the spare capacity at the proposed waste water treatment plant. It is difficult to come to any other conclusion but that the proposed waste water treatment plant will have a capacity significantly in excess of what could reasonably be required for a village of the size of Ardfert within the medium term.
8.2 Development Plans
The Tralee/Killarney Hub Settlements Local Area Plan 2006, includes within its boundary, the village of Ardfert. It is recognised that the sewer system (for both foul and surface water) is at capacity and that no development can be permitted until the waste water treatment situation is improved. The LAP refers to preparation of a preliminary report. This has been carried out – Preliminary Report for the Ardfert Sewerage Scheme, June 2009 [copy included at Appendix 3 of the EIS]. A revised Preliminary Report was issued in 2011, arising from a change in location of the new waste water treatment plant. The development boundary of the village closely corresponds to Phase 1 of the proposed sewerage scheme – with the addition of existing houses in Commons West.
8.3 Design & Layout
8.3.1 The proposed development comprises two principal elements – the new waste water treatment plant and the new sewerage network (both foul and surface
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 12 of 32 water). The discharge point for foul water is located 1.25km from the waste water treatment plant. The construction phase of development is expected to last 18 months. Construction hours are stated to be 07.30-20.00 Monday to Saturday and 08.00-16.00 on Sundays and bank holidays. The maximum no. of workers on site at any one time will be 10. These hours would appear to be reasonable in the interest of completing the work as expeditiously as possible – particularly where roads/streets are to be dug up to facilitate the laying of new sewer pipes. It is unlikely that work will be continuous in any area over such an 18-month period.
8.3.2 The preliminary design elements of the waste water treatment plant are outlined in section 9.4 of the EIS. It is proposed to use Activated Sludge with Tertiary Sand Filtration rather than Membrane Bioreactor technology. This is justified on the basis of cost – notwithstanding that the former technology requires a larger site. Space is not an issue in this agricultural area – the land being of poor-quality. The response of the EPA notes the significantly higher energy costs involved with membrane bioreactor technology. It is already noted that the ‘Design & Build’ nature of the contract means that there is no detailed plan of the effluent treatment plant. Notwithstanding this, the preliminary design details outlined in section 9.4 and within section 6.5.2 of the Preliminary Report for the Ardfert Sewerage Scheme (June 2009), give sufficient details to enable a decision to be made on the appropriateness of the design. The design allows for two streams in the secondary treatment process, to facilitate maintenance. Modular design allows for increase in capacity without too much disruption of the existing facility. There is five days sludge storage capacity. Sludge will be removed from the site for treatment in accordance with the Council’s Sludge Management Plan. Phosphorous removal is by chemical precipitation and secondary clarification to a standard of less than 0.5mg/l. Tertiary sand filtration will further improve the quality of effluent – providing for less than 5mg/l of BOD and less than 10mg/l of suspended solids.
8.3.3 The proposed new access to the waste water treatment plant is located on a straight stretch of the R551 at a point where the 80kph speed restriction applies, and where sight distance in either direction is good. Upon completion of construction of the plant, there will be limited traffic to the site for servicing and sludge removal. The proposed development will not result in traffic hazard. Similarly, laying pipelines within roads will be in the nature of routine maintenance of such infrastructure and, if appropriately managed, will not result in traffic hazard.
8.3.4 The new foul network will involve replacing and upsizing pipe runs, replacing manholes, and constructing new sewers to service parts of the village currently served by septic tanks. Because the system is designed to cater for future development flows, providing self-cleansing velocities may prove difficult. To this end, it is proposed to connect one road gully at the head of each branch to allow the system to be flushed periodically during heavy rainfall events. Phase 2 of the development will allow for lands to the south of Ardfert to be developed and sewered. Because of gradients in the area – effluent would have to be
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 13 of 32 pumped to manhole F46 before falling by gravity to the waste water treatment plant. This would appear to be reasonable.
8.3.5 The new surface water network is divided into two phases – Phase 1 servicing existing development in the village. The existing system cannot cope with a 1-in- 20 year storm event. New lengths of pipe are to be laid – varying in diameter from 225mm to 1,050mm (some 2.17km). These sewers will cater for future development within the village. New storm sewers are to be provided for the Commons West and Sackville/Skrillagh parts of the village – in areas where none exist at present. Two attenuation tanks are provided – to attenuate flows discharging to the Tyshe River. Attenuation tanks vary in capacity from 480-600 cubic metres within Phase 1. The proposed discharge from the Sackville/Skrillagh area of the village will not be attenuated – owing to the limited area served by the new sewer. All discharges will be fitted with hydrocarbon interceptors. It is proposed to construct an open 450mm diameter land drain to connect agricultural run-off at a farm gate on the Commons East Road (between manholes S17 and S18) – a point which is causing flooding on the road at present. Phase 2 at South Ardfert and Cloon Glebe provides for additional sewers to serve future development lands, together with attenuation tanks. Lands at Cloon Glebe will drain to the Tyshe River to the north, whilst lands at Ardfert South will drain to the Cloghmackirkeen Stream to the south.
8.3.6 Section 13 of the EIS deals with the landscape and visual impact of the development: Appendix 13 provides additional photographs. Having regard to- the limited site area of the proposed waste water treatment plant; its separation from the R551 Ardfert-Ballyheige road; the limited scale and height of structures on site; the replacement nature of the development (new treatment plant for old); the absence of any designated views/prospects in the area; and the limited extent of disturbance arising from pipe-laying (with reinstatement of ground afterwards); the proposed development will not have any significant impact on the landscape or the visual amenities of the area.
8.4 Flora & Fauna
Section 12 and Appendix 12 of the EIS deal with the issues flora and fauna. The area of the site is 1.4ha, an insignificant area in terms of the quantity of similar- type surrounding farmland. The loss of habitat will not be significant. The area is low-lying – there being a drain running along the northern boundary of the waste water treatment plant site. This drain and another tributary of the Tyshe River will have to be bridged to access the site proper. A field survey was carried out on 17 th August 2009. A mammal survey was carried out, with no evidence of mammals on the site – although the habitat would be suitable for otter, hare, pygmy shrew, stoat and badger. The site does not provide suitable roost sites for bats – there being no trees or buildings. Trees along the route of pipelines have been identified – which might provide suitable roost sites, but these are unlikely to be affected by trenching and pipe-laying. There is only a poor-quality
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 14 of 32 hedgerow, battered by sea winds, along the eastern side of the new access to the waste water treatment plant. A separate habitat survey was carried out on 12 th August 2009. The site of the waste water treatment plant could be characterised as ‘wet grassland’ or ‘improved agricultural grassland’. Rush and flag iris are conspicuous on site. Proximity to the sea results in few trees in the area – evidenced by photographs attached to this Inspector’s Report). There were no NPWS Rare Plant Data species recorded on the site. There were no bird species of high conservation concern recorded at the site. I would be satisfied that the proposed site for the treatment plant will not have any significant impact on flora or fauna in its immediate vicinity. I have elsewhere in this report commented on the potential impacts on aquatic species within streams and the Tyshe River.
8.5 Surface Waters
8.5.1 Section 11 and Appendix 11 of the EIS deal with this issue. There are 3 no. proposed surface water discharge points to the Tyshe River and one further one to the Cloghmackirkeen Stream. Fieldwork to assess biological water quality was carried out on 26 th February 2009. Kick samples were collected from three points on the Tyshe River and one on the Cloghmackirkeen Stream. Habitat assessment was carried out on four stretches of the Tyshe River for salmonid and lamprey species. Results were mixed (indicated at section 11.2). The Biological Water Quality indicated a Q-rating of Q3 (moderately polluted) at the two sites on the Tyshe River upstream of the existing waste water treatment plant and Q2 (seriously polluted) at the one site just downstream of the existing waste water treatment plant. The South Western Regional Fisheries Board designates the Tyshe River as “valuable salmonid spawning and nursery water”. Further downstream of the waste water treatment plant, the water quality and habitats are adequate to support a moderate population of juvenile brown trout and sea trout/slob trout. Sluice gates at the outfall to Tralee Bay constitute an obstacle to migrating trout/salmon. The outfall of the Tyshe River to the sea is some 3km from the proposed discharge point from the new waste water treatment plant. Approximately 1km of the lower reaches of the Tyshe River forms the boundary of the Akeragh, Banna and Barrow Harbour cSAC/pNHA. The Tyshe River is not within the Tralee Bay Complex cSPA – except where it debouches into the sea at Black Rock on Banna Strand. The cSAC is remarkable for its dune systems and salt marshes, and the plant species they support. These areas are also important as a wintering site for significant numbers of waterfowl. Surface water is already discharging to the Tyshe River from the catchment around Ardfert. The proposed development will improve the quality of surface water discharge through the installation of hydrocarbon interceptors on new outfall points and through removal of surface water from the waste water treatment plant – resulting in stormwater overflow within the plant at times of heavy rainfall. The proposed development will not result in deterioration in the water quality of this river.
8.5.2 It is proposed to discharge surface water from part of phase 2 of the sewerage scheme to the Cloghmackirkeen Stream to the south of the village. The habitat
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 15 of 32 assessment indicates variability for salmonid and lamprey species. The Biological Water Quality is Q4 (unpolluted). The Cloghmackirkeen Stream already drains the catchment. The new surface water outfall would include a hydrocarbon interceptor. The proposed development will not result in deterioration in the water quality of this stream.
8.5.3 The revised Preliminary Report for the Ardfert Sewerage Scheme (June 2009 & August 2011)) examined five discharge points, varying from the existing waste water treatment plant discharge point to a point where the Tyshe River debouches into the sea at Black Rock on Banna Strand. The proposed plant can achieve the standards set down in the Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations 2001, but cannot meet the much higher standards of the European Communities Environmental Objectives (Surface Waters) Regulations 2009. There are no flow measurement stations on the Tyshe River. The estimated flow at the proposed discharge point (point 2) is 2,134m3 per day. The discharge point is not a marsh, as confirmed by site inspection on 3 rd December 2011. A total of 26 river water samples were taken at West Bridge on the Tyshe River between May 2007 and March 2008, and analysed for BOD, suspended solids, ammonia and Molybdate Reactive Phosphate (MRP). The sampling point was upriver of the discharge from the existing waste water treatment plant. There are no significant data results for other points on the river. Table 6.7 provides a summary of the waste assimilative capacity of the river at all five chosen possible discharge points. The assessment indicates that the river has no assimilative capacity with respect to total ammonia, phosphorous and suspended solids and has limited capacity to assimilate BOD at any of the possible points of discharge. For this reason, a BATNEEC approach has been adopted to dealing with each parameter. The discharge standards proposed are 4.92mg/l BOD, 10.0mg/l suspended solids, 0.5mg/l total phosphorous, 0.3mg/l ortho-phosphate, and 0.5mg/l total ammonia. The Shannon International River Basin Management Plan requires restoration of the Tyshe River to ‘Good’ status by 2021. The proposed development will improve the quality of discharge to the Tyshe River – although no information has been given of the quality of effluent from the existing waste water treatment plant. The pumping of treated effluent to Point 2 will improve the dilution rate available through discharging at a point 1.25km downriver of the existing discharge point. In between, there are a number of streams/drains debouching into the main channel of the Tyshe River.
8.5.4 It will be necessary to obtain wayleaves through agricultural land for the outfall pipe to discharge Point 2. Part of the access road to the waste water treatment plant will accommodate the first section of this rising main. The proposed pipeline will have to cross two deep and wide drains (see photographs attached to this Inspector’s Report) where drains in the area have been canalised and dredged to improve drainage for agricultural purposes. No details of proposed crossing points have been indicated – so it is not clear if the pipe will be beneath the drains, through the drains or above them.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 16 of 32 8.5.5 Section 15.2.4 of the EIS deals with the issue of flooding – particularly in relation to the Tyshe River. Flood flows from five-year to one hundred-year were calculated. Tidal levels in Tralee Bay were also taken into consideration – as there are sluice gates at the mouth of the Tyshe River at Black Rock. The one- hundred year flows are calculated at 11.7m 3 per second. The lower half of the river is susceptible to tidal flooding. The proposed waste water treatment plant site is not subject to tidal flooding – being located approximately 5m OD.
8.6 Cultural Heritage
Section 14 and Appendix 14 of the EIS deal with this issue. Of principal importance is the built heritage of the ruins of Ardfert Cathedral and associated religious outlying buildings, and the area of archaeological importance surrounding the complex (KE020-046001). This area of archaeological importance (KE020-046) may contain remains of the mediaeval town which grew up around the cathedral and the castle (now gone) – (KE020-046005). The area is rich in recorded monuments – some 48 within the study area – ranging from earthworks/ringforts to grave slabs and ecclesiastical structures. A number of structures are also included in the Record of Protected Structures contained within the Development Plan. Site walkovers were carried out on 18 th September 2008 and 20 th March 2009. There are no known monuments within or adjacent to the waste water treatment plant site. Most pipe runs are located within existing roads. However, some pipe runs will be through virgin ground – particularly surface water sewers within both Phase 1 and Phase 2. The EIS was referred to the Department of Arts, Heritage & Gaeltacht for comment. The Department recommended archaeological monitoring during any ground disturbance – regard being had to the extent of the scheme. This would appear to be reasonable. The site of the waste water treatment plant and access road is well outside of the area of archaeological potential associated with Ardfert.
8.7 Soils, Geology & Hydrogeology
These topics are covered in section 15 of the EIS. The soils in the area comprise cut-over peat. The subsoil in the area is till. The bedrock is carboniferous limestone. The aquifer beneath the waste water treatment plant is classified as Regionally Important – Karstified diffuse. The vulnerability of the aquifer is variable (High to Low), as only an interim study was carried out by the Geological Survey of Ireland (GSI) in this area. Vulnerability beneath the village itself is classified as Extreme – particularly along the Tyshe River as it flows through the village. The extent of gravel aquifers in the area is unknown. Water- bearing gravels extend from 9-18m below ground level. The public water supply borehole for the village is located within the townland of Skrillagh, some 480m to the east of the waste water treatment plant site – and the depth to bedrock at the borehole is 18m. It is stated in the EIS that ‘ A source protection area has not been delineated for the scheme ’. The GSI website indicates that there is no information to date for County Kerry in relation to protection of public sources of
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 17 of 32 water supply. There is little difference in the distance to the borehole from the existing waste water treatment plant and the proposed waste water treatment plant. The borehole is located inland of the proposed site, and the direction of groundwater flow is estimated to be from east to west i.e. towards the sea. This means that any accidental spillages at the waste water treatment plant which enter groundwater, would likely flow away from the public supply borehole towards the sea. Water supply is from the gravels above the bedrock. Broken or cracked sewers have the capacity to pollute groundwater. The proposed development will upgrade an older sewer network and will rectify identified damaged sewers. The proposed development will not have any impact on soils, geology or hydrogeology in the area.
8.8 Air Quality & Climate
These linked issues are covered by section 16 of the EIS. The waste water treatment plant is of limited scale and will not have any impacts on climate. A baseline air quality monitoring survey was carried out at six locations for volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide, ammonia, hydrogen sulphide and dust. The survey was carried out over two-week period in July/August 2009. As would be expected in a rural area, background air pollutant concentrations are low. Odour dispersion modelling was used to estimate the impacts of odours released on sensitive receptors in the vicinity. Generic emission rates for odours were used in the absence of any detailed design for the waste water treatment plant. Prevailing westerly winds from the Atlantic ensure good dispersion of any air-borne pollutants in the area. A total of 14 sensitive receptors in the area were identified (Table 16.7 and Figure 16.2). The closest is 250m from the waste water treatment plant. There are no legislative limits for odour in Ireland – owing to the subjective nature of odour. Dust limits are specified at 350mg per sq.m per day. Odour concentrations were mapped for all 14 sensitive receptors. Figure 16.2 indicates that concentrations of odour would not give rise to any annoyance at the most affected receptors R3-R6. An Odour Management Plan for the plant will be put in operation. There was no noticeable odour from the existing waste water treatment plant on the date of site inspection – other than from a standing position directly above the overflow chamber within the treatment plant complex itself. I would be satisfied that the proposed effluent treatment plant is located a sufficient distance from the nearest odour sensitive location (houses immediately to the east) – approximately 200m. At page 11 of the non-Technical Summary of the EIS, it is noted that the appointed operator will be required to comply with the European Communities (Waste Water Treatment) (Prevention of Odours and Noise) Regulations 2005 – S.I. No. 787 of 2005.
8.9 Noise & Vibration
8.9.1 Section 17 of the EIS deals with these issues. The activated sludge waste water treatment plant will result in some level of noise over and above surrounding noise levels. The principal noise source in the area is from traffic on the R551
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 18 of 32 road. There will be some level of noise during the construction phase of the waste water treatment plant and the excavation of trenches for sewers, but this will be of limited duration. The Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for noise recommends not greater than 55dB(A) during daytime and 45dB(A) during night- time (22.00-08.00 hours) – measured at the nearest noise-sensitive location. Operation of the plant would be on a continuous 24-hour basis. The noise- sensitive locations in the vicinity of the waste water treatment plant are houses – located to the north and east of the site. A baseline noise survey was carried out on 5 th August 2009 at five residential locations to the north, east and southeast of the waste water treatment plant – essentially along the R551 Regional Road. An additional sixth noise monitoring point was established on the site of the proposed waste water treatment plant, and a further seventh point to the east was used for 24-hour baseline monitoring (monitoring points indicated at Figure 17.1 of the EIS). Daytime noise measurements varied from 42.3dB(A)LAeq to 61.5dB(A)LAeq. There is commercial activity on either side of the R551 due east of the site at Kerry Agri-Business and at Atlantic Oils. The closest house to the site is N5 – 110m [sic] to the east. The distance is in fact approximately 200m. This house is located immediately adjacent to the above-mentioned commercial premises and also the R551 Regional Road. Noise measurement at Point 7 (24- hour monitoring) reached a low of 30.5dB(A)LAeq in the early hours of the morning, and a high of 53.5dB(A)LAeq in the late evening. The survey indicates that noise from the existing waste water treatment plant was inaudible from all monitoring points. Table 17.8 is a model showing predicted noise levels at noise- sensitive receptors during construction stage. A total of 10 receptors are indicated R1-R10 (but there is no key or map showing where they are located). A similar model has been produced for operational noise – but again there is no key showing the location of the 10 receptors. Operational noise will include the aeration system and pumps. Section 17.4.4.2 acknowledges that it is not possible to be exact in relation to noise from the waste water treatment plant because of the ‘Design Build Operate’ nature of the contract. A computer noise propagation model for a typical waste water treatment plant was used to model the impact on the 10 receptors – the highest of which was 41.0dB(A)L Aeq. Noise mitigation measures include restriction of construction hours, good work practices during construction, and periodic monitoring of noise during initial operational stage. Traffic volumes to the waste water treatment plant will be slight, and will not have a significant impact on the noise regime in the area. There was no noise audible from the existing waste water treatment plant, other than the sound of water flowing, at the boundary of the plant. I would be satisfied that the separation distance between the proposed waste water treatment plant and the nearest houses to the east would be more than sufficient to mitigate any noise from the plant. It should be noted that houses in this area are located immediately adjacent to the busy R551 regional road (the principal noise source in the area) and two commercial premises – Kerry Agri-Business and Atlantic Oils. Noise nuisance related to excavation of trenches for laying of new sewers and replacement of old ones will be of limited duration, and will not have any significant impact on the environment. At page 11 of the non-Technical
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 19 of 32 Summary of the EIS, it is noted that the appointed operator will be required to comply with the European Communities (Waste Water Treatment) (Prevention of Odours and Noise) Regulations 2005 – S.I. No. 787 of 2005.
8.9.2 There will be no vibration impacts from the development – other than very short- term impacts during the excavation of trenches for sewers within roadways in the vicinity of houses.
8.10 Environmental Impact Assessment
8.10.1 Compliance with the Requirements of Articles 94 and 111 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 (as amended)
The proposed development, in overall terms, is in compliance with Articles 94 and 111 of the Planning and Development Regulations, 2001 (as amended). To this extent I would comment as follows:-
• The EIS contains the information specified in paragraph 1 of Schedule 6 of the Regulations, in that it:-
- Describes the proposed sewerage scheme, including the site for the waste water treatment plant, and the design and size of plant and sewerage; - Describes the measures envisaged to avoid, reduce and, if possible, remedy significant adverse effects; - Provides the data necessary to identify and assess the main effects the sewerage scheme is likely to have on the environment; - Gives an outline of the main alternatives studied and the main reasons for the choice of site for the waste water treatment plant, and outfalls for foul and surface water, taking into account the effects on the environment.
• The EIS contains the relevant information specified in paragraph 2 of Schedule 6 of the Regulations. This includes:-
- A description of the physical characteristics of the sewerage scheme and its land use requirements; - The main characteristics of the waste water treatment plant; - The emissions arising; - A description of the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected by the proposal (waste water treatment plant, surface water discharge points and excavation for sewers); - A description of the likely significant effects on the environment resulting from the development’s existence, the development’s use of natural resources, the emission of pollutants (to watercourses and air) and creation of nuisances, and a description of the forecasting methods used; and - Provision of an indication of any difficulties encountered in compiling information. To this end it must be noted that there is no detailed design
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 20 of 32 for the proposed waste water treatment plant – the facility being undertaken on a ‘Design Build Operate’ basis.
• There is an adequate summary of the EIS in non-technical language.
8.10.2 Identification of the Likely Significant Direct and Indirect Effects of the Sewerage Scheme on the Environment
The submitted EIS, and the assessment preceding this part of the Inspector’s Report, focus on the significant direct and indirect effects arising from the proposed development. It is proposed here solely to identify the main likely effects under a range of headings as follows:
Human Beings
• Employment at the construction stage. • Odour. • Noise.
Flora & Fauna
• Impacts on water courses in the area. • Effects on Special Areas of Conservation/proposed Natural Heritage Areas. • Effects on Special Protection Areas. • Species impacts within the watercourses in the area.
Water
• Water quality within the Tyshe River and its immediate discharge to the sea at Black Rock, and within the Cloghmackirkeen Stream. • Quality of water in gravel and bedrock aquifers beneath the village and beneath the wastewater treatment plant.
Air and Climate
• Effects of odour from the waste water treatment plant.
Cultural Heritage
• Effects on archaeology in and around Ardfert Abbey complex arising from excavation of ground to replace or to lay new sewers.
Interactions
• Humans and odour/noise.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 21 of 32 • Flora & fauna and water quality.
8.10.3 Description of the Likely Effects Identified
The likely effects arising from the development proceeding are anticipated to include the following:-
Human Beings
Employment : Short-term local community impact at the construction stage (up to 10 people employed during the 18-month construction phase).
Odour : Nuisance caused by proximity of waste water treatment plant to sensitive receptors (houses) – particularly those downwind of the prevailing southwesterly and westerly winds in this area.
Noise : Noise from machinery and processes at the waste water treatment plant site – most elements of which will be externally located.
Flora & Fauna
Special Areas of Conservation : Impacts on aquatic fauna due to discharges from the waste water treatment plant.
Natural Heritage Areas : Impacts on aquatic fauna due to discharges from the waste water treatment plant.
Special Protection Areas: Impacts on bird species.
Water
Lowering water quality : Within Tyshe River and Cloghmackirkeen Stream arising from construction run-off during excavation for sewers and upon the ecology and freshwater invertebrate fauna, flora and fish habitats from discharge from the waste water treatment plant.
Accidental Spillages: At waste water treatment plant when sludge is being transferred to vehicles or when repairs/maintenance is undertaken, and possibility of spillages entering adjacent watercourses.
Affecting important habitats : Undermining the important habitats at the adjacent Tralee Bay Complex cSPA; and the Akeragh, Banna and Barrow Harbour SAC/pNHA.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 22 of 32
Groundwater: Pollution of gravel and bedrock aquifers beneath the site arising from leakage of the foul sewer system or leakages/spillages of chemicals or sewage/sludge at the waste water treatment plant during transfers of sludge or during maintenance works. The connection of houses within Ardfert (Commons West and Sackville/Skrillagh) which currently operate on septic tanks has the potential to improve the quality of groundwater in the area.
Air and Climate
Odour : Likelihood of nuisance being caused to nearby sensitive receptors – particularly houses.
Noise disturbance : Mechanical noise impacts from wastewater treatment plant on sensitive receptors.
Cultural Heritage
Archaeology : Disturbance to or destruction of on-site archaeology during laying of new pipes or replacement of older pipes within an area of archaeological potential surrounding Ardfert Cathedral or within new surface water sewer run through Cloon Glebe townland.
Interactions
The effects of interactions between humans and air quality, flora/fauna and water quality (ground and surface) are implicit in the range of preceding issues listed.
8.10.4 Assessment of the Likely Significant Effects Identified, Having Regard to the Mitigation Measures Proposed
The detailed assessment set out before this section of the report fully considers the range of relevant likely significant effects with due regard given to the mitigation measures proposed to be applied, should the proposed development proceed. What follows is a short list of some of the most important mitigation measures to be employed, which are considered necessary to address the range of potential significant impacts arising from the proposed development.
Human Beings
Odour: In the absence of detailed design for the waste water treatment plant, the applicant relies on the separation distance of the plant from houses – the closest of which is approximately 200m away.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 23 of 32 Noise: Separation distance between waste water treatment plant and the nearest house – approximately 200m.
Flora & Fauna
Special Areas of Conservation: Constraints-led approach to siting of plant, pumping of waste to outfall 1.25km distant.
Natural Heritage Areas: Constraints-led approach to siting of plant, pumping of waste to outfall 1.25km distant.
Special Protection Areas: Avoidance of areas designated for nature conservation; discharge point outside of SPA.
Species impact: Restriction in area of site for treatment plant, location of plant outfall at point of greater dilution on Tyshe River.
Water
Watercourse quality: Protection of watercourses through use of hydrocarbon interceptors and attenuation tanks on surface water outfall points to Tyshe River and Cloghmackirkeen Stream. Location of outfall from waste water treatment plant some 1.25km further downstream on the Tyshe River to ensure better dilution rates. Improved tertiary treatment on waste water treatment plant with regular sludge removal off-site. Bunding of areas of waste water treatment plant where waste is to be transferred to tankers. Relocation of waste water treatment plant from banks of Tyshe River to lessen the chance of fluvial flooding of the works and consequent pollution of the watercourse.
Groundwater quality: New sewers and improved gradients will lessen the possibility of leakage and pollution of gravel and bedrock aquifers beneath Ardfert.
Important habitats: Licensed discharge to Tyshe River.
Air and Climate
Air: New treatment plant and location of plant further away from village will lessen the likelihood of odour nuisance in the event of a malfunction at the plant.
Noise disturbance: Separation from sensitive receptors.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 24 of 32 Cultural Heritage
Archaeology : Pipes within the area of archaeological potential will almost entirely be laid in public roads. Archaeological monitoring will be carried out for all soil-stripping and sewer trenching (having regard to the rich archaeological heritage of the area).
Material Assets
Sewerage: Improvement in sewerage services for Ardfert.
8.10.5 Conclusions Regarding the Acceptability or Otherwise of the Likely Residual Effects Identified
The conclusions regarding the acceptability of the likely main residual effects of this proposal are clearly addressed under the various headings of the main assessment, and it is not proposed to repeat them. Suffice to indicate that the principal areas of concern focus on impacts on ecology, water, and human beings. The other sections of this assessment seek to draw out the critical issues and to determine the most desirable approach to reaching a balanced decision on the proposed development.
8.10.6 Alternatives Considered
8.10.6.1 Section 6 of the EIS deals with the issue of alternatives considered. The ‘do nothing’ option was not considered feasible, as the existing waste water treatment plant has no capacity for expansion, and is already causing pollution to the Tyshe River.
8.10.6.2 A total of 5 no. discharge points to the Tyshe River were considered – ranging from the existing waste water treatment plant outfall point to a discharge at Black Rock close to Banna Strand (close to where the river discharges into Tralee Bay). The assimilative capacity of the river was assessed with respect to total ammonia, phosphorous, suspended solids and BOD. The closer to the sea, the greater the BOD assimilative capacity. Stringent BOD standards are stated to be achievable at discharge point 2. Moving the discharge point further downstream would necessitate the construction of additional length of rising main and concomitant additional costs in relation to pipe laying and pumping. There was evidence of eutrophication at discharge point 3.
8.10.6.3 The possibility of pumping raw sewage from Commons Bridge, Ardfert to a new treatment plant at Abbeydorney was considered. The distance involved is some 7.5km by road. It was considered that such a length of rising main could result in waste water becoming septic with consequent odour nuisance at Abbeydorney waste water treatment plant and corrosion
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 25 of 32 of pipes along the rising main. Chemical dosing for septicity was considered to be financially costly - €62,000 per annum. In addition, the trunk main at Abbeydorney would have to be upgraded from 300mm to 375mm diameter.
8.10.6.4 A total of four sites were considered for the waste water treatment plant on the northwestern side of the village. Sites with greater separation distances from schools and houses (sensitive receptors) were favoured – arising from concerns in relation to odour, noise and potential impact on house prices. All four sites will discharge to the same point on the Tyshe River. Sites 1 & 2 on the Ballyheige Road were considered to be less attractive on visual grounds – owing to proximity to the Regional Road. Site no. 1 (the site of the existing waste water treatment plant) was considered less favourably due to space constraints and absence of a vehicular connection to the road network. Sites 1 & 2 are closer to the area of archaeological potential associated with Ardfert Abbey and the village core, and therefore, more likely to negatively impact on cultural heritage. Site 1 was considered to be at risk of flooding from the Tyshe River itself. Site 4 (the preferred option) can be operated by gravity feed.
8.10.6.5 Alternative waste water treatment options considered were Activated Sludge with Tertiary Sand Filtration and Membrane Bioreactor (MBR). The former was chosen because of better performance and because lesser quantities of chemicals are required to precipitate phosphorous. The energy requirements of MBR are 40% higher than the first option. The first option requires three times as much land as the MBR method, but with falling land prices in recent years, this is not considered a critical consideration. The estimated cost for 4,080 p.e for the former option is €2,689,938, whilst for the latter it is €3,044,368.
8.10.7 Interaction of Impacts
Section 18 of the EIS deals with the interaction of potential impacts on human beings, flora, fauna, soil, water, air, climatic factors, the landscape, material assets (including architectural, archaeological and cultural heritage).
8.11 Appropriate Assessment
8.11.1 The proximity of the site to the Tralee Bay Complex Special Protection Area (SPA) [which incorporates the former Akeragh, Banna & Barrow Harbour SPA] and the Akeragh, Banna and Barrow Harbour candidate Special Area of Conservation (cSAC)/proposed Natural Heritage Area (pNHA), which form part of the Natura 2000 Network, render the proposed works subject to ‘Appropriate Assessment’ (AA) procedures of the potential for the development to impact either directly or indirectly upon the ‘conservation objectives’ for these sites, as required under Article 6 of the EU Habitats Directive. The AA is included at
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 26 of 32 Appendix 12 of the EIS. Approximately 1km of the lowest reach of the Tyshe River abuts the cSAC/pNHA, whilst only the point where the river debouches into the sea at Black Rock is within the SPA. Whilst the sewer network and the waste water treatment plant are located some distance from either Natura 2000 site, the Tyshe River, and to a lesser extend the Cloghmackirkeen Stream, are direct conduits connecting the development to Tralee Bay. The proposed discharge point from the waste water treatment plant to the Tyshe River is approximately 3.25km from the point where the river debouches into the sea at Black Rock on Banna Strand.
8.11.2 A Stage 1 Screening process was undertaken on behalf of the applicant. The waste water treatment plant is small in scale and the site itself is consequently small. Impact on surface water quality is likely to be the most significant impact of the proposal. The impact is adjudicated to be positive, in that the quality of effluent discharged from the new waste water treatment plant will be superior to that currently discharged by the existing waste water treatment plant. The Screening identified four Natura 2000 sites within 5km (arbitrarily chosen) of the waste water treatment plant. Adherence to appropriate site management procedures during the construction phase of the waste water treatment plant and the excavation of trenches for sewer lines, will ensure that no pollution (accidental spillages of concrete or hydrocarbons) or silt enters watercourses leading to the Tyshe River and Cloghmackirkeen Stream.
8.11.3 Site-specific ‘Conservation Objectives’ are available for the Akeragh, Banna and Barrow Harbour cSAC. These relate to maintenance or restoration of the favourable conservation status of the following- • Annual vegetation drift lines. • Salicornia and other annuals colonizing mud and sand. • Atlantic salt meadows ( Glauco-Puccinellietalia maritimae ). • Mediterranean salt meadows ( Juncetalia maritimi ). • Embryonic shifting dunes. • Shifting dunes along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria (“white dunes”). • Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation (“grey dunes”). • Humid dune slacks. • European dry heaths. The principal habitats to be preserved within the cSAC/pNHA are dunes, salt meadows and salt-flats/mud-flats. Specific mention is made of Salicornia – a genus of succulent plants which include amongst others samphire and glasswort. Marram grass ( Ammophila arenaria ) is mentioned in association with dune habitats. None of these species or habitats will be impacted upon by the discharges to the Tyshe River. The discharge pipe is located some 2km upriver of the boundary of the cSAC/pNHA where is abuts the same Tyshe River. The proposed waste water treatment plant and discharge will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerned.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 27 of 32 8.11.4 Site-specific ‘Conservation Objectives’ are available for the Tralee Bay Complex SPA. These relate to the presence of intertidal sediments and flats supporting a diverse macro-invertebrate fauna, as well as extensive beds of eelgrass which provide important food for colonies of birds and winter feeding for migratory birds. Of special conservation value are Whooper Swan, Light-bellied Brent Goose, Shellduck, Wigeon, Teal, Mallard, Pintail, Scaup, Oystercatcher, Ringed Plover, Golden Plover, Grey Plover, Lapwing, Sanderling, Dunlin, Black-tailed Godwit, Bar-tailed Godwit, Curlew, Redshank, Turnstone, Black-headed Gull and Common Gull. The SPA is stated to support over 20,000 wintering waterfowl annually – some populations being of international importance. Whooper Swan, Golden Plover and Bar-tailed Godwit are included in Annex I of the Birds Directive. Only the mouth of the Tyshe River abuts the SPA – some 3.25km downstream of the proposed discharge point from the waste water treatment plant. The proposed development will improve the quality of water in the Tyshe River. The proposed waste water treatment plant and discharge will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerned.
8.11.5 It is proposed to discharge surface water only to the Cloghmackirkeen Stream (Phase 2) which flows into Tralee Bay through Barrow Harbour. This stream already serves as the surface water drainage channel for the area to the south of Ardfert. The outfall will be fitted with an hydrocarbon filter (as will the discharge points to the Tyshe River). These will improve the quality of surface water being discharged to the watercourse. The proposed surface water discharges will not adversely affect the integrity of the Natura 2000 sites concerned.
8.12 Other Comments/Issues
8.12.1 The EIS refers to a pumping station for foul water on the Tralee Road. This does not feature in the foul sewer layout drawing Figure 1.1. However, in order to service Phase 2 lands in Ardfert South, pumping would be required to manhole F46 from whence gravity would take sewage to the waste water treatment plant.
8.12.2 I note that the project does not deal with the issue of decommissioning of the existing waste water treatment plant.
8.12.3 Observers have suggested that the line of the foul network be altered in the vicinity of the Kerry Agri-Business building – where the line leaves the road and crosses agricultural land to connect to the waste water treatment plant – between manholes F1c and F1h. The alternative route suggested along the R551 and back down the access road to the waste water treatment plant would involve considerable additional length and cost for no real benefit. It is not clear if gradients would be appropriate for gravity feed. It will be necessary for the Council to acquire wayleaves for the pipeline to cross agricultural land. Similarly the proposed new surface water sewer through observer lands S28-S32, will have to be installed with the necessary wayleaves obtained from the landowner. The decommissioning of the old waste water treatment plant will result in the
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 28 of 32 redundancy of the existing sewer line F01-F05 within the same field – the length of redundant and new piping being roughly equal. Suggestions that all surface water outfall pipes be amalgamated and discharged into the Tyshe River at Point 5 near Black Rock (in place of Point 2) as proposed, does not make any sense – particularly as it has been suggested that pipe runs be along the public road to Banna instead of through fields, in order to obviate the need to obtain wayleaves from farmers. This would have the effect of considerably adding to the cost of the scheme through laying of additional lengths of pipe and having to pump surface water as well as foul. The applicant has indicated that the dilution rates available at Point 2 are sufficient and there is no benefit to be had from pumping the additional 3km distance to Point 5. The suggestion that surface water could be pumped to discharge Point 2 to assist in flushing is not reasonable, as discharge upriver as proposed, will have the same effect – the water flowing down the Tyshe River and past discharge Point 2 to assist in flushing.
8.12.4 Reference is made to pumping of water from Ardfert Quarry into the Tyshe River upstream of the village. The discharge of water from the quarry is not part of the application for approval before the Board. Water is stated to be pumped from the quarry at present, and whether a new waste water treatment plant is built or not, will not make any difference to the situation. Claims that erosion is being caused at the land of one of the observers as a result of this pumping is not a relevant consideration in the case before the Board. It has been suggested that if extraction of aggregate at the quarry were to cease, then pumping would cease, and the flow in the Tyshe River would be consequently reduced, with impact on dilution. It is also suggested that in summer, with reduced pumping from the quarry, the flow rates in the Tyshe River are considerably reduced and it has even dried up at times. No evidence has been produced to back up these statements.
8.0 RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that the Environmental Impact Statement be approved for the Reasons and Considerations set out below and subject to the attached Conditions.
REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
Having regard to:
(a) the requirements of the E.U. Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC);
(b) the Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations, 2001 (S.I. No. 254 of 2001);
(c) the European Communities Environmental Objectives (Surface Waters) Regulations 2009 (S.I. No. 272 of 2009);
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 29 of 32 (d) the provisions of the Kerry County Development Plan 2009-2015, the Land Use and Transportation Study for the Electoral Area of Tralee 2002, and the Tralee/Killarney Hub Settlements Local Area Plan 2006;
(e) the Environmental Impact Statement, and the Habitats Directive Screening Assessment Report (Appendix 12) submitted in respect of the proposed development;
(f) the replacement nature of the waste water treatment plant for the village of Ardfert;
(g) the licence application made to the Environmental Protection Agency in relation to the scheme,
it is considered that, subject to compliance with the conditions set out below, the proposed development would not give rise to significant adverse effects on the environment, including on any Natura 2000 site, and would constitute an improvement in the existing situation in relation to waste water treatment and discharge at Ardfert, and would, therefore, be in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
The Board had particular regard to:
(a) the existence of an existing waste water treatment plant for the village of Ardfert which is contributing to pollution in the Tyshe River;
(b) the limited assimilative capacity of the Tyshe River in terms of both flow and baseline water quality;
(c) the description of the Tyshe River by the South Western Regional Fisheries Board as a “valuable salmonid spawning and nursery water” and one which supports a moderate population of juvenile brown trout and sea trout/slob trout;
(d) the necessity to achieve, on a consistent basis, very stringent treatment standards for effluent discharges from the waste water treatment plant, and;
(e) the requirements of the Water Framework Directive in relation to future improvement of surface water standards in the Shannon River catchment, including the Tyshe River.
CONDITIONS
1. The construction of the new waste water treatment plant and sewerage network shall be constructed, managed and operated in accordance with the particulars
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 30 of 32 contained within the Revised Preliminary Report for the Ardfert Sewerage Scheme, and within the Environmental Impact Statement, received by An Bord Pleanála on the 25th day of October 2011, except as may otherwise be required in order to comply with the following conditions.
Reason: In the interest of the proper planning and sustainable development of the area and to avoid adverse environmental impacts.
2. The scheme to be implemented shall generally be to the extent shown in the environmental impact statement as Phase 1 only, and the new waste water treatment plant shall not accept treatment of effluent in excess of 2,040 population equivalent, unless it has been determined that the assimilative capacity of the Tyshe River can safely accept discharge from any Phase 2 development.
Reason: In the interest of public health and environmental protection, having regard to the limited assimilative capacity of the Tyshe River and to enable the requirement for any further Phase 2 loading from Ardfert to be considered in the light of circumstances and water quality then prevailing.
3. The proposed development shall be constructed to a standard capable of complying with the treated waste water emission limit values set out in the environmental impact statement, except where alternative compliance values are requested under the terms of any licence issued by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Reason: In the interest of protecting the receiving environment.
4. The existing waste water treatment plant serving Ardfert shall be dismantled and decommissioned within six months of the commissioning of the new waste water treatment plant.
Reason: In the interest of public health, safety and visual amenity.
5. Any fencing surrounding the new effluent treatment plant shall be painted green.
Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.
6. The developer shall facilitate the preservation, recording and protection of archaeological materials or features that may exist within the site. In this regard, the developer shall -
(a) employ a suitably-qualified archaeologist who shall monitor all site investigations and other excavation works (including trenches for sewers), and
(b) provide arrangements for the recording and for the removal of any archaeological material which the authority considers appropriate to remove.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 31 of 32
In default of agreement on any of these requirements, the matter shall be referred to An Bord Pleanála for determination.
Reason: In order to conserve the archaeological heritage of the site and to secure the preservation and protection of any remains that may exist within the site.
______Michael Dillon, Inspectorate.
8th February 2012.
PL 08.JA0031 An Bord Pleanála Page 32 of 32