An Bord Pleanála Ref.: PL11.240927

An Bord Pleanála

Inspector’s Report

Development: Alterations to boundaries of site previously granted planning permission under Reg.Refs.08/682 and 07/1346 to include demolition of buildings, construction of motorway service area and filling station, Oldglass, Grantstown, , Co. Laois.

Planning Application

Planning Authority: Laois County Council

Planning Authority Reg. Ref.: 11/331

Applicant: Thomas and Patrick Hennessy

Type of Application: Permission

Planning Authority Decision: Grant Permission

Planning Appeal

Appellants: Paschal Bergin

Observers: National Authority

Type of Appeal: Third Party

Date of Site Inspection: 8th of November 2012

Inspector: Angela Brereton

AnBordleanala age

1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION The proposed development site is located in the townland of Oldglass, approx. 3km south west of Ballacolla and approx.7km north-east of , Co Laois. It is c.30km south of and c.10km to the west of Durrow. The north-south alignment of the new borders the site to the west. The site is located on the south side of the re-aligned R433 Ballacolla-Rathdowney , east of junction 3 of the M8 motorway. The motorway signage, roundabouts and bridge can be seen from the site, which is below the level of and not very visible from the M8. The narrow L1590 county road bounds the site to the south and east. There is a motorway bridge across this road to the south of the lands, which can be seen from the site. The Erkina River lies further to the south (c.1.5km) and is accessed via this county road. The land to the north, south and east comprises a mixture of one-off dwellings and agricultural pasture and tillage land. There is an agricultural entrance on the opposite side of the R433, from the existing commercial entrance.

The subject site extends 6.995hectares and is located in a rural area. The site forms part of a larger 10.6 hectare landholding which is occupied commercially by Manor Stone Quarries as a stone processing, display and sales facility. There are no quarrying operations on site. It is currently in use as a Stone and Garden Display Centre and has its own commercial access from the R433. The existing use is to remain but the site will be reduced in area and located separate from the proposed service station i.e. between the two areas of the development site. The development site is divided into two separate sections, the northern part is to be developed for the proposed services station with a wayleave connecting to the proposed WWTP and percolation area on the southern part of the site. The bulk of the northern part of the site is composed of buildings and artificial surfaces and the southern part improved grassland. The sheds are in use associated with the Manor Stone commercial business, although one of the sheds on site is in use for agricultural purposes as a slatted shed. It was noted on the day of the site visit that this contained cattle and that there was an area in use as a silage slab alongside. The southern part of the site, was being grazed by cattle and appeared wet on the day of the site visit with water accumulating in part in a pond area. The southern part of this area is on higher ground and appeared better drained. There is a small forest in the north-eastern corner of the site adjoining the R433 and this is considered immature woodland. The site is bounded by stonewalls along the northern and eastern site boundaries.

2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Leslie Colton Engineering and Architectural Services have submitted an application on behalf of Thomas and Patrick Hennessy to include the following:

a) Alter boundaries of site, which was previously granted planning permission (Reg.Refs.08/682 and 07/1346 refer). b) Demolish existing guillotine/canteen/workshop shed, drying shed and saw shed. c) Move existing entrance on the R433 including realignment of the R433. d) Construct an off line motorway service area to include a filling station with a HGV refuelling area, shop, restaurant, toilet and shower block, storage area, rest area for HGVs, car wash, car parking area, picnic area, play area and all necessary site works e) Site signage and motorway signage f) All associated site works including a MBR proprietary wastewater treatment system and polishing filter.

AnBordleanala age

Documentation and detailed drawings have been submitted in support of the application and details include the following: • A justification for the proposed development in this location. • They provide great care has been taken to comply with the requirements of the NRA and refer to the guidelines as set out in the Document ‘The Location and Layout of Service Areas’ from Vol.6 Section 3, Part 3 NRA TA70/08. • They have included a Traffic Impact Assessment by Road Plan Consulting. • During the preparation of this report, they have discussed a requirement to re-align the R433 to make way for a ghost island, as per the proposed site layout. • A Natura Impact Statement has been prepared by Openfield Ecological Services. • Details of boundary treatment are provided. They have included a Landscaping and Screening Plan prepared by Gerard McHugh to ensure maximum screening from the motorway and other neighbouring properties. • The locations of the proposed notification motorway signage is to comply with the NRA standards and specifications • The on-site signage required for the Service area is included with the site layout. • They provide details of Services, including waste water treatment system for the proposed development including a Report prepared by Fay Environmental Ltd in conjunction with the application for a discharge licence application prepared by ‘IE.’ Consulting Civil-water Environmental. This includes a detailed Report and Appendices from the later i.e: ‘Hydrogeological Assessment of Discharge to Aquifer’.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY The following refers to the recent history of applications granted by Laois County Council on the subject site at Manor Stone Ltd, Oldglass, Ballacolla, Co Laois: o Reg.Ref.03/333 – Permission granted subject to conditions for the retention of office with septic tank and percolation area, display yard, storage yard, 3 No. sample stone huts, second entrance also to retain change of use of one farm building to a workshop and all ancillary works and entrance signage. o Reg.Ref.07/1346 – Permission granted to erect a new commercial entrance onto the R433, the Rathdowney/Ballacolla Road and all ancillary site works. This has been constructed and is the location of the current entrance. o Reg.Ref.08/682 – Permission granted for the retention of change of use of the existing agricultural shed to commercial including modifications, for display sheds, for saw shed and to increase the size of yard and all ancillary site works.

Copies of these permissions are included in the History Appendix of this Appeal.

4.0 TECHNICAL REPORTS Internal The Water Services Section noted that water supply is to be from the Ballacolla Private group Water Scheme and that as the site is not within a serviced area a private treatment system in accordance with the EPA standards for Small Communities, Hotels etc will need to be designed. Also the applicant, would need to apply for a discharge licence for this commercial development. Subsequent to the submission of the C.F.I they had no objections to the proposed development.

AnBordleanala age3

The Environmental Health Officer has no objections to the proposal subject to a number of conditions.

The Roads Design Office in a detailed Report recommended that further information be requested on surface water drainage and disposal, road structure, ghost island right turning land on the R433 and site access corner radius. Subsequent to the receipt of the F.I they recommended that the development should undergo a Stage 3 Road Safety Audit before the opening of the site to the public should permission be granted.

The Environment Section noted the proximity of the site to the SAC and recommended that an Appropriate Assessment be carried out. They were concerned that insufficient information had been submitted to enable this application to be considered fully and recommended that further information be submitted having regard to a discharge licence and surface water drainage and waste water treatment. They had a number of concerns relative to wastewater discharge subsequent to the submission of the F.I and recommended that a Clarification of F.I be submitted on a number of drainage related issues. Subsequent to the receipt of the C.F.I they had no objections and recommended a number of conditions.

External The NRA considered that the proposed development would be contrary to National Roads and to Local Planning Policies. They provided that it is the policy of the NRA to discourage inappropriate development adjacent to junctions/interchanges on the national road network. They considered that the proposed development would adversely impact on the safety and efficiency of the national road network and would put at risk the public investment in the construction of the M8 and associated junctions.

The DoAHG were concerned that the NIS appeared to be deficient in a number of aspects having regard to the assessment of the impact of the proposed development on the proximate SAC and they provide details of these concerns.

Inland Fisheries Ireland provided that while they have no objection in principle to the proposed development they have concerns regarding the impact of the drainage from the proposed development and refer in particular to their concerns with the document submitted by Fay Environmental Ltd. They also have some difficulties with the Hydrological Assessment submitted and refer to discharge issues.

An Taisce and the Heritage Council have been consulted by the Board and no comments have been received to date.

Submissions on behalf of local residents include regard to the following: • Concern about risk of pollution to receiving waters and water quality in the area, including local private wells. • Flooding issues • Damage to drainage systems and to farming practices. • There would need to be at least 7 days storage capacity as the site is so close to an SAC. • Concern about traffic safety and the location of the proposed entrance.

AnBordleanala age

• Material Contravention of the CDP Policy – this refers to policies in the previous development plan. • Contravention of NRA Policies and to national transportation policies. • Contravention of the Retail Planning Guidelines relative to the location of motorway service areas. • They provide a number of reasons as to why planning permission should be refused for the proposed development.

The Planner’s Report noted details of the history and location of the site and the Technical Reports and to the Submissions made. They have regard to the relevant national and local planning policies and considered that the proposal is not contrary to these policies. Also they noted that while there are some roads issues that the Road Design Office does not object to the TIA submitted. They had some concerns relative to the proximity of the SAC and to deficiencies in the Natura Impact Statement submitted and to the adequacy of the mitigation measures proposed relative to the Natura 2000 site. They considered that an AA (revised NIS) would be required in this case. They requested that detailed further information be submitted and this included the following: • Detailed plans and particulars regarding road design issues and the proposed access to the development. • Revised details on pavement construction to include ramps and disabled access. • Further surface water drainage proposals including on-site attenuation and a revised layout showing all surface water drainage sewers and disposal systems. • Revised details including layout on wastewater treatment proposals to comply with current standards. • Details on AA and mitigation measures proposed to show that the conservation objectives of the SAC would be complied with. • Further details having regard to design and layout issues. • Details for construction and demolition waste disposal.

Applicant’s response: A Report on Wastewater Treatment and Disposal has been prepared by I.E Consulting and includes the following: • Details of revisions to proposed on-site wastewater treatment plant are provided and revised drawings submitted. • Appendix B provides the Revised Effluent Treatment Plant Design. This includes a Report by Fay Environmental Ltd ‘SBR Wastewater Treatment Plant’ • Appendix C provides details on Integrated Constructed Wetland Earthworks. Appendix D provides planting specifications and E provides for maintenance, management and monitoring. • Roadplan Consulting have provided further details relative to the Road Safety Audit and a revised Site Layout Plan has been submitted. • A revised Natura Impact Statement prepared by Openfield Ecological Services dated February 2012 has also been submitted.

Planner’s response: They recommended that a C.F.I response be sought on a number of issues which include: • The applicant to obtain a Discharge Licence under Section 4 of the Local Government (Water Pollution) Acts 1977 to 1990. AnBordleanala age5

• Discharges from the proposed Car Wash Facility • Surface Water Disposal • Drawings to show clearly the proposed storm water sewers and disposal systems. • Further details on the proposed WWTP and on Foul Water Sewer Design. • Pavement Layout details. • Comment on the Submissions made. • Further details in relation to impact on the SAC.

Clarification of further information response This has been submitted by Leslie Colton Engineering and Architectural Services and also by I.E Consulting and includes the following: • Clarification details including revised drawings of foul/surface water drainage and a response to the submissions made. • Further details regarding WWTP design and loadings and the impact of the discharge to ground and surface waters. • They have previously discussed details in relation to any impact on private wells. • The water supply source for the proposed development is the Ballacolla-Clogh Group Well. • Appendix A provides EPA Hydro Tool Sub-catchment Calculations • Further details have been submitted on the NIS. They provide the proposed water supply demand will not impact negatively on the SAC. • Pavement Specification details including Permeable Pavement & Infiltration details and specifications. • A Waste Discharge Licence has been granted by Laois County Council.

Planner’s response had regard to the C.F.I details and revised plans and particulars submitted and to the Submissions made and Reports received. They considered that the applicant had adequately addressed the issues raised and this includes roads, environmental and nature conservation issues. They noted the NRA concerns and considered that the proposal reinforces balanced regional development and provides a Type 2 type Service Station (TA70/80 refers). They considered that the proposed development complies with the current NDP, NSS and MRPG while the revisions proposed ensure that it will not create a traffic hazard, or be prejudicial to public health or negatively impact upon the River Barrow and Nore SAC and recommended that permission be granted subject to conditions.

5.0 DECISION On the 10 th of July 2012, Laois County Council granted planning permission for the proposed development subject to 14no. conditions. These are summarised as follows: • Condition no.1 – The development shall be carried out in accordance with the plans and particulars submitted. • Condition no.2 – A Stage Three Road Safety Audit to be completed for the development prior to opening. • Condition no.3 –Omission of the proposed Directional Signage and submission of a signs licence application under Section 254 of the Planning and Development Act. • Condition no.4 – Designated uses not to be changed without a prior grant of planning permission.

AnBordleanala age6

• Condition no.5 – Relates to a number of issues including Surface Water Drainage, bunding of oil/chemical storage areas, noise levels, waste disposal, no discharge to foul/storm sewers from the car wash facility, and WWTP to be operated in accordance with the Discharge Licence. • Condition no.6 – Under grounding of service cables. • Condition no.7 –Details of external finishes to be submitted. • Condition no.8 – Landscaping • Condition no.9 – Project Construction and Demolition Plan to be submitted. • Condition no.10 – Proposed Development to comply with the requirements of the CMO and CFO. • Condition no.11 – The use of the retail unit shall be limited to use as shop. • Condition no.12 – Restriction on signage. • Condition no.13 – Proposed filling station to comply in full with the Dangerous Substances (Retail and Private Petroleum Stores) Regulations SI 311 of 1979. • Condition no.14 – Development Contributions.

6.0 GROUNDS OF APPEAL A Third Party Appeal has been submitted by Liam McGree and Associates Ltd, Planning and Development Consultants on behalf of Mr Paschal Bergin. The Grounds of Appeal include the following: • The proposal in this unserviced rural location would be in material contravention of Policies in the Laois County Development. • The Togher Interchange Area south of Portlaoise town off the motorway has been zoned for enterprise and employment generating uses and the proposal would mitigate against the achievement of an integrated motorway services area at Togher. • Insufficient consideration has been given to the potential impacts that this and associated commercial development would have on the adjoining site and the amenity of this rural area. • It would be in Contravention of NRA policy for the provision of on-line service areas on motorways and high quality dual carriageways. • They note a preference for on-line facilities and that do not directly compete with existing fuel and other retail facilities in the immediate locality. • There is a danger that this service area would become a ‘destination in its own right’ contrary to NRA policies. • This proposal would increase traffic and congestion on the local and national road network in the area. They note that the NRA has recommended refusal for this application. • They have regard to NRA policy on the provision of service areas and note their broad objective to have service areas at intervals of approx.50-60km apart to cater specifically for road users. • They note other indicative locations for the development of on-line motorway services on the M7 close to only 13.5km to the north of the subject site and that planning permission has been granted at the Mayfield Interchange, Monasterevin, on the M7. Also the provision for such services on zoned land at Togher, south of Portlaoise. • They have regard to the more recent NRA document ‘Service Areas on National Roads; NRA Policy and Status Update’(2010) which provides that the construction of

AnBordleanala age

motorway services at new locations has been deferred because of continuing constraints on capital expenditure in the present difficult economic situation. • They provide that this is a temporary arrangement until funding again becomes available to cater for the needs of road users. • They consider that the provision of on-line services at Truma, close to Mountrath, continues to be a medium term objective of the NRA. • They contend that the provision of an off-line motorway services area on the subject site, would be premature and contrary to national transportation policy in relation to service areas on national roads. • They recommend that planning permission be refused for reasons of material contravention of the Laois CDP in that it would mitigate against the provision of such services at Togher. Also insufficient consideration has been given to its impact on commercial development and on the amenity of this unzoned rural area. • There has been a failure to demonstrate that the proposal would not have a significant detrimental impact on existing commercial businesses in the area and in the surrounding network of established settlements. • The development of an off-line Motorway Services Area close to the Rathdowney Grade Separated Junction on the M8 would be contrary to NRA policy, which promotes the development of on-line locations. • The proposed development would be at variance with official NRA policy in relation to control of frontage development on National Roads.

7.0 OBSERVATIONS The notes that the development proposal represents off-line motorway service areas at a national road junction. Official policy in relation to such developments is included in Section 2.8 of the DoEHLG ‘Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines for Planning Authorities’2012. They provide that they would expect Laois County Council to have due regard to these official guidelines and liaise with the Authority if necessary and advise that no such consultation has been undertaken.

They advise that the Board consider these issues and note that the proposed development is not an NRA Motorway Service Area and stress that criterion for selection of sites referred to in the Authority’s own documentation refers to the provision of online NRA Motorway Service Areas only.

8.0 RESPONSES Laois County Council response to the grounds of appeal includes the following: • In accordance with planning policy while Togher is advanced as the primary location (policy TT10/P21 refers) there is scope for an off line motorway service station at this location in accordance with planning policy in the Laois CPD 2011-2017 (TT10 /P25 refers). • NRA concerns have been noted by the Planning Authority. They consider that the current NDP and the NSS support the development and upgrading of key routes and the M8 is a route referred to in this regard. They also refer to Section 4.9.2.3 of the Midlands RPG 2010-2022 and consider that the proposal supports balanced regional development. • They have regard to Circular No.12/2009 Re: Service Areas, which sets out that in view of current economic difficulties that the NRA should refrain from further

AnBordleanala age8

investing in Exchequer funds in service areas until the economic situation improves. However it is also provided that this may be of interest to developers who may be interested in providing some or all related facilities on sites close to junctions on the network. From an NRA prospective they would have to address traffic issues in a normal fashion, but in the absence of on-line facilities for the immediate future it is provided that such may be relevant. • They note Retail Planning Guidelines (2005) policies in relation to petrol filling stations and limitation of the size of associated retail outlets. They consider that the proposed service station in this instance has a specific role to play in terms of providing safe and convenient facilities for motorway traffic and that in this regard the policies in the RPG do not apply. • They refer to Par.4.33 of TA70/08, which sets out specific retail sizes and requirements, which are specifically tailored to Type 2 service stations such as that proposed. • They also refer to the RPG 2012 and note that guidance in relation to motorway service areas is contained in the ‘Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines’ 2012.

First Party response This has been submitted by Clarke Town Planning Consultants on behalf of the Applicants and provides details of the proposal as submitted and their response to the grounds of appeal includes the following: • They note that the Third Party Appeal is made on behalf of one appellant only i.e Mr Paschal Bergin, the reference to additional persons supporting the appeal bears no weight and has no effect in the context of this appeal. • They consider that the nature of this appeal is anti-competitive and in instances vexatious having regard to the fact that it is from a filling station proprietor in the area and note it is not the nature of planning to prohibit competition. • They provide details of the principle of the development and justification in relation to road safety and to cater for the refuelling, rest and refreshment needs of drivers and passengers. • They note there are limited off-line opportunities for rest and servicing and that the proposal is well placed to facilitate motorway users on this section of the M8. • They refer to NRA policy and Guidelines, which they consider supportive of the provision of such service areas. However in view of current economic constraints the development of on-line facilities has been deferred and that such off-line facilities provided by private commercial interests are now supported. • They consider that the third party has put an emphasis on historic NRA policy in 2006 and provide that the application for the provision of off-line services by a private developer has been made having regard to updated policy in respect of motorway service areas in 2010 and 2011. • They do not consider that the proposed development, which does not include a hotel or additional retail will become a destination in its own right. • They note that the NRA has not objected to the principle of the proposal to provide an off-line service area in this location and consider that it is relevant to note that the NRA has not appealed this decision.

AnBordleanala age

• The proposed motorway service building does not front and will not be very visible from the motorway. It is only the treatment element of the site, which will be located adjacent to the motorway. • The proposal is not contrary to NRA ‘Spatial Planning and National Roads’ Guidelines (2012), which specifically refers to both on-line and off-line service areas. • They note that off-line service areas are considered in the above and not within the ‘Retail Planning Guidelines’. • They provide that to date detailed consultations have taken place with the NRA and Laois County Council and they have responded to the submissions made. • The proposal is not contrary to and is supported by policies and objectives of the NRA the Laois CDP and the Regional Planning Guidelines for the Midlands Region and they provide details of this. • The applicant has prepared a detailed TIA and Road Safety Audit that has regard to traffic safety issues and they provide that these have been assessed by the Council’s Roads Authority and the NRA and they note the summary in the TIA and details in the F.I submitted. • They provide that as demonstrated in the TIA the proposed development would not negatively impact on the junction capacity and road network. • They consider that CDP policy to develop a MSA at Togher Portlaoise is by no means certain and they refer to Policy T/OMS 3 of the Togher Masterplan, which refers to traffic modelling and assessment of impact on the road network. • Also that it does not exclusively apply to Togher and preclude off-lines services elsewhere and would not be contrary to policies in the Laois CDP 2011-2017. • There is an existing commercial development on this site in the rural area, the use of which is long established and is not under consideration in the current application. The proposed service area will be built largely on a ‘brownfield’ site. • Considerable regard has been had to the amenity of this rural area and they refer to the NIS and environmental details submitted for the AA by Oldfield Ecological Services. A detailed Landscaping Plan was also prepared. • They note that the Department of Arts, Heritage and Gaeltacht does not object provided the mitigation measures specified are carried out. • A detailed Hydrological Assessment by IE Consulting Ltd has been carried out in relation to discharge to the aquifer. A percolation site and associated proposals for WWTP were prepared by Fay Environmental Ltd and amended in response to the F.I requests. • They also have regard to the Waste Disposal Licence that has been submitted. • They provide that due consideration has been given to the effects of this rural area that may arise as a result of the proposed development. Subject to the mitigation measures proposed as part of the development there would be no adverse effect on the environment. • There is no objective to prepare a ‘scheme for the provision of services’ by the NRA and the planning authority along the M7 and M8 motorway and they provide that as no objective exists the proposal cannot be considered ‘premature’. • They consider that it has been clearly demonstrated that the proposed development represents the proper planning and sustainable development of the area by delivering key and needed services, which otherwise would not be provided by the NRA due to financial constraints.

AnBordleanala age

9.0 PLANNING POLICY The Laois County Development Plan 2011-2017 This is the Adopted Plan for the County Area. Section 3.3.1 refers to Portlaoise and the Togher National Enterprise Park and 3.5.1 refers to the preferred strategy for the Portlaoise Area. It notes the strategic centrality and prominence of Portlaoise is recognised in the National Spatial Strategy (NSS) and in the Midland Regional Planning Guidelines (MRPG). This development strategy prioritises economic development for the principal town of Portlaoise, which has a prime position on the national road network to economically sustain the critical mass of the Southern Development Area and reap the benefits of the improved Motorway corridors and public transport network. It also refers to the development of the South West Laois Regeneration Area. Section 7.7 refers specifically to the Togher National Enterprise Park and Map 1.7.1 shows the Togher Masterplan Area. Policies EC7/P16/P17 refers.

Section 10 provides the aims and objectives for Transportation and Section 10.4 refers to Land Use and Transportation. It provides that it is a strategic aim to co-ordinate transport and land use planning through settlement and enterprise and employment policies. Section 10.5 and Objective TT10/O02 seeks to maintain and enhance the carrying capacity and operational efficiency of the road network and Policy TT10/P07 seeks to promote road safety measures. Section 10.5.1 refers specifically to the Motorway Network and this includes the need for the provision of services. Section 10.9 has regard to Surface Water drainage, SUDS and Storm Water and Section 10.10 refers to Flood Risk. Section 11.3 refers to Water Supply and Section 11.5 to Wastewater treatment.

Section 12 provides the aims and objectives for Environmental Management and refers to Water Quality and to the Water Framework Directive. Section 13 deals with Natural Heritage and Section 13.2.2 refers to Designated Sites.

Design and Development Standards and objectives are provided in Section 16. Urban Design is referred to in Section 16.3. Table 33 provides the Development Control Standards for the different land uses. DCS16 refers to Commercial Development in Rural Areas, DCS 19 refers specifically to the development criteria for Filling stations. DCS 43 refers to Landscaping and Site Design. DCS49 refers to SUDS. DCS54 refers to Sustainable Design and Construction.

Amended Portlaoise Local Area Plan 2006-2012 This is the current plan and was adopted in 2010 and sets out a framework for the physical development of the Town of Portlaoise. Chapter 2 provides the policies and objectives for Transport and Infrastructure. This has regard to the Portlaoise Integrated Framework Plan for Land Use and Transportation and the Portlaoise Land Use and Transportation Study. Section 2.2 has regard to the Portlaoise Traffic Model referred to as the Saturn Model.

Section 3.3 refers to and provides the policies relative to the Togher National Enterprise Park Masterplan, which is included as an Appendix C to this LAP and the vision is to develop a flagship National Transport Node and Inland Port.

Section 2.3.1 of the Togher Masterplan refers to the use and benefits of the Saturn Traffic Model. Section 3.0 of this plan refers to Policy Context at National, Regional and Local level.

AnBordleanala age

The Land Use Strategy is referred to in Section 4.1 and Map no.7 refers to the zoned lands including those zoned for off-line motorway service area.

National Guidance The National Spatial Strategy 2002-2020 The NSS sets out the vision and strategic framework for achieving sustainable and balanced regional development in Ireland and supports the development of Gateways and Hubs. Portlaoise is described as being on a central spine of the country linking the east/west radial transport corridors by road and bus-based public transport through the Midlands. It suggests a role for Portlaoise as a key national transport node with the capacity to develop related economic and logistics activities. It is also stated in the NSS that Portlaoise has strong national development potential as a transport hub and distribution centre as an inland port given its location on several national road and rail routes (section 4.4).

The National Development Plan 2007-2013 Chapter 7 provides details on the Strategic Context for Economic Infrastructure Priority and also refers to the core aspects for enhancement of connectivity in . It provides that a good transport infrastructure is crucial to the promotion of national competiveness and sustainable development.

Regional Planning Guidelines for the Midlands Region 2010-2022 These set out the mid/long term strategic planning framework for the Midlands Region and seek to implement national policy as set out in the NSS. They include Co. Laois and also focus on better integration of transport and communications within and between regions and between towns and linked gateways. Section 1.6 notes that in co-operation with the NRA and the DoEHLG, Laois Co. Council prepared a Masterplan for the Inland Port in Portlaoise so as to fulfill its role as designated in the NSS. Section 3.6 provides the Economic Objectives and this includes objective ED04, which is to facilitate the development of the ‘Togher inland Port’ at Portlaoise through the provisions of the Togher Masterplan. As per Section 4.2 Portlaoise is included in the Southern Regional Area as being a focus for development. Section 4.9 refers to the southern area as covering parts of the region along the M7/M8 including the urban area of Portlaoise as being one of the five development areas. Policy SDAP6 refers to fulfilling the potential of Portlaoise and Togher Inland Port to become a major transport hub and distribution centre, by building on its strategic location at the intersection of key national road and rail routes. Section 4.9.2.3 is concerned to support a balanced regional development. Section 5.3.2 refers to Protection of Existing and Proposed Road Infrastructure.

The Retail Planning Guidelines 2012 Section 2.4.3 notes that Petrol Filling Station shops have a floorcap of 100sq.m net irrespective of location. Section 2.5.4 refers to encouraging sustainable travel modes through careful location and design of new retail development relative to the catchment area being served. Section 4.4 refers to the Sequential Approach to Retail Development. Section 4.10 refers to the need in certain cases for a Transport Impact Assessment to access impacts on the transport networks serving a proposed retail development. Section 4.11 refers to the Assessment of Specific Categories of Retail Development. While Section 4.11.10 refers to Online and Off-Line Motorway Service Areas it notes that they are considered as part of the Spatial Planning and National Guidelines for Planning Authorities DECLG 2012 . AnBordleanala age

Section 5.0 provides for Retailing and Design Quality and Section 5.4 to the accompanying Retail Design Manual. Annex 1 provides a Glossary of Terms and this includes a description of Convenience and Comparison goods , and types of retailing, which includes Forecourt Retailing i.e a mini-supermarket linked to petrol filling stations.

Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines 2012 These provide Guidelines for Planning Authorities and have been prepared in the context of the delivery of the NSS and actions identified in Smarter Travel, A Sustainable Transport Future, A New Transport Policy for Ireland 2009-2020. They set out policy considerations relating to development affecting national roads (including motorways, national primary and national secondary roads) outside the 50/60kmp speed limit zones for cities, towns and villages. They aim to achieve and maintain a safe and efficient network of national roads in the broader context of sustainable development strategies, thereby facilitating continued economic growth and development throughout the country. Section 2.7 refers in particular to Development at National Road Interchanges or Junctions and Section 2.8 refers to Service Areas both on and off-line.

Water Framework Directive 2000 This Directive sets out a framework for the comprehensive management of water resources in the European Community. The fundamental objective of the WFD is at maintaining ‘high status’ of waters where it exists, preventing any deterioration in the existing status of waters and achieving at least ‘good’ status in relation to all water by 2015.

10.0 ASSESSMENT Having read through the file and had regard to the history of the site, planning policy, the submissions made and the documentation submitted the following are considered to be the most pertinent issues in this appeal: • The Principle of Development and Planning Policy • Impact of the MSA as a destination • Regard to other relevant applications • Material Contravention and issues of Prematurity • Design and Layout • Impact on the visual amenity and character of the area • Regard to TIA • NRA issues • Provision of Services and regard to HRA • Surface Water Drainage • Discharge Licence • Inland Fishery concerns • Modifications and Revisions to WWTS proposed • Regard to Appropriate Assessment

10.1 The Principle of Development and Planning Policy This application is for the provision of an off-line Motor Services Area for the to motorway, adjacent to Junction 3, an interchange, on the M8, c.100km from Dublin and c.150km from Cork. Regard is had to the position of the NRA with respect to provision of online and offline service areas on the national road network. Such facilities should be at intervals of approx. 50-60km as stated in Section 1.6 of the NRA’s ‘Policy Statement on

AnBordleanala age3

Development Management and Access to National Roads’ (2006). This also states: The Strategy for the provision of services area will entail a combination of facilities located on line and at or close to interchangers (in the case of proposals promoted by commercial interests).

National, Regional and Local Development Plan policies in relation to the provision of motorway service areas, impact on the national and local roads network and traffic safety and on the sustainable development in are discussed further in this Assessment below. Section 4.9.2.3 of the Regional Planning Guidelines for the Midlands Region 2010- 2022 provides that having regard to the recently established M7 / M8 motorway infrastructure, the southern area of Laois should be utilised to support balanced sustainable economic development of the SDA region. It is provided in the application that the proposed development would broadly support the principle of this objective.

Section 3.5.1of the Laois CDP 2011-2017 provides the preferred strategy for the Portlaoise Area and notes the benefits of improved motorway corridors/rail and public transport in the economic development of Portlaoise. It is of note that Policy TT10/P21 seeks to: Advance Togher as the primary location for off-line motorway services and other uses in line with the Togher National Enterprise MasterPlan (adopted in April 2010) as advocated in the Spatial and National Roads Guidelines (Draft 2010). Therefore it is the policy of Laois Co. Co. to support the development of motorway services in this designated area. There is concern that the proposed development would mitigate against the achievement of an integrated motorway services area at Togher. It is also of note that Togher, Portlaoise is adjacent to the M7 and would not necessarily provide a services area to facilitate traffic on the M8. While further consideration is given to the policy for provision of a MSA at Togher in this Assessment below, it is considered that in this case regard must be given to the merits of the current application which is located off-line at Junction 3 of the M8 and is some distance (c.30kms) from Togher located at Junction 17 on the M7.

While Section 3.3.1 of the Laois County Development Plan 2011-2017 supports the primacy of Portlaoise and refers to the Togher National Enterprise Park area, it also supports South West Laois Regeneration. It provides that large tracts of enterprise and employment lands exist in close proximity to the Borris in Ossory Interchange on the M7 Dublin – at Borris in Ossory village and the Granstown Interchange on the M8 Dublin–Cork at both Rathdowney and Ballacolla and that these will be further pursued during the plan phase. However this relates to zoned lands within planned urban boundaries and does not promote or encourage isolated development at junctions removed from urban areas. While the subject site is proximate to Junction 3 on the M8 motorway and forms part of an established commercial site it is in the rural area. The proposal is specifically for the provision of an MSA, rather than a more general commercial development.

Section 10.5.1 refers to the Motorway Network and includes reference to the role of and need for the provision of a service area for fuel, toilet and food and safety related rest stop needs. It is provided that it is important that service areas do not become destinations in their own right as this can lead to congestion at interchanges, interference with road safety and reduction in the flow of long distance travel. Also that development at interchanges does not undermine town-based development. It is noted that the NRA anticipates that service areas will be provided off-line (accessible by ordinary road network as well as motorway) and on line (accessible from motorway only). Proposals being brought forward by private sector AnBordleanala age

development interests to provide offline services will be subject to normal Planning requirements and procedures and consultations with the NRA. Map 1.10.2 indicates the interchanges within the County and the potential they will bring to the development of nearby settlements and existing zoned areas. It is noted that Junction 3 to the south west of Ballacolla is indicated as one of the interchanges on this Map.

Section 10.5 of the LCDP 2011-2017 has regard to the potential for development at interchanges and seeks to maintain and enhance the carrying capacity and operational efficiency and improve the safety of the road network. In this case the proposal is for an off- line MSA that would not seek direct access onto the M8. Policy TT10/P18 seeks to: Maximise the beneficial return of public investment in the national motorway network by protecting the carrying capacity of the M7/M8, including associated junctions, through County Laois. Therefore the proposed development should not impact adversely on the safety or carrying capacity of the road network and regard is had to traffic issues and to the TIA submitted in this Assessment below. Policy TT10/P23 seeks to: Promote the development of lands for enterprise and industrial uses within existing settlements such as Portarlington, , Ballacolla, Mountrath and Borris in Ossory, , Rathdowney and Durrow. In this respect the proposed site is not on zoned land and while it is proximate to some commercial development it is located within the rural area. However Policy TT10/P25 seeks to: Recognise existing and long-established employment uses including off-line services at M7 Junction 15 at New Inn and M8 Junction 3 at Granstown.

The ‘NRA Policy and Status Update’, February 2010 provides that the provision of MSAs is being deferred in view of current economic circumstances and states: Following a direction from the Minister for Transport in August 2009 that the Authority should suspend the development of further service areas requiring Exchequer funding. Therefore the First Party provides that it would be of great benefit to have a privately funded Services Area in this location to cater for the needs of road users and thereby help alleviate fatigue related road accidents. They note that the NRA has completed some on-line service areas through the Public Private Partnership (PPP) mechanism and provide details of these. They consider that it is apparent that the provision of MSA’s will only be delivered by private commercial interests in the short to medium term and that the need for adequate service areas needs to be fulfilled as soon as possible. Also that off-line services should not be inhibited from developing having regard to non-provision of on-line services in the short-term.

10.2 Impact of the MSA as a destination The site forms part of a larger 10.6 hectare landholding which is occupied by Manor Stone Quarries Limited as a stone processing, display and sales facility. There are no quarrying operations carried out on this site and the existing commercial use is to remain but as shown on the Site Layout Plan will be located adjacent to the proposed service station. While the area would become a destination to visit the current use and the MSA, it is considered important in the interests of traffic safety that the two uses have separate entrances as envisaged by the TIA submitted.

AnBordleanala age5

It is noted that some concern has been expressed about the impact of the proposed development on local commercial business. That it would constitute a commercial/retail development in a rural area outside of any designated settlement. They consider the applicants have failed to demonstrate that it would not have a detrimental impact on existing businesses in the area and in the surrounding network of established settlements. It is also put forward that the subject proposal would provide a destination in its own right and would be in contravention of NRA policies. ‘NRA Policy and Status Updates 2010’ provides that on-line service areas should not become destinations in their own right and not directly compete with existing fuel and other retail facilities in the immediate locality. The range of facilities provided in NRA service areas should be limited to those catering specifically for road users. It is submitted that as designed the proposed development, which does not include additional commercial area (such as a hotel, retail) other than a motorway services area facilities will not become a destination in its own right. The objective of the proposed development is to cater for refueling, rest and refreshment needs of drivers and passengers on the M8 motorway. This is reiterated in Section 2.8 of the ‘Spatial Planning and National Roads’ Guidelines 2012 where it is submitted that a proliferation of such facilities should be avoided and that a coordinated approach to provision should be taken. The MSA should not become a destination for local customers as this would be contrary to policy to encourage retail in town centres as per the Retail Planning Guidelines. The First Party provides that the service area is purpose designed to cater for a different market than that served by petrol filling stations in rural villages near the site and this is considered to be the case.

The NRA Technical Guidance Document TA70/08 ‘The Location and Layout of Service Areas’(2008) provides a definition of Type 1 and Type 2 Service Areas. The development proposed in this instance is considered a Type 2 Services Area as indicated in these Guidelines. Section 4 of this document refers specifically to ‘Type 2 Service Areas’ and provides a general description of these larger scale service areas providing an amenity building together with other facilities. In general they are single sided and accessible from both directions of travel where the total design year AADT is less than 40,000. It is provided when over 40,000 a separate facility should be created for each carriageway. The current situation is for the former single sided service area, accessible from both directions on the M8 via a motorway bridge.

Therefore it is considered that the MSA is designed as a use with a specific purpose, and should not be seen as a destination for other retail or types of commercial use that would impact adversely on town centres or local businesses in the area.

10.3 Regard to other relevant applications It is noted that the Togher Masterplan is included in Appendix C of the Amended Portlaoise LAP (Adopted April 2010). The site on the western side of the Togher Interchange in Area 2 is allocated for Motorway Offline Services (Map Nos.2 and 8 refer). However there has been no development to date of this Area. Section 2.2 of the Masterplan provides that the Togher Interchange is also the gateway to Portlaoise and serves the Portlaoise Development Area as well as the Midlands Region. There is a current appeal before the Board for a petrol station, shop, carwash, signage, vehicular access via previously permitted entrance and exit roads (Reg.Ref.05/1297)’ on Lands adjacent in Togher Interchange, Abbeyleix Road, Meelick, Portlaoise, Co.. Laois (PL11.240814 relates). However this is for a smaller scale development and is not for a motorway services station, and is not located on the lands allocated for motorway offline services (Map no.8 refers). Also of note is A.B.P. Ref. PL11.215808 / P.A. AnBordleanala age6

Reg. Ref.05/1400 this refers to an application for a Motorway services building, petrol filling station, associated car, coach and heavy goods vehicle parking areas and associated roads and infrastructure at Togher, Portlaoise, Co. Laois by Corrigeen Construction Limited. The site is situated west of the appeal site referred to above. This application was then made in conjunction with PL11.215859 for a distributor road. Permission was refused by the Board for the distributor road and the Board considered that it would be premature pending the determination of a road layout for the area, including the National Transport Node objective at this location and that the development would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. The First Party note that the development of this land for an off-line service area is not certain having regard to the policy T/OM3 in the Masterplan i.e. –All uses and quantum of each development shall be run through the Saturn Model to determine the level of appropriate development for the Masterplan and ensure no adverse impact on either the existing and/or future national roads infrastructure. It is provided that the Togher service area is part of a destination point (also in view of its proximity to Portlaoise) altogether different from the nature of the facility proposed for the subject site. It is noted that there is no current application for the development of the zoned lands at Togher for the development of an off-line MSA.

Permission has been granted by County Council for the development of motorway services at Mayfield interchange, Monasterevin Co. Kildare (Reg.Ref.06/1881 refers). This MSA has been constructed and is fully operational. It is accessed directly off the M7 at junction 14 and includes a service station, car wash, an amenity building providing restaurant area, shop and toilets, truck and car parking areas. This site is located in Co. Kildare and is approx. 50kms away from the subject site at junction 3 of the M8. As proposed for the subject site it is a single sided Type 2 MSA that is accessible from both directions.

The procedure adopted by the NRA to select specific service area sites should be informed by the broad objective to have service areas at intervals of approx.50-60km. It is noted that one of the indicative locations for the development of on-line motorway services is on the M7 close to Mountrath which is just over 13km to the north of the subject site at Oldglass. It is provided that in accordance with the NRA Policy document ‘Service Areas on National Roads: NRA Policy and Status Update’ (2010) that arrangements to construct new motorway service areas at other designated locations have been deferred in current economic times because of continuing constraints on capital expenditure. Both the 2010 and 2011 NRA Policy and Status Updates for MSAs provide a list of Board approved service areas. They note that in view of current economic constraints that the NRA is not currently taking steps to further advance the proposed provision of service areas near Athlone, Cashel and Kilcullen for which permissions have been obtained or to progress indicative locations in the environs of Mountrath and Nenagh on the M7 and on the M9. However, they provide that it remains the Authority’s intention to resume work on these elements of its service area programme as soon as Exchequer finances permit so as to cater for road users. The Third Party consider that the provision on on-line services on the M7 at Truma, close to Mountrath, continues to be a medium term objective of the NRA.

The Planner’s Report provides that the proposal does not compromise any previous projects as indicated by the NRA, namely the service area which has received approval off the M8 at

AnBordleanala age

Cashel, which is situated approx.55km to the south of the site. Arrangements to construct other approved service areas including that proposed for the M8 at Cashel have been deferred due to current economic circumstances. For this reason the First Party consider the map prepared by the NRA in 2007, showing the proposed locations for MSAs is now out of date, particularly in light of the NRA’s most recent policy statements on the provision of on/off line MSA’s. On this map it is noted that the MSA proposed at Cashel is the closest location on the M8 to the subject site.

The NRA ‘Spatial Planning and National Roads’ Guidelines 2012 specifically refers in Section 2.8 to both on-line and off-line motorway service areas. This provides that a proliferation of private off-line service facilities at national road junctions should be avoided and that a co-ordinated approach between planning authorities should be undertaken in consultation with the NRA as part of the development plan process.

10.4 Material Contravention and Prematurity Section 34(6) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 sets out the procedure under which a planning authority may decide to grant permission for such a development. This has been subsequently amended by Section 23 of the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2010. Section 37(2) of the 2000 Act provides the constrained circumstances in which the Board may grant permission for a material contravention. These include whether the development is of strategic or national importance, where the development should have been granted having regard to regional planning guidelines and policy for the area etc, where there are conflicting objectives in the Development Plan or they are not clearly stated, or permission should be granted having regard to the pattern of development and permissions granted in the area since the making of the Plan.

Concern has been expressed that the proposed development in this un-serviced rural location, not connected to any designated settlement would be contrary to CDP policies and would mitigate against the achievement of an integrated motorway services area at Togher. Also that insufficient consideration has been given to the potential impacts that this and the associated commercial development on the adjoining site would have on the amenity of this rural area. The Third Party considers that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on existing businesses in the area and on the surrounding network of established settlements. The First Party provides that policy to develop lands at Togher (Policy TT10/21 refers) does not preclude consideration of additional off line service areas to that at Togher (Policy TT10/P25 refers). Policies and Objectives support the development of Togher as a primary location for development, having regard to its proximity to Portlaoise, but they also support the sustainable development of the region and the provision of off-line services at M8 Junction 3 at Granstown. It is noted that the Development Management Guidelines 2007 provide that caution should be exercised when refusing permission on the grounds that the proposed development would materially contravene the development plan. Where such a reason is given it must be clearly shown that specific policies/objectives of the plan would be breached in a significant way. It is considered that these two policies should be seen as complementary rather than mutually exclusive and would not represent a material contravention of LCDP 2011-2017.

AnBordleanala age8

It is also put forward that the proposed location would be in conflict with NRA objectives for the location of motorway services, and national transportation policies relative to the provision of off-line services. There is concern regarding the impact on the local roads network and on road safety and that it would be at variance with official policy in relation to control of frontage development on National Roads. This refers specifically to the NRA’s ‘Policy Statement on Development Management and Access to National Roads’ (2006) and to the ‘Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines’ (2012) which include provision for such facilities. The First Party provides that the proposed development of an off-line MSA facility in this location would not be contrary to either national policy relating to the National Roads Authority or the recent ‘Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines’ 2012.

The Third Party provides that the development of an off-line service facility on this site would be premature pending the determination by the NRA, the planning authority and the roads authority of a scheme for the provision of services to motorists using the M7 and M8 motorways in the vicinity of the subject site. In response it is provided that there is currently no objective, nationally or otherwise to prepare a scheme for the provision of services by the NRA and the planning authority along the M7 and M8 motorway. Regard is had to the Development Management Guidelines 2007, which provides in Section 7.16.1: In general prematurity arises where there are proposals to remedy any deficiency . Where no objective exists the development cannot be considered premature. It is provided that this application is made having regard to the updated policy in respect of motorway service areas in 2010 and 2011 and that applications should be considered on their own merits. It is of note that the latter policy has regard to the role of Private Developer Proposals for the development of off- line service areas. Having regard to all these issues it is not considered that the proposed development would be in material contravention of planning policies and objectives or premature.

10.5 Design and Layout As shown on the Site Layout Plan the site is located adjacent to the eastern roundabout of Junction 3 of the M8 motorway and south of the R433 . In order to provide a self-contained site with a designated independent entrance off the R433, it is proposed to alter the boundaries of the Manor Stone site, and to demolish some of the existing building details as per the attached drawings. The proposed development lands comprise an area of 6.99ha and would be divided into two sections i.e. the northern section would comprise 2.77ha and would contain the MSA facilities (b) through (e) as noted in the Proposal Section above; the southern section would comprise 4.22ha and would contain the proposed foul water treatment system. The two separate site areas are located on either side of the Manor Stone area to be retained and are to be adjoined by a wayleave area connecting both sites.

The site while in the rural area, for the most part contains an established permitted commercial use (Reg.Refs. 08/682, 07/1346 and 03/333 refer). The yard is in use as a display area and there are a variety of sheds and other buildings currently in use associated with the Manor Stone commercial business, some of which are proposed for demolition located on the northern part of the site. There is also an existing slatted shed and silage slab shown retained on the Site Layout Plans. There is no objection to the demolition of the sheds as proposed although the proposal will lead to a reduced commercial business area for Manor Stone. The proposed development is to be largely built on a ‘brownfield’ site, although it is noted that the southern part of the site is currently greenfield and was in use by cattle for grazing on the day of the site visit. AnBordleanala age

It is proposed to construct an off line motorway service area to include filling station with a HGV refuelling area, shop restaurant, toilet & shower block, storage area, rest area for HGV’s, car wash, car parking area, picnic area, play area and all associated site works. The Site Layout Plan shows that the services building would have a floor area of 663sq.m.This would include the shop, restaurant, toilet and shower would be located on ground floor and first floor associated admin/storage area and staff canteen. As shown on the revised Floor Plans the floor area of the shop is c.120sq.m. Elevations of the building show that it would be c.7.5m in height and the canopy area over the forecourt would extend out from this and be of a similar height. It is considered that the design of the proposed building is functional and does not have any particular architectural merit. It is recommended that quality external finishes be used if the Board decide to permit that it be conditioned that details including samples of external finishes be submitted.

The Retail Planning Guidelines have been revised in 2012. Section 4.11.9 refers specifically to Retailing and Motor Fuel Stations having regard to convenience shopping and the floorspace cap which is 100sq.m. However it is not considered that this would apply to the current proposal, which is for a MSA rather than a motor fuel station. Section 4.11.10 refers to On and Off-line Motorway Service Areas. Guidelines for these are contained in the ‘Spatial Planning and National Guidelines for Planning Authorities’ 2012. The NRA TGD TA70/08 relative to MSAs, refers to the amenity building in Section 4.32. This includes that the area of the convenience shop should typically be between 200sq.m and 250sq.m. and that the number of seats in the restaurant area should be broadly related to the total parking area (Table 4/4 refers). It is considered that the area of the convenience shop as proposed in the amenity building (120sq.m) is acceptable as part of the MSA facility.

As part of the F.I request it was requested that revised plans be submitted to allow for the inclusion of a telephone kiosk and indoor children’s play area. The revised Site Layout Plan shows the location of these and of the proposed car wash and the bin storage deliveries area. Food waste from the restaurant is to be disposed of appropriately through a licenced waste contractor and there will be no such disposal on site. It is noted that a bin storage area is to be installed to the south of the proposed filling station/shop building. Further details on the car wash facility are provided in the Services Section below.

10.6 Impact on the Visual Amenity and Character of the Area The element of the proposed development, which constitutes the above ground building does not front the motorway. It is only the treatment plant element of the site, which is to be located adjacent to the motorway. Regard is had further to the proposed WWTP element of the proposal in the services section below. Owning to the natural gradient and levels of the site, below the passing motorway, and to screen planting it is considered that the proposed development will not be very visible from the M8 and would not have the same visual impact of a MSA at grade.

A Landscape Plan has been submitted by Gerard McHugh, this provides Site Specific Notes and includes provision for a woodland screen from the road. Planting at the Entrance Roundabout, Playground and Picnic areas and details of tree planting and screening in the car parking and truck and bus parking areas are provided. It is considered important in accordance with Section 4.51 of TGD TA70/08 that the design of the service area should be appropriately landscaped and complimentary to the surrounding area. In the interests of visual amenity and to provide screening, existing boundary planting particularly along the AnBordleanala age

road frontage of the R433 should be retained and augmented. Landscaping should also be provided along the eastern side boundary with the county road.

Some details of boundary treatment have been shown on the drawings submitted. It is proposed to erect a 2.4m high galvanized steel boundary fence to divide the site as per the details submitted . It is considered that this should only be erected internally within the site and not along the site boundaries with the R433 or the L1590 county road where boundary treatment should include provision for the maintenance and continuation of existing stone boundary walls which add to the character of the area. It recommended that if the Board decide to permit that a condition regarding Landscaping and boundary treatment be included.

They have also included the proposed lighting installation to provide for a high standard of illumination utilising high efficiency light sources with low maintenance cost to comply with National Standards. It was also requested that it be demonstrated that all proposed lighting complies with the requirements of the NRA TGD TA70/80. It is noted that Section 4.49 of these guidelines provides that the service area should be treated as an environmentally sensitive area, in accordance with TD 30, to minimise night-time visual intrusion. If the Board decide to permit it is recommended that lighting be conditioned.

Regard is also had to signage and it is noted that while directional signage has been submitted that details of general signage on the amenity building and canopy have not been submitted. Condition no.12 of the Council’s permission provides a general condition restricting signage and it is recommended that such a condition be included should the Board decide to permit. It is noted that the F.I includes a Site Plan showing the location of directional signage. Condition no. 3 of the Council’s permission provides that the signage shown on the Site Layout Plan (dated 9 th of August 2011) submitted shall be omitted and that signage shall be subject to a signs licence application under Section 254 of the Planning and Development Act. This is supported by Section 3.8 of the ‘Spatial Planning National Roads’ Guidelines 2012 which provides that on national roads, the erection of signage needs to be tightly regulated for road safety and environmental reasons. It is noted that in the case of planning legislation, planning permission under section 34 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 as amended, is required for signage on private property, while advertisement structures, on the public road are also covered by a licence issued under Section 254.

It is of note that having regard to NPWS website Site and Monuments database that there are no recorded monuments on site.

10.7 Regard to the Traffic Impact Assessment RoadPlan Consulting provide that the objective of the TIA Report is to examine the traffic implications associated with the proposed development in terms of how it can integrate with the existing traffic in the area. The Report seeks to determine and quantify the extent of additional trips generated by the proposed development and the impact of such trips on the operational performance of the local road network, in particular the proposed access to the development from the realigned R433 Rathdowney – Ballacolla Road and the Eastern Roundabout of the M8 Junction 3. Details are provided of the Study Methodology for the TIA and regard is had to the impact of the development.

It is proposed to provide a right-turn lane as shown on the Site Layout drawing in Appendix B of the TIA Report and that this access will serve the service area exclusively. The existing AnBordleanala age

Manor Stone facility is to use an independent access via the existing entrance from the L1590 south of the development site. It is of note that, while there are entrance gates to this site from the county road, this is not at present in use as a commercial entrance. The commercial entrance to the site is currently from the R433, in a similar location to the proposed entrance for the MSA. Permission was granted to Manor Stone for this commercial entrance in Reg.Ref. 07/1346. The TIA has not given consideration to the implications on the local road network of this revised commercial entrance for Manor Stone. It is noted that the Manor Stone site is within the applicant’s landholding and there is an internal access road to the site from the R433. However it is considered that it would be preferable in the interests of clarity and traffic safety if the entrance to Manor Stone were kept separate from the MSA and this existing entrance and internal access road to the existing commercial business closed off. It is recommended that if the Board decide to permit that it be conditioned that revised plans and particulars be submitted prior to the commencement of development for the agreement of the planning authority showing details of the proposed entrance to Manor Stone from the entrance on the L1590 and the existing entrance from the R433 to Manor Stone closed off. Also that all signage for Manor Stone be removed from the entrance to the MSA on the R433.

The Council’s Road Design Office has concerns that the ghost island right turn lane for the R433 would interfere with the safe movement between the access and the westbound lane of the public road. They requested that the applicant relocated the site entrance to facilitate the continued safe use of that existing laneway. They also had some concerns about the turning area for HGVs on site and provided that if the maximum length of vehicle liable to visit the proposed facility exceeded the proposed 16.5m separation that the site layout needs to be revised and that a swept path analysis be submitted. The Council’s further information request included regard to these road design issues.

Section 3 of the TIA provides details of Existing and Proposed Traffic conditions on the surrounding proximate road network including the Eastern Roundabout Junction 3 and the Existing Access onto the R443. They provide that traffic counts demonstrate that traffic flows have decreased on major roads since 2010 when the M8 opened. Section 4 relates to Traffic Generation and Trip Distribution and it is noted that the TRICS database has been used. This has regard to Trip Generation for the Filling Station and Shop, and the restaurant facility. It is noted that there will be 3 truck bays and 8 car bays i.e 11 filling bays to be provided which suggests 27% HGVs. They have assumed in Section 4.3 that 90% of trips will be pass-by traffic from the M8 Motorway and the R433 and 10% completely new to the road network in the area. Also that there will be some new trips distribution distributed as 25% each, to/from the Abbeyleix, Rathdowney, Portlaoise (via the motorway) and Culahill (via the motorway) directions. Section 4.6 provides details of Future Year Traffic Growth 2018 to 2028. Section 5 provides details of Operational Assessments related to the Development Access/R433 Junction and to the Eastern Roundabout of the M8 Junction 3. They provide that junction analysis has been undertaken to assess the effects of traffic generated by the proposed development access junction and for the existing Eastern Roundabout of the M8 Junction 3. This analysis shows that both junctions will operate within capacity in all assessment years with the development in place. Appendix F of the TIA provides PICADY results and Appendix G –ARCADY results.

Section 6 of the TIA provides details of parking provision and requirements in Table 6.1. These have been assessed in relation to the Laois County Council ‘Roads and Parking Standards’ February 2007. The TIA states that a total of 84 (including 8 disabled spaces) car AnBordleanala age

parking spaces and 21 truck parking spaces are to be provided for the filling station, shop and restaurant. Regard is now had to the Adopted Laois CDP 2011-2017 where Table 33 provides the Development Control Standards, Policy DCS 34 refers to Parking Standards. This provides that a ‘shop’<250sq.m (1 space per 25sqm), and restaurants 1 space per table. It is considered the parking provision is adequate to serve the proposed development.

Concern has been expressed in the Submissions made about the traffic safety implications for local residents. Section 7 notes that a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit in accordance with NRA DMRB HD 19, has been carried out. It is proposed to provide a ghost island at the development access. It is noted that the R433 is classified as a ‘Strategic Regional’ road. It is provided that adequate sightlines can be provided at the access in accordance with current guidelines. At present there are no footpaths along the R433 and it is not considered necessary to provide any external to the proposed development. Footpaths will be provided internally. The Council’s Road Design FI request included that further details of the proposed road structure be submitted, particularly having regard to pedestrian crossings, and ramped transitions between roadway, car parking areas and footpaths to accommodate wheelchair users. This has been shown on the revised plans.

Section 8 of the TIA provides Summary and Conclusions and this has regard to the analysis undertaken and provides that the assessment indicates that the proposed development can be accommodated by the existing road network. It also noted that adequate sight lines can be achieved and a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit was carried out.

Roadplan Consulting in their response to the F.I provide that there are additional items they have noted having regard to the Road Safety Audit. These include regard to changes in the layout in the internal road system. Directional information signage is to be provided for drivers at the internal roundabout to direct them to their parking area and a signage layout, will be required to enforce the one-way system. The revised layout shows the location of the entrance from the R433 has been altered so that it is not directly opposite the agricultural entrance on the opposite site of the road. The First Party provides that as demonstrated in the TIA the proposed development would not negatively impact on junction capacity and the road network.

10.8 NRA issues The Third Party is concerned that the development of an off-line Motorway Services Area close to the Rathdowney Grade Separated Junction on the M8 Motorway would be contrary to the policy of the NRA which promotes the development of on line locations for reasons relating to convenience and safety of access to facilities for national road users and separation of longer-distance, high speed motorway and dual carriageway traffic from traffic on the local roads network. Also that the proposed development would be at variance with policy in relation to control of frontage development on National Roads as outlined in the NRA’s Policy Statement on ‘Development Management and Access to National Roads’ and to the ‘Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines for Planning Authorities’. They are concerned that the proposed development would appear to conflict with national road and county development plan policies. They have serious concerns about the impact of the proposal in the efficient operation, capacity and safety of the M8 and associated junction which are part of the strategic road network, as identified in Transport 21, the NDP 2007- 2013 and the NSS.

AnBordleanala age3

The NRA seeks to ensure that official national objectives are not undermined or jeopardised and it is their policy to discourage inappropriate development adjacent to junctions/interchanges on the national road network, a policy that is reflected in the Laois CDP 2011-2017. They consider that the proposed development would adversely impact the safety and efficiency of the national road network and would by itself and by the precedent it would set for other similar development adversely affect the use of the M8 and its associated junctions. Also the present development proposal would put at risk public investment in the construction of the M8 and associated junctions, as well as transportation and safety benefits afforded by this infrastructure.

They consider that insufficient data has been submitted to demonstrate that the proposed development will not have a detrimental impact on the capacity, safety or operational efficiency of the national road network in the vicinity of the site and note that a Road Safety Audit has not been submitted with the application. They are also concerned that details of signage have not been submitted. They provide that the precedent a grant of permission would set could lead to a proliferation of such development and would adversely affect the operational efficiency and safety of the national road network.

It is noted that the Council’s Road Design Office recommended that the development undergo a Stage Three Road Safety Audit for the development prior to opening and that this be considered and approved by Laois County Council. Also that the Stage 3 RSA will not be deemed complete, until all mitigation works identified by the audit have been implemented. This is included in Condition no.2 of the Council’s permission. It is recommended that should the Board decide to permit that it should be conditioned that a revised Road Safety Audit be submitted, that would also take into account the implications of the new access for Manor Stone on the L1590.

The NRA in their Observation note that the proposed development is not an NRA motorway service station and that the criterion for selection of sites referred to in their documentation refers to the provision of online NRA MSAs only. They provide that due regard should be taken to official policy in relation to such off-line developments as contained in Section 2.8 of the DoEHLG ‘Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidance for Planning Authorities’ 2012.

10.9 Provision of Services and regard to Hydrology This is not a serviced site. It is proposed to construct a MBR proprietary wastewater treatment system and soil polishing filter system, details of which are included in the report prepared by Fay Environmental Ltd. A detailed report providing information on a ‘Hydrogeological Assessment of Discharge to Aquifer’ prepared by IE Consulting Civil- Water Environmental has been submitted concerning the on-site wastewater treatment system for the proposed motorway service area. The main objectives of this hydrological risk assessment is to assess the risk and impact posed to groundwater in the area as a consequence of the proposed treatment system and polishing filter that are proposed to serve the development.

The proposed location of the treatment plant and polishing filter is currently in use as pasture for grazing cattle. It is provided that there are no water courses on the site and the nearest drainage ditch runs parallel to the motorway and this is entirely culverted. The Erkina River is approx. 1.5km south of the site and flows in an easterly direction before discharging into AnBordleanala age

the River Nore, approx. 7kms south-east of the site. This report also has regard to the Topography of the area and to the geological setting. Section 5.1.2 of the Hydrological Report provides Site Specific Data. This includes information on the soil and subsoil profile in the vicinity of the proposed polishing filter and has regard to trial pits excavated. Section 5.2.2.3 refers specifically to the Percolation Tests the results of which are referred to in Section 7 and provided in Appendix G of this Report. They provide that the location of the polishing filter within the site investigation area was chosen on the optimum position based on the results of the trial pitting, PSD analysis as well as P and T tests (Appendix A of their Report refers).

Fresh water is to be provided from a new connection from the Ballacolla Clough Group Water Scheme, and a letter of consent has been included with the application. The Ballacolla GWS is supplied by boreholes approx.1.1km to the north-west and up gradient of the site. The maximum volume of water required for the proposed development is 27m3/day. Also that the regional topography and water level data indicate that the approximate groundwater flow direction is to the south/south-east towards the Erkina River and the closest down gradient wells are >800m from the polishing filter. They provide that the bedrock formation, the Aghmacart Formation is classified as a Locally Important Aquifer, and would normally be capable of yielding sufficient water from wells or springs to supply farms, small communities or small group water schemes. Expected yields would generally be between 100 and 400m³/day. Section 6.2 refers to the location of third party wells in the vicinity of the site and provides that these will not be impacted on.

Concern has been expressed in the Submissions made about the degree of uncertainty associated with risk to receiving waters. Also that on-going monitoring post development as is proposed in the planning submission is not practicable and should not be accepted. The Report recommends that additional sampling and ongoing water level monitoring is undertaken to confirm the groundwater quality and water table fluctuations. Section 6.4 notes that the groundwater vulnerability is high beneath the proposed polishing filter, where bedrock is 3.5m below ground level. Table 5 provides a Comparison of Groundwater Results with Relevant Standards. In conclusion they provided that overall the quality of the surface water and groundwater is good in terms of the environmental objectives applied under the legislation. Also that considering a proposed daily loading rate of 22.5m³/day, the approximate ratio of treated effluent to background groundwater throughput would be 1:10.

Section 8 of the Hydrology Report provides that the proposed on-site wastewater treatment system, all within the confines of the site boundary (Layout is shown in Appendix A of the Report), comprises the following components: • Pump Sump – 24hour storage capacity • Secondary proprietary treatment system including emergency overflow tank and disinfection by UV • Pump Sump – 24 hour storage capacity • In-situ soil polishing filter

Section 8.1 provides details of the wastewater loading and that over a 12hour day with a personal loading rate of 15 l/day (as per Table 3 of the EPA Manual for Small Communities, Business, Leisure Centres and Hotels (1999). The maximum daily loading is 21.96m³/day and that a discharge rate of 22.5m³ is assumed. Table 8 provides a Qualitative Risk Assessment

AnBordleanala age5

and Tables 9, 10 & 11 the Calculation of Estimated Resultant Nitrate Concentration from the Secondary Treatment Plant. The Hydrology Report notes that the wastewater will have higher concentrations of ammonia to BOD than normal domestic sewage and has concerns about the levels of nitrate. It is provided that in order to balance the plant inflows and consequently the nitrogen loading to the secondary treatment plant, the design of the plant includes a 24hour storage pump sump, an emergency storage tank, flow balancing and primary settlement tank with a baffle wall with a capacity of 27m³. This proposed treatment will also serve to reduce the peaks of ammonia that may occur. The Council’s F.I requested that revised loadings be submitted based on the EPA Wastewater Treatment manual: ‘Treatment Systems for Small Communities, Business, Leisure Centres and Hotels’ . These loadings should be based, on 24 hour usage of the development and should include hydraulic and biological loadings. It is proposed to install a generator to power the treatment plant in the event of a mains power failure.

The Report provides that the calculations presented in Table 11 of the Hydrology Report indicate that the limit of 35.5mg/l in the European Communities Environmental Objective (Groundwater) Regulations 2010 is not exceeded, apart from the worst case nitrate mixing scenario outlined in Table 9. They provide that the limit of 50mg/l set out in the Drinking Water Regulations 2007 (S.I No.278 of 2007) is not exceeded in any of these scenarios.

10.10 Surface Water Drainage Surface water as per the surface water drainage plan is to incorporate two petrol and oil interceptors, two attenuation ponds and relevant hydro breaks to be connected to the existing 1,500mm dia. road drainage pipe. A rainwater harvesting system is proposed and water from the car wash is to be recycled through a Freylit, the eko-lit 200 system from Klargester Ltd. Surface Area. Drainage calculations have been provided in the documentation submitted.

It was noted on the day of the site visit that the northern part of the site area proposed for the WWTP is wet and there is ponding on this part of the site and the southern part where it is proposed to put the percolation area is located on the higher more well drained part of the site. As shown on the revised plans it is proposed that an attenuation pond and integrated constructed wetland system (surface flow design) –tertiary treatment be in a similar location to the current pond on the northern part of the site.

The Council provides that given the size of the development and its proximity to a SAC they would encourage the applicant to consider disposal routes other than discharge into site- external sewers or drainage channels as the most appropriate for the site’s surface runoff. It was considered that whilst infiltration via permeable surfaces proposed for parking areas within the development and via the attenuation ponds will provide important contributions to the alternative disposal routes that the site may have capacity to provide greater levels of infiltration. The feasibility of on-site disposal of the surface water generated on site-internal roads rather than disposal via a drain connected to a watercourse needed to be investigated. The Council’s F.I requested recalculations for the estimate of ‘peak greenfield surface water runoff rate’ from the development site with strict application of the method prescribed in Laois Co. Co. Storm Water Management Policy.

The C.F.I confirms that all surface water drainage associated with the forecourt and fuel transfer area will be captured and treated in a totally separate closed system to the main surface water drainage system for the site. The surface water runoff drainage for these areas AnBordleanala age6

will be physically isolated such that no runoff will bypass their appropriately sized hydrocarbon separator and be discharged to groundwater or flow into other drainage channels without treatment.

Discharge of effluent from the car wash facility into the surface water drainage system should not be permitted. The Council’s Road Design Section also provides that the design shall conform with to the guidance in PPG 13 Vehicle washing and cleaning. It is provided that the car wash will operate on a closed loop system whereby all liquids will be recycled. Losses due to evaporation and solid material will be removed from a settling tank and disposed of in accordance with the appropriate waste regulations. Also there is to be no discharge of liquid effluent to either surface waters or the wastewater treatment system. It is noted that the Clarification of F.I response provides that there will be no loading from the car wash facility to the wastewater treatment plant. It is provided that wastewater from the car wash will be stored in a storage tank and emptied periodically by a licenced contractor for off-site treatment and at a licenced facility. Therefore the design of the WWTP remains unchanged. Furthermore it is proposed to erect a canopy over the carwash area and aco channels, drain across the entrance and exit to car wash to prevent surface water entering the car wash. It is noted that Condition no.5(l) of the Council’s permission provides that there be no discharge from the car wash facility to the drainage system and it is recommended that this be conditioned should the Board decide to grant.

10.11 Discharge Licence The applicants propose to dispose 27m³/day of sewage effluent to groundwaters. A licence under Section 4 of the Local Government (Water Pollution) Acts 1977 to 1990 is required for this discharge. The Environment Section considered that the applicant should obtain a discharge licence from the Council prior to permission being granted and this formed part of the Council’s F.I. request. They were concerned that the applicant should establish the maximum concentrations of a range of parameters that could be discharged at this location that would have no significant impact on the quality of water in the aquifer or on the adjacent SAC. These limits, should be used as the discharge parameters from the waste water treatment plant. The Water Services Section provides that because this is a commercial entity and not a domestic usage that the applicant would need to apply for a Discharge Trade Effluent or Sewage Effluent to Waters (Section 4 of the Water Pollution Act) Licence. Section 10 of the Hydrology Report provides that the proposed discharge will be subject to and controlled by a discharge licence, which will require on-going monitoring of the effluent as well as upgradient and downgradient quality of the aquifer beneath the site.

The Council’s Environment Section noted the C.F.I response and that the applicants proposed to dispose of 27m3 /day of sewage effluent to groundwaters (with no discharge included from the car wash). It is also of note that in their letter dated 2 nd of May 2012, Laois County Council provides they have granted a Licence to Discharge under Section 4 of the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act 1977, Amendment Act 1990 for the proposed development subject to conditions (Ref.ENV 2 –WP 35 refers and a copy of this is included in the Appendix of this Report). Having examined the revised plans and particulars submitted they do not object to the proposed development and recommend that permission be granted subject to conditions. Also subsequent to the submission of the C.F.I the Council’s Water Services Section had no objection to the proposed development. Condition 5(m) of the Council’s permission provides that the WWT and disposal system shall be operated and

AnBordleanala age

maintained in a manner that ensures that discharge licence no. Env 2 –WP 35 is complied with at all times.

The DoAHG noted the C.F.I submitted and had regard to the Discharge Licence granted by Laois County Council. They noted that there is no record of this being referred to them for comments. They provide that all discharges should be subject to screening for AA and if necessary AA, and where applicable shall comply with the draft Freshwater Pearl Mussel Nore Sub-Basin Management Policy 2010. They recommended that if planning permission is granted that all mitigation measures specified in the NIS be implemented in order to protect surface and ground waters. Regard is had to the NIS submitted in the Assessment below.

10.12 Inland Fishery concerns

Inland Fisheries Ireland provides they have no objection in principle to the development as proposed. However they have submitted a detailed response and are concerned to ensure that there is no pollution of groundwater or surface water arising from the proposed development. They recommended that specific conditions be imposed precluding discharge from the car wash to either surface water or groundwater resources either directly or indirectly. Also that storm water runoff rates should be regulated so as not to exceed per-development rates and in this regard it is noted that the developer proposed installation of flow retention/hydro brake facilities. They recommended conditions to ensure grease traps on the foul sewer network and that food waste is disposed with in accordance with the appropriate standards. They are concerned that the proposed construction and the recently installed road drainage network immediately to the north of the subject site have the potential to significantly impact on the aquatic environment and downstream of fisheries resource if they are not carried out in an environmentally sensitive manner.

It is considered that no part of the development should be occupied and operated until such times as the treatment works proposed, or such modified works as may be required by the Council, is fully installed, commissioned and fully operational. Also they do not consider the treatment plant as proposed as acceptable. They are concerned with higher contaminant levels in the proposed final effluent quality pre the percolation process and refer to their concerns with the document prepared by Fay Environmental Ltd. This includes inconsistencies in calculations in the Hydrogeological Assessment as regards the discharge to aquifer and the size of the required percolation area, and the ratios between groundwater and wastewater volumes are noted. It is provided that the drainage network following completion of the M8 motorway project, now flows to a tributary of the River Erkina and it would appear the proposed discharges to surface waters following treatment in the proposed interceptors, etc, constitute trade effluent. They request that should planning permission be granted that no part of the development be occupied and operated until such time as the applicant has been granted the appropriate licence under Sections 4 and 16 as appropriate of the Local Government(Water Pollution) Act 1977, as amended.

10.13 Modifications and Revisions to the Wastewater treatment system proposed Detailed information is provided regarding the wastewater treatment plant in the IE Consulting response to the further information and this includes that the proposed treatment system will comprise the following components:

AnBordleanala age8

• Effluent treatment plant – primary and secondary treatment. • Integrated constructed wetland system (surface flow design) –tertiary treatment • Soil polishing filter – further treatment and discharge to ground.

Revised layout drawings have been provided and the proposed on-site wastewater treatment plant comprises the following components: • Inlet Stream • Inlet Pump Sump – 24 hour storage capacity • Secondary extended aeration sequence batch reactor treatment plan including emergency overflow tank and disinfection by UV.

The Secondary treated and disinfected effluent will flow by gravity to the ICW system and the treatment plant design details are included in Appendix B of their Report. It is provided in Table 1 that the population equilivant is 150 and the total biological loading per/day is 440. Table 2 of their F.I response provides the proposed effluent standards from the Secondary Treatment Plant. The proposed wastewater discharge to ground will be restricted to the average discharge of 28m3 per day. Additional storage area will be provided within the bunded ICW system to accommodate extreme rainfall events. Table 7 provides a summary of the ICW System Design Criteria. Section 3.4 provides details of the In-situ Soil Polishing Filter. The installation of 4no. observation wells within the in-situ soil polishing will provide monitoring locations for long term sampling and monitoring of effluent at the base of the filter. Also monitoring boreholes will be required to serve as long term monitoring points as part of the discharge licence.

The tertiary treated effluent from the ICW system will flow under gravity into a 24 hour storage pump sump with a 24 hour storage capacity (28m³). Then effluent will be pumped intermittently to the soil polishing filter and a duty/standby pump system will be installed. Section 3.4.4 notes the impact of wastewater on the aquifer and has particular regard to nitrate concentration. This provides that the total nitrate concentration in the final treated effluent from the treatment plant is 5mg/l N(22mg/l NO³). The calculations presented indicate that the Groundwater Threshold Value of 37.5mg/l for nitrate in the European Communities Environmental Objective (Groundwater) Regulations 2010 is not exceeded as a result of this discharge. Also the limit of 50mg/l set out in the Drinking Water Regulations 2007(S.I.No.278 of 2007) is not exceeded. It is provided that the effluent discharged to ground will not result in significant deterioration of the quality of the groundwater aquifer or in any downgradient surface water bodies. Appendix B provides details on the Revised Effluent Treatment Plant Design in a Report by Fay Environmental Ltd ‘SBR Wastewater Treatment Plant’. Appendices C-E have regard to the Integrated Constructed Wetland earthworks, planting and maintenance, management and monitoring. It is noted that Section 11.5 of the Laois CDP 2011-2017 refers to Wastewater Treatment and provides that by adopting and implementing a strategy that integrates the management of land, water and biological resources, whilst promoting conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way, the ICW concept addresses the objectives of the EU Water Framework Directive.

The Clarification of F.I response from IE Consulting provides further details on loading to the WWTP and refers to the capacity of the aquifer to assimilate the proposed wastewater loading. Table 2 refers and it was noted that the results indicated that there would be unacceptably high down gradient nitrate concentration, which would exceed the Groundwater

AnBordleanala age

Threshold Values. As per Table 3 they do not expect that having regard to the ICW system the discharge will impact on the overall good status of the Rathdowney groundwater body. In Table 4 they provide that the calculations indicate that the proposed discharge would not exceed 25% of the theoretical available capacity in the down gradient surface water body for Ammonia and MRP. On this basis it is provided that it not expected that the discharge will impact on the overall status of the Erkina surface water body and associated Nore SAC.

The C.F.I also provides a response to the concerns raised regarding drainage and road related issues in the submissions made. This includes that the proposed drainage system for this development will be entirely separate from the existing regional and local road drainage systems. All these drainage networks are closed systems and will operate independently of each other. It is also provided that the proposed pavement layout has been redesigned so that concrete surfacing will be provided at locations within the proposed development where there is a high risk of fuel spills. They note that all attenuation ponds have been designed to surpass the minimum requirements stated in section 3.4 of the Laois County Council’s Storm Water Management Policy. In conclusion they provide that they cannot guarantee a more isolated, safer and hydraulically prudent drainage design if any of these attenuation ponds were moved from their positions shown on the relevant drainage drawings.

10.14 Regard to Appropriate Assessment

There is a need to ensure that any plan or project which has the potential to directly, indirectly or cumulatively impact on a site protected under European legislation (SAC or SPA) is assessed in accordance with Article 6 of the Habitats Directive in order to avoid adverse impacts on the integrity and conservation objectives of the site. Potential threats to a designated site may arise from developments such as water abstraction, or discharges from wastewater treatment plants, surface water or surface water attenuation at locations which are geographically remote from the site, through hydrological links with the designated site (tributaries, streams, drainage ditches and drains). Under Article 6 of the Habitats Directive the term ‘significance’ is taken to mean an effect on the integrity of the SAC.

The Council’s Environment Section notes that the proposed service station is located within the protected area of the Nore Freshwater Pearl Mussel and within 15km of the River Barrow and the River Nore SAC and considered that an AA is required to support this application. A Natura Impact Statement for the proposed Motorway Service Station has been prepared by Openfield Ecological Services. The SAC is located approximately 1km to the south along the floodplain of the Erkina River. An aerial photograph has been submitted showing the proximity of the Erkina River relative to the site. The NIS refers to the proximity of the site to the River Barrow and River Nore SAC and has regard to the Conservation Objectives. There is a need for the proposal to be fully compliant with S.I No.9 of the (EC Environment Objectives (Groundwater) Regulations) 2010; S.I No. 272 of the 2009 (EC Environment Objectives (Surface Water) Regulations) and the River Basin Management Plan 2009-2015, which is part of the Water Framework Directive. This provides for a number of measures to be taken to ensure that pollution does not occur during construction and operational phases. It is noted that there are no water courses on the site and the nearest drainage ditch runs parallel to the motorway. This is entirely culverted and is practically devoid of vegetation.

AnBordleanala age3

Section 2.3 of the Natura Report provides details of Site Survey results in relation to Habitat Survey Guidelines. Section 3.0 provides an Analysis of the Project and notes that the development will result in the loss of immature woodland and buildings and artificial surfaces habitats. This notes details submitted in relation to surface water drainage and to bunding of fuel storage areas. Fuel is to be stored in bunded area to be maintained in accordance with ISO standards. Section 5.0 provides that in order for an impact to occur there must be a pathway between the development (the source) and the SAC (the receptor). Where a pathway does not exist then an impact cannot occur. It provides that the scope of the NIS considered the impacts to the River Barrow and River Nore SAC and not necessarily to biodiversity in general. This provides that there is no habitat on site that is associated with Annex 1 Habitats or Annex 11 species. It has regard to impacts on pollution during normal operation. It provides that in summary there is one potential significant effect that could occur i.e impacts to groundwater (ultimately entering the Erkina river, a part of the SAC and within a Freshwater Pearl Mussel area) from the normal operation of the wastewater treatment plant.

Section 6.0 notes that it is imperative that the integrity of the SAC and the local water quality, be maintained and significant effects avoided and has regard to mitigation measures. There is concern that while the wastewater treatment plant has been designed to the highest available specification that there is a degree of uncertainty associated with the assimilative capacity calculations. Also that under a worse case scenario the threshold values under the 2010 Groundwaters Regulations will be exceeded. Mitigation measures include a programme of groundwater monitoring, be agreed with the LA, at locations both upstream and downstream of the percolation area be implemented. The NIS considers that alternative treatment methods will need to be considered should the thresholds in the Groundwater Regulations be exceeded including the installation of an integrated constructed wetland, which would considerably reduce residual nitrate levels. Section 7.0 provides that if these measures are fully implemented then it can be concluded that the integrity of the SAC will remain intact and significant effects are not likely to occur. They also recommend that a bat survey be carried out well in advance of any demolition works so that a derogation licence can be applied for if relevant. It is noted that the December site survey dates for the study were a ‘suboptimal time for a general habitat survey’.

The DoAHG is concerned that the NIS appeared to be deficient in a number of ways. The NIS dated August 2011, has not been assessed under the most recent conservation objectives (19 th July 2011). They are concerned that the impact of water abstraction from the aquifer, on the conservation objectives of the River Barrow and River Nore cSAC has not been assessed. Also that the impacts of the discharge of treated effluent with a flow direction towards the Erkina River, part of the River Barrow and River Nore cSAC, in an area of high to extreme groundwater vulnerability, on the sites conservation objectives, in particular the Nore Freshwater Pearl Mussel, have not been assessed and there is concern about nitrate levels. They consider that the mitigation measures suggested in Section 6 of the NIS are insufficient. In accordance with EC Guidance (European Commission, 2001), evidence must be provided in relation to both water monitoring and the constructed wetland mitigation measures and to the implementation of these and their likely success. Without appropriate mitigation measures the development has the potential to negatively impact on the water quality in the Erkina River and therefore the Nore Freshwater Pearl Mussel found down stream. Section 13.7 and Policy NH13/P25 of the LCDP 2011-217 provides for the protection of the Nore Freshwater

AnBordleanala age3

Pearl Mussel through the measures set out in the Freshwater Pearl Mussel NoreSub-Basin Management Plan (2009).

There were a number of concerns expressed by the L.A about the robustness of the NIS as originally submitted and consideration of all potential impacts of the proposal and they were not satisfied that it had been shown that the proposal would not have a significant adverse effect on the Natura 2000 site. The mitigation measures proposed within the NIS were not considered sufficient to allow for a determination that the proposal would not, if permitted, undermine the integrity of the River Barrow/Nore SAC when considered in terms of the conservation objectives 2011. A detailed further information request was sent in this regard to require an AA (revised NIS) and to show compliance with the conservation objectives and integrity of the SAC.

In response an updated (Feb.2012) NIS was prepared by Openfield Ecological Services. This noted the fundamental objective of the Water Framework Directive is at maintaining ‘high status’ of waters where it exists, preventing any deterioration in the existing status of waters and achieving at least ‘good’ status in relation to all water by 2015. The NIS noted that water quality in the area is currently Q4 and generally satisfactory. The South Eastern River Basin Management Plan, which in 2010 found that the WFD status of groundwater in the Erkina basin is determined to be ‘good’ while the Erkina river itself is ‘poor’. The NIS has regard to The Conservation Objectives for the SAC. It is noted that these have been updated in 2011. A copy of these from the NPWS.ie website is included in the Appendix of this Report. These Conservation Objectives include regard to the Nore Freshwater Pearl mussel. The NIS provides that while they are present in the Nore River downstream, they are not present in the Erkina River. The water quality of the Erkina River is below the Q4-5 range and is currently not of a sufficiently high standard to support this species.

Section 5.1.2 of the NIS 2012 notes that the WWTP has been designed to the highest available specification and an assimilative capacity study shows that the projected groundwater concentration of nitrate will not exceed 22mg/l which is well within the range of current standards as discussed in the previous Services Section above. Additional de- nitrification occurs in the ICW, the polishing filter within the surrounding subsoil. Surface water will be attenuated in a series of ponds that contain safeguards against spillages of oil. This also notes that there will be no direct discharges to surface waters leading to the Erkina River. Groundwater flows in the direction of the Erkina River and so there is a connection to the SAC and subsequently to populations of Freshwater Pearl Mussel downstream. However this distance is approx 1.5km and given the levels of treatment and attenuation proposed for this project it can be concluded that pollution to surface water is unlikely to occur. Section 5.1.7 of the revised NIS now concludes that there are no potential significant effects arising from this proposal. As per Section 6.0 it has been found that no significant effects are likely to arise during construction or operational phases of the project.

A further revised NIS dated May 2012 has been submitted as part of this C.F.I response. This has regard to the Conservation Objectives for the SAC (2011). It is provided that the surface water from the site would be discharged to ground and not directly to the water courses feeding the Erkina River and calculations for the assimilative capacity of the Aquifer under varying loadings and Effluent Standards have been submitted. Also the IE Consulting response notes that the GWS abstraction approximates to 0.02% of the surface water sub- catchment contributing to the River Barrow and the River Nore SAC. On the basis of the AnBordleanala age3

information submitted in particular to the ICW tertiary treatment proposed, and to the revised NIS it is not considered that the surface water discharge or water supply demand from the proposed development would impact negatively on the qualifying interests of this SAC. It is considered reasonable to conclude on the basis of the information available that the proposed development, individually and in combination with other plans and projects would not adversely affect the integrity of the European site No. 2162 in view of the site’s conservation objectives.

11.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Having regard to the above it is considered that that while the primary location at Togher, Portlaoise, for the provision of off-line services is supported as per policy TT10/P21 of the Laois CDP 2011-2017 that the principle of the proposed development on the subject site is not contrary to policy in particular TT10/P25 or to Section 4.9.2.3 of the Regional Planning Guidelines for the Midlands Region 2010-2022. While the comments of the NRA are noted as are their policies and objectives relative to the provision of on-line/off-line MSA facilities, it is considered that the current lack of funding for progressing these services needs to be taken into account. It is noted as discussed in the Assessment above that while proliferation of such facilities is to be avoided, that private developer proposals for service areas may also be considered acceptable depending on location and impact on traffic safety and on the roads network. Also that due regard needs to be taken to official policy in relation to such off-line developments as contained in Section 2.8 of the DoEHLG ‘Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidance for Planning Authorities’ 2012. Consideration has also been had to the proposal relative to ‘The Location and Layout of Service Areas’ in TGD TA70/08.

The TIA and details submitted provide that the assessment indicates that the proposed MSA development, can be accommodated by the existing road network. It is noted that the Council’s Road Design Section has not objected to the revised proposals and while the NRA has made Observations on the application they have not appealed the Council’s decision. However as noted in the Assessment above it is considered that there is some lack of detailed information submitted in relation to traffic and roads and in particular having regard to the location and proposals for the entrance to the Manor Stone site. It is recommended that if the Board decide to permit that it be conditioned that revised plans and particulars be submitted for the agreement of the planning authority prior to the commencement of development showing details of the proposed entrance to Manor Stone from the existing entrance on the L1590 and the existing entrance from the R433 to Manor Stone closed off. Also it needs to be conditioned that a revised Road Safety Audit taking account of these changes be submitted prior to the commencement of development.

It is considered that detailed information has been submitted having regard to Hydrological Risk Assessment, surface water drainage and the waste water treatment plant and polishing filter and it is noted that tertiary treatment is to be provided in the integrated constructed wetland system. On the basis of the information submitted in particular to the ICW tertiary treatment proposed, it is not considered that the proposed development would impact negatively on the qualifying interests of this SAC. It is noted that the revised NIS now concludes that there are no potential significant effects arising from this proposal on the Natura 2000 site and it has been found that no significant effects are likely to arise during construction or operational phases of the project.

AnBordleanala age33

Having regard to the Assessment above it is considered that the proposal will provide an off- line MSA facility in this location serving this area of the M8, which is currently not well provided for with such services. It is not considered that the proposed development is contrary to planning policy or will impact adversely on the proper planning and sustainable development of the area and it is recommended that permission be granted subject to the conditions below.

12.0 REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS

Having regard to the proposed development to provide an off-line Motorway Services Area in this location proximate to Junction 3 of the M8 motorway, to planning policies in the Laois County Development Plan 2011-2017, to recent NRA Policy relative to the provision of such Motorway Service Areas by private developers, the ‘Spatial Planning and National Roads’ Guidelines for Planning Authorities 2012, and to the existing commercial use of part of the site, it is considered that, subject to compliance with the conditions set out below, the proposed development would not seriously injure the visual or environmental amenities of the area or of property in the vicinity, or be prejudicial to public health and would be acceptable in terms of traffic safety and convenience. The proposed development would, therefore, be in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

13.0 CONDITIONS

1. The development shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the plans and particulars lodged with the application as amended by the further plans and particulars submitted the 16 th and 20 th days of January 2012, and the 15 th day of June 2012 and by the further plans and particulars received by An Bord Pleanála on the 31st day of August, 2012, except as may otherwise be required in order to comply with the following conditions. Where such conditions require points of detail to be agreed with the planning authority, these matters shall be the subject of written agreement and shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed particulars.

Reason: In the interest of clarity.

2. The proposed development shall be amended as follows:

(a) Revised Plans and Particulars shall be submitted showing details of the proposed commercial entrance to Manor Stone from the existing entrance on the L1590. (b) The proposed entrance to the Motorway Services Area from the R433 shall not be used by Manor Stone and the internal road access shall be closed off. (c) A Road Safety Audit shall be submitted to take these revisions into account.

Revised drawings showing compliance with these requirements shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, the planning authority prior to commencement of development.

Reason: In the interests of road safety and amenity.

AnBordleanala age3

3. Prior to commencement of development, a scheme detailing the management, maintenance and monitoring processes to be undertaken in relation to the proposed integrated constructed wetland system shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the planning authority. The monitoring of the performance of the proposed integrated constructed wetland system shall be carried out by a suitably qualified person as approved by the planning authority.

Reason: In the interest of environmental protection and the prevention of water pollution.

4. a) Water supply and drainage arrangements, including the attenuation and disposal of surface water from the development shall comply with the requirements of the planning authority for such works and services. b) There shall be no discharge to the foul or storm water sewers from the car wash facility. c) The use of the proposed development shall not commence until all drainage arrangements including the integrated constructed wetland system are in place to the satisfaction of the planning authority. d) Upon completion of development, the applicant shall complete a storm water survey to ensure no misconnections to the storm water system.

Reason: In the interest of public health.

5. The floor area of the proposed motorway services building including the retail area shall not exceed that shown on the permitted drawing no.0001 (12R) submitted on the 20 th of January 2012 and the proposed designated uses in the building including the use as a convenience shop shall not be changed or subdivided without a prior grant of planning permission.

Reason: In the interests of clarity.

6. Details of the materials, colours and textures of all the external finishes to the proposed motorway services building shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, the planning authority prior to commencement of development.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

7. The internal road network serving the proposed development, including turning bays, junctions, parking areas, footpaths and kerbs and the access road to the service area shall be in accordance with the detailed standards of the planning authority for such works.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and of traffic and pedestrian safety.

8. Parking for the development shall be provided in accordance with a detailed parking layout which shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, the planning authority prior to commencement of development.

Reason : To ensure a satisfactory parking layout in the interests of pedestrian and traffic safety and of visual amenity.

AnBordleanala age35

9. Public lighting shall be provided in accordance with a scheme designed to prevent avoidable light spill from the site and shall not result in any light pollution, details of which shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, the planning authority prior to commencement of development.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and public safety.

10. No advertisement or advertisement structure, the exhibition or erection of which would otherwise constitute exempted development under the Planning and Development Regulations 2001, or any statutory provision amending or replacing them, shall be displayed or erected on the canopy, on the motorway services building or anywhere within the curtilage of the site and adjoining lands unless authorised by a further grant of planning permission.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and in order to allow the planning authority to assess the impact of any such advertisement or structure on the amenities of the area

11. All signage, including directional signage adjacent to the public road shall be omitted and shall be subject to a signs licence application under Section 254 of the Planning and Development Act 2000.

Reason: In the interests of clarity and traffic safety.

12. The site shall be landscaped in accordance with a comprehensive scheme of landscaping, details of which shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, the planning authority prior to commencement of development. This scheme shall include the following:

a) A plan to scale of not less than [1:500] showing – (i) Existing trees, hedgerows and stone walls, specifying which are proposed for retention as features of the site landscaping and screening. (ii) The measures to be put in place for the protection of these landscape features including existing boundary planting during the construction period. (iii) Details of screen planting and species, variety, number, size and locations of all proposed trees and shrubs which shall comprise predominantly native species. (iv) Hard landscaping works, specifying surfacing materials and finished levels. (v) Boundary treatment including the provision of stone walls along that part of the site with frontage onto the R443 and the L1590. b) A timescale for implementation

All planting shall be adequately protected from damage until established. Any plants which die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development, shall be replaced within the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the planning authority.

Reason: In the interests of residential and visual amenity.

AnBordleanala age36

13. All service cables associated with the proposed development (such as electrical, telecommunications) shall be located underground. Ducting shall be provided by the developer to facilitate the provision of broadband infrastructure within the proposed development. All existing over ground cables shall be relocated underground as part of the site development works.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

14. The construction of the development shall be managed in accordance with a Construction Management Plan, which shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, the planning authority prior to commencement of development. This plan shall provide details of intended construction practice for the development, including hours of working, noise management measures and off-site disposal of construction/demolition waste.

Reason: In the interests of public safety and residential amenity.

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

Reason : In the interests of sustainable waste management.

16. Detailed measures in relation to the protection of bats shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the planning authority, prior to commencement of development. These measures shall be implemented as part of the development. Any envisaged destruction of structures that support bat populations shall be carried out only under licence from the National Parks and Wildlife Service and details of any such licence shall be submitted to the planning authority.

Reason: In the interest of wildlife protection.

17. The developer shall pay to the planning authority a financial contribution in respect of public infrastructure and facilities benefiting development in the area of the planning authority that is provided or intended to be provided by or on behalf of the authority in accordance with the terms of the Development Contribution Scheme made under section 48 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The contribution shall be paid prior to the commencement of development or in such phased payments as the planning authority may facilitate and shall be subject to any applicable indexation provisions of the Scheme at the time of payment. Details of the application of the terms of the Scheme shall be agreed between the planning authority and the developer AnBordleanala age3

or, in default of such agreement, the matter shall be referred to the Board to determine the proper application of the terms of the Scheme.

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

______Angela Brereton, Inspector, 23 rd of November 2012

AnBordleanala age38