Tag Archives: Monaghan

INTERCONNECTOR DAY24

by

Michael Fisher  Northern Standard 21/04/16 p.14

More Monaghan Landowners

ANN MURRAY from Lemgare expressed her strong objection to the erection of giant pylons across the unspoilt drumlin landscape of Monaghan and neighbouring counties.She said the 400kV line was being foisted upon her family and neighbours. It was a situation over which they had no control and no choice. She said the line would inhibit future development of sites in the area for family members. Their property would be devalued.

There would be an impact on wildlife such as swans, buzzards, badgers, snipe and the protected marsh fritillary butterfly which was to be found in Drumgallon bog. There would be issues over rights of way. There was a health issue. Burying the power line would mean it would be safer and more acceptable to local communities and it would have a lot less impact on health, property devaluation and visual impact.

Her late parents had lived in Lisdungormal all their lives and called it a little bit of heaven here on earth. But with overhead power lines it would certainly change the lives of her family and neighbours.

She pointed out that Lemgare Rocks was a very important part of their heritage and the heritage of county Monaghan. Yet EirGrid wanted to place giant pylons on top of these rocks. Lemgare Mass Rock was also listed as an important piece of history and was an important spiritual and religious site for the community.

There were a number of abandoned mine shafts in Lemgare Rocks and throughout the local area. She wondered if EirGrid had taken this into consideration with regard to construction impacts causing possible collapses of tunnels and collapses of land.

She went on: “From our garden we can see the beautiful scenic view of the Lemgare Rocks and the natural drumlins of County Monaghan in a setting that is breathtaking – a landscape that has taken hundreds of years to mature to its current appearance.

Placing pylons in the visual foreground will detrimentally affect this tranquil setting and is totally inappropriate for a rural landscape. I also believe that these pylons will also produce noise which we do not want to be subjected to, but won’t have an option if permission is granted.”

She pointed out that the pylons would also cross over the pathway of the Monaghan Way. On a summers day you will see lots of hikers walking the route, but if this project got the go- ahead, no-one would want to walk there. She did not understand how EirGrid expected to use narrow laneways to carry construction machinery weighing up to 30 or 40 tonnes bearing a load without having a negative impact.

Multiple loads of concrete and steel would need to be reversed into these laneways and this would not be possible as the local roads were far too narrow and the laneways were only cart tracks with no foundations to withstand multiple heavy loads.

Placing pylons on the side or top of drumlins would pose a health and safety risk for farmers using farm machinery while working their farms. Coupled with this during the construction phase of the project there would be major health and safety risks both to farmers, their families, their livestock and the general public and indeed the workers erecting these pylons. The only way to eliminate such risks was to place these power lines underground.

“Eirgrid have been asked question after question over and over again and we are still waiting on answers and they have lists and lists of unanswered questions from the people of the North East. To us it looks like we are second class citizens”, she said.She called on EirGrid to provide in detail an adequate assessment of the evaluation of alternative routes for this proposal.

Mrs Murray concluded: “Why should my family and the people of County Monaghan, Meath and Cavan pay an unacceptable social and economic price for supplying power to the rest of Ireland and subject themselves to totally unacceptable potential heath risks and also to a total devaluation of our properties which we have worked hard to build and maintain. I trust that An Bord Pleanála as an independent public body will have the courage to take our observations into consideration when making a decision on this project.”

ARLENE BRENNAN from Tasson, Clontibret, said her main concern was in relation to health, as a mother of three young children. She said studies had shown that exposure to EMFs can increase the risk of childhood leukemia. This was any parent’s nightmare to have to live close to these lines with constant worrying about what might happen in the future. Each day of their lives they would have to pass under them on visits to school, football and Irish dancing. Would they now have to consider not going to social activities?

The next concern was the devaluation of their property and farm, which she and her husband worked extremely hard to build it up. In the event that their property might have to be sold, who in their right mind would buy a house or farm near power lines or even an enormous pylon? She also had concerns regarding possible planning permission which might be needed for future generations.

The visual impact of this proposal would be catastrophic, she said. “We have the most beautiful scenery in Co. Monaghan with our rolling drumlins and beautiful lakes. The visitors that call to our house are blown away by the views and beautiful scenery that they can see. If this proposed interconnector gets the go-ahead overground, it would mean that as I open my front door or even glance out my window, the first thing that will catch my eye is a massive steel structure hovering over the skyline.”

Mrs Brennan said she had concerns regarding animal health and in relation to wildlife, something that was very important in rural Ireland. All wildlife needed to be protected. She regularly saw swans flying overhead and on occasion had spotted whooper swans near the lake. It would be awful to see these birds being destroyed, she told the hearing.

She believed the area would be adversely affected by these proposed lines and pylons with regard to tourism. Visitor numbers most likely would decline, as most tourists were fishermen, who travelled by car throughout our drumlin landscape.

The proposed power lines were just passing through Co. Monaghan. Initially EirGrid had tried to fob them off that the power would be of good benefit to them. But now the truth had been unearthed that this was of no benefit to the rural tight-knit community where people actually cared about each other. In her opinion EirGrid did not care about any of them and they were being treated as second class citizens.

EirGrid did not care how this should work; they just wanted to bully their way in across ordinary, decent people who just like her were trying to get on with their lives, work hard and rear their children the best possible way they could. This line was just a supply to power Northern Ireland and the authorities there had not made provision for security of supply within their own jurisdiction, she pointed out. The bottom line was if these proposed lines had to be installed, they must be placed underground.

MATTHEW GORMAN is an agricultural contractor from Tasson. He said the line would form a horse shoe right around his family’s home. He came to the hearing to object totally against overhead lines and ugly pylons in their area on the grounds of health, visual impact, property devaluation and loss of business.

“As an agri contractor I know the lands and laneways in the area like the back of my hand. Some of the narrow laneways and gaps they propose to use for access for construction are only fit for horses and carts. We had to purchase fold-up machinery to access these lands. Has EirGrid taken into consideration the effect high powered lines have on modern machinery?

We have invested heavily in the last number of years. We use a GPS navigation system to measure our work. It will not work under high voltage lines—that’s a fact. The spinning rolls of plastic in the twin satellite wrapper generate electricity. When it comes in contact with a high voltage line it can blow the monitor in the cab €2800 to replace. There’s a brain in the balers when they operate. If there is a jump in frequency under the power lines it can cause a short, blowing the brain and possibly the monitor in the cab cost €4500 in total. In fact when you cross under a power line of smaller voltage the monitor freezes, having a massive effect on the operation.”

Mr Gorman said tractors had an electronic gearbox powered by an ECU. It was known that power lines had a big effect on them too. If this was to go ahead it would have a massive effect on them financially, not counting the downtime working around pylons and the danger to himself and the men manoeuvring around pylons on the side of a hill in the drumlins of the neighbourhood.

He went on: “I think it is desperate that EirGrid think they can just walk over communities and farmers who have been there for generations. Before you make your decision on this, Inspector, think of this going through your back garden and your community. Would you give them permission or would you stand up for family, property and neighbours? We’ll not stop until these lines are buried.”

MARTIN MCGARRELL, Cashel, Annyalla, in an individual submission said the proposed pylon development raised issues about the effects on the health of humans and animals; health and safety; the impact on tourism and the equality of treatment with other parts of the country which he believed Monaghan residents were not being shown. The county would not benefit from the development of an overhead line as there was no sub-station planned by EirGrid along the line. In the west, the story had changed regarding development of the electricity grid and an overhead line had been abandoned and there was talk of an underground route instead. All the money wasted so far in the nine years since the project was first proposed would go a long way to filling the gap between the cost of undergrounding against an overhead line.

Mr McGarrell expressed concerns regarding the impact on wildlife such as buzzards and badgers. He showed the hearing a picture of a badger hole he had taken recently close to where two pylons would be built. The grassland area close to Tasson bog was environmentally sensitive and could take years to recover if it was disturbed.

He said working under the power lines would be dangerous for farmers, such as when they were spreading slurry. The pylons would destroy the landscape and would have a profound effect on tourism. He questioned the proposed access route for construction of two of the pylons which he said would require machinery to go up a narrow lane and across a hedge and sheugh where EirGrid would have to put in a bridge. The proposed development would affect three farm businesses and he wanted to know who would compensate farmers if cattle got a disease.

NOEL MCGARRELL questioned EirGrid about what provision the company would make for him to continue farming while pylons were being constructed. He said the company had not come to him for permission to use access routes they had chosen using aerial photographs and maps.

MARK LEATHAM, owner of land beside Mr McGarrell’s, claimed that no information had been sent out by EirGrid to landowners and that they had been excluded from the consultation process. He wondered how contractors working on behalf of EirGrid would manage to get concrete that would first be offloaded into dumper trucks up to the pylon construction sites without spilling some of the load over the fields.

JOHN MCGUINNESS an 80 year-old farmer from Annagh, Annyalla said he had a 20 acre holding, spread over three-quarters of a mile. One pylon would be beside his house and another near his farmyard. He claimed EirGrid were taking land off people through the back door. He questioned how one of the towers would be built when it would have two legs built into a rock and the other two legs 15ft lower down in a bog.

CIARAN KERR, his neighbour, said the overhead line would be a monumental insanity. It had no community support, despite EirGrid’s sponsorship of events. None of their children when grown up would want to live in a house close to a power line. They would want to move elsewhere. Was EirGrid going to compensate them for that?, he wondered. They had been saying all along they wanted the line out underground but all they got was a ‘No’. Undergrounding was the future and overhead lines were the past, he said.

Mr Kerr also asked the company’s representatives to explain what would happen if ice formed on the power lines and whether the weight would bring them closer to the ground because of sagging. A simple engineering question, he said, to which he wanted to know the answer.

COLETTE MCELROY claimed that EirGrid had moved a proposed tower closer to their home in the latest proposed route compared with the previous application. She spoke about the effect the power lines and the noise they could emit would have on her son, who has autism.

EIRGRID RESPONSE

EirGrid said it would arrange to bring back its environmental expert at an agreed date to answer questions that arose about the sound from power lines and the possible effects on children with autism. The company also provided some responses to invidual landowners about the proposed access routes for constructing pylons and details of machinery that would be used to carry out the work.

Robert Arthur of ESB International explained how concrete lorries would arrive at a suitable location on the public roadway close to the pylon sites. The concrete would then be offloaded into tracked machinery or a wheeled dumper truck. It would not be filled to full capacity. Shuttering would be used at the side to ensure that the concrete did not spill out when it was traversing laneways and fields. He said the type of machinery available would be able to go along narrow lanes and they would be cutting hedgerows to ground level to provide access to some sites.

EirGrid engineering consultant Tom Cannon explained that a traffic management plan would be drawn up by the contractors for the access routes. Flag men would be posted at various points to communicate with the drivers of vehicles and liaise with landowners about traffic movements. At one of the pylon sites in the area near Clontibret, approximately 33 lorry loads of concrete would be required for building the tower foundation. The deliveries would be spread out over three days.

A lawyer for EirGrid Jarlath Fitzsimons SC explained that the company’s practice had been to engage with land owners regarding access to land once planning permission had been granted. Statutory powers for access would only be used as a last resort.

Regarding a claim by Mark Leatham that there had been no contact with the landowner, Mr Fitzsimons said there was a comprehensive record of correspondence with the person who was the registered landowner, now deceased. A search of property registration the previous day showed the name of the owner had not yet been changed.

EirGrid landscape consultant Jeorg Schulze was asked to explain why pylons had been located in some cases close to houses. But he said they had were within the recommended distance from the line. He was asked about photographs that had been displayed to the inspectors showing panoramic views from the top of hills that would be spoilt by the pylons.

Mr Schulze said the photomontages he had produced were all taken from public roadways, in accordance with international guidelines. Asked about some of the residential impact assessments regarding what could be seen of the proposed power line from a particular house, he said the methodology used had been consistent both in the Republic and in the North.

Regarding compensation to farmers for any losses, William Mongey of EirGrid said there was a code of practice in place between the ESB and the IFA. This set out their policy throughout the country. The terms of compensation for farmers on whose land a pylon was being erected were described in an earlier module.

On the question of ice on power lines, Robert Arthur of EirGrid said there were no national or EU design standards requiring a particular ground clearance for ice loading. The standards were for normal weather. Ice loading had therefore not been factored into the figure for clearance of the wires above the ground.

Mr Arthur also said he was confident the type of leg extensions the ESB had for latticed steel pylons would suffice for building the tower in the area where Mr McGuinness had expressed concern. They could be used for two of the four legs on the lower side of the tower foundation.

The hearing will sit on Monday and Tuesday of next week when it will continue to hear submissions from Monaghan landowners.

 

INTERCONNECTOR DAY23

by

MARTIN MCGARRELL from Cashel, Annyalla, explained he was acting as spokesperson for the Co. Monaghan landowner group consisting of 115 landowners who were totally opposed to pylons on their lands. This represented 92% of landowners in the area stretching from border at Lemgare to S. Monaghan almost to Cavan border.

As had already been pointed out, 99% of people who attended three open days in Monaghan in May 2013 indicated they had no acceptance of the current project. This remained the case despite the vast amount of money EirGrid had spent trying to infiltrate our communities by way of sponsorship of local radio stations and the GAA.

This advertising in the local media which had been ongoing since the application was lodged in June 2015 and particularly intense since this oral hearing began is prejudicial to a fair outcome and totally contrary to natural justice, not to mention a complete waste of taxpayers’ money.

They may be here to talk but the talk had been of rebuttal, denial, stonewalling, constant changing of evidence, filibustering, legalistic and technical jargon and point blank refusal to supply reasonable information that was requested.

EirGrid say that 25% of the lands have been accessed and surveyed but yet no maps have been produced to prove this. We firmly believe that nowhere near 25% of lands were accessed in Monaghan and if they were then it was done by trespass without the knowledge of the owner.

The landowners are full supportive of the stance taken by both CMAPC and NEPPC when they withdrew from part one of the hearing. Both the Cavan/Meath landowners and Monaghan landowners unanimously endorsed this stance at hugely attended meetings in Navan on Holy Thursday and Aughnamullen on Easter Monday.

What EirGrid was allowed to do by way of submitting maps in the EIS without firstly informing the landowners concerned was a total insult to not only the 25 affected landowners but to all the landowners in general. An insult to one is an insult to all.

To compound this insult the amended maps were delivered some days and indeed weeks later in the case of the first six by courier on Good Friday and Easter Tuesday, after they had been presented to this oral hearing, without any consultation with the landowners whatsoever.

MARIA FITZPATRICK from Lemgare claimed people in Monaghan were not being given the same treatment as the rest of the country where partial undergrounding of electricity lines was being allowed. She expressed concerns about the access route EirGrid proposed to use to get to the proposed pylon site. She said it would bring construction traffic along a laneway lines with hawthorn hedges and it was not suitable for that. She also wanted to know what would happen to the horses she kept when work on the towers was taking place. They would not have access to water if the laneway was blocked. They were also sensitive animals and she was concerned for their safety. She said it would also affect her husband’s business. 

MARTIN TRAYNOR from Lemgare said the power line would have a devastating impact as it would split his farm in two. He would have no choice but to travel under the lines several times daily to carry out his work. His elderly mother lived next door and her residence would be about 44m from the outer conductor of the line. He had a shed that was less than 30m away from the outer conductor of the line.

Mr Traynor claimed that the construction of the foundations for one of the towers had the potential to ruin the spring well from which he drew his water supply. There would be knock-on impacts for his farming enterprise and suckler cow herd, depriving him of earning a living from the land.

PHILIP AND ANNA COLLINS, Lisdrumgormley, had their submission presented by Jim McNally. They had expanded their our poultry house egg production in 2011 to accomodate 32,000 laying hens. However this new poultry house had not been included on the developer’s maps in the planning application.

EirGrid had admitted their property was very highly sensitive in the EIS, but had made no attempt to change the route, or to actively engage with, or accommodate them at any time in a positive or constructive manner. NIE in the North had redirected the line in South Tyrone near the Moy to avoid poultry housing.

No great effort was made by the developer to look at putting this powerline underground using DC technology along national roadways which would have avoided a very high sensitive poultry egg producing unit such as theirs. The omission of the new poultry unit from the EirGrid maps in their view rendered the EIS and the planning application incomplete, given that their poultry business should be classified as “very highly sensitive” in line with EirGrid’s own parameters.

Mr Mc Nally also presented a submission for KATHLEEN HUGHES of Lisdrumgormley. She expressed concerned about the real potential disturbance to the animals on the family farm and the access restrictions to the land in real terms during construction. She was concerned about the ongoing interruption to farming work and the potential for the spread of disease among animals. The access route for proposed pylon 109 was near a bend, off a local road, and would require the removal of wire fencing and hedgerow and bulldozing, to level off high ground and uneven surfaces in the field. No clarification on how each of these issues would be addressed had ever been explained to her.

SIR JACK LESLIE DIES AGED 99

by
Sir John (Jack) Leslie in Caledon Photo: © Michael Fisher

Sir John (Jack) Leslie in Caledon Photo: © Michael Fisher

Sorry to learn this morning of the death of Sir John (Jack) Leslie eight months before his 100th birthday. He was single. His age did not stop him from dancing his way around various nightclubs in Ibiza and Monaghan! The news was conveyed by the family on social media @Castle_Leslie, adding that he died peacefully at his home.

In November last year (then aged 98) at the residence of the French Ambassador in Dublin, family and friends of Sir Jack joined the celebrations as the World War II veteran was awarded France’s highest distinction. The former Irish Guards officer was made a Chevalier de la Légion d’honneur, adding to his formal title of fourth baronet. The distinction was bestowed by the French Minister of State for Veterans and Remembrance, M. Jean-Marc Todeschini. Representatives of the British Army and the Irish Defence Forces were present for this important occasion that was another chapter in the historical friendship between Ireland and France. The Bishop of Clogher Dr Liam Mac Daid and Donagh Parish Priest Fr Hubert Martin were also among the guests.

Sir Jack said he wished to accept the award on behalf of all soldiers from the island of Ireland who fought and died in the two great wars. As a second Lieutenant in the Irish Guards, Jack Leslie commanded a unit at Boulogne-sur-Mer in 1940 that took on the advancing Panzers of the German army and held them back for several days allowing thousands of other British soldiers to be evacuated from Dunkerque. He was taken prisoner and spent the rest of the war in a prisoner-of-war camp in Germany.

Born on 6th December 1916 he was the eldest son of Sir Shane Leslie, 3rd Bt, and Marjorie Ide. He became the fourth baronet when his father died in 1971. He was educated at Downside School and Magdalene College, Cambridge. During World War II, he served as an officer in the Irish Guards during the Battle of France before being captured at Boulogne-sur-Mer. He then spent five years in POW camps. After the war he moved to New York and later travelled around Europe, settling in Rome. At the age of 78 he returned to his family’s homestead and traveled to Ibiza for his 85th birthday in 2001. He revealed the wedding location of Sir Paul McCartney and Heather Mills by admitting to reporters it was to take place in Castle Leslie, but that it was “a secret”. In January 2012 he appeared in the TV special “Secrets of the Manor House”, which discussed the Leslie family and Castle Leslie, among other manor homes. In 2015 he featured in the TV series “Tales of Irish Castles”. He was presented with the Legion d’Honneur at the French embassy in Dublin on 9 November 2015.

Jack Leslie survived his older sister, the author Anita Leslie (Anita King d.1985) and his younger brother, Desmond Leslie (d.2001). In the immediate line of succession for the baronetcy are nephew Shaun and nephew Mark. His father was a first cousin of the former British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill. His paternal grandmother, Leonie Jerome, and Churchill’s mother, Lady Randolph Churchill (born Jennie Jerome), were sisters – the daughters of American financier Leonard Jerome. His mother, Marjorie Ide, was the daughter of Henry Clay Ide, a former Governor-General of the Philippines.

A repeat of my article in 2014:

Among the family stories examined in a current World War One exhibition at the National Library in Dublin was that of the Leslies of Castle Leslie, Glaslough, County Monaghan. Sir John was a veteran of the Second World War and was there to help with the opening of the exhibition. It was attended by the British Ambassador Dominick Chilcott and the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht Heather Humphreys TD, from County Monaghan.

I reported in 2014 how the display will run for four years and features letters, diaries, newspapers, leaflets and photographs from the library’s archives and aims to depict the various aspects of the Irish experience of the war, and Ireland’s response to the conflict. It is supported by the British Embassy and is part of the National Library’s programme for the Decade of Commemorations.

Nikki Ralston, exhibition curator for the NLI, said: “Irish people had very diverse and complex reactions to World War I. This exhibition captures those sentiments, and also recounts the tense domestic situation in the Ireland of 1914. We felt one of the best ways to illustrate how Ireland experienced the war was to explore a range of themes through real-life stories. We have chosen to focus on four people who had very different experiences, and we have featured their writings – including personal diaries and letters– in this exhibition. These primary sources are complemented by audio, video and touchscreen installations to create a multi-layered, multimedia experience for all visitors.”

Among the four real-life stories featured in the new exhibition focus on:

DSC_0077

Sir John (Jack) Leslie at Monaghan County Museum Photo: © Michael Fisher

**Captain Norman Leslie, 28 Rifle Brigade, second son of the well-known Leslie family from Castle Leslie, had become heir to the family estate when his elder brother, Shane, converted to Catholicism and became a supporter of Irish Home Rule. An experienced soldier when the war broke out, Norman was shot and killed in October 1914, while charging a German machine gun armed only with a sword (it was considered ungentlemanly for officers to carry guns). He is buried in France at Chapelle d’Armentieres Old Military Cemetery. The sword he was carrying when he died was eventually returned to the Leslie family, and now hangs in the gallery of Castle Leslie. It was carried by Jack, his nephew, for the opening of the exhibition.

Jack’s nephew, Mark Leslie; and Mark’s son, Luke were also present at the launch of the exhibition. The family spoke of how Norman’s memory is kept alive at Castle Leslie, where his sporting trophies adorn the entrance hall and his sword – considered a symbol of good luck – is used to cut all wedding cakes at the Castle.

Launching the exhibition at the time, Minister Heather Humphreys said: “This exhibition in the National Library allows us to understand the sheer magnitude of the First World War through very personal stories. By choosing to focus on four people and their different experiences, the Library has brought to life the real-life challenges and dilemmas which they faced 100 years ago. We can walk in their shoes, hear their words and see their hand-written letters. I was interested to see the Leslie family from Co Monaghan featuring in the exhibition. The story of the tragic death of Norman Leslie in 1914 gives us just one of example of the brutal way in which tens of thousands of Irish men lost their lives during the War. This fascinating exhibition is part of the Library’s programme for the Decade of Commemorations, and I would encourage as many people as possible to check it out.”

Addressing the launch, British Ambassador Dominick Chilcott said: “The British government are very pleased to be supporting the National Library of Ireland’s excellent work of commemorating the events of 100 years ago. The National Library’s archive of First World War documents is a rich one; and our understanding of the Great War and the Irish experience of it benefits hugely from this collection. The part of this exhibition that the British government helped to fund is the ‘listening post’, where you can hear period songs and readings of poetry and letters. The generation that went to war was a highly literary one. They wrote huge numbers of letters as well as much poetry and many books and diaries recording their experiences at the Front. We are fortunate in having so much material to explore.”

More details of the exhibition can be found here.

INTERCONNECTOR DAY22

by

This dealt with the potential effects on the Brittas estate Co. Meath

Probing questions to EirGrid by a lawyer acting for the Brittas estate near Nobber in Co. Meath revealed what anti-pylon campaigners believe are several inadequacies in the planning application for the North/South interconnector. EirGrid has said the detailed environmental impact statement it submitted has complied with the relevant Irish and EU regulations.

Michael O’Donnell BL acting for the owners of Brittas House and demesne Neville Jessop and Oinri Jackson asked EirGrid why no site specific details were provided regarding construction of the proposed pylons, the felling of a section of mature woodland, and the impact the proposed line would have on the views from a wing of the house built in 1732 and incorporating an earlier residence from 1672. The house was extended in the 18th Century and a ballroom wing, designed by Francis Johnston (architect of the GPO), was added in the early 19th Century. The house is located approximately 430m to the east of the proposed development.

Three ringforts are within 400m of the proposed line. According to an archaeological consultant for EirGrid, Declan Moore, these monuments will have their setting impacted on by the proposed development. The environmental impact statement explained that as much as was practicably possible the topography of the area had been used to keep impacts on the setting of Brittas House to a minimum. Mr Moore found that where the proposed development crossed the entrance avenue, there would be no views of the house and likewise in the vicinity of the house there were no views of the proposed development. But he added that there was the potential there may be views from some of the upstairs windows of the house, especially during the winter months. The impact on the setting of the house was in his view slight to moderate.

Questioned by Mr O’Donnell, Mr Moore said he had not entered the demesne as permission had not been granted but he had carried out from the public road a visual inspection of some of the three archaeological monuments inside it. He insisted that the development would have no direct physical impact on any such monument. He also repeated a number of times that there were no national monuments within the demesne.

This was disputed by the lawyer for the owners. He revealed that a ministerial letter had been sent out in July 1997 to the then owners referring to a monument in the townland of Brittas with details of preservation requirements.

At a previous module Neville Jessop explained how one of the access routes proposed by EirGrid to a pylon site would require concrete lorries to pass over an old bridge which had cracks in the stonework. He told the company the access bridge was not available because of its condition. Any repair work that needed to be done on the structure would require notification to the Minister for Arts Heritage and the Gaeltacht. A lawyer for EirGrid said on Tuesday it did not know the bridge had been closed for health and safety reasons.

 

 

 

INTERCONNECTOR STAGE2

by

COMMUNITY AND POLITICIANS CALL FOR EIRGRID INTERCONNECTOR TO BE PUT UNDERGROUND

Michael Fisher THE NORTHERN STANDARD

EIGHT TDs from the three main parties expressed unanimous opposition to EirGrid’s plan for a North/South high voltage electricity transmission line when stage two of the Bord Pleanála oral hearing into the planning application began in Carrickmacross on Monday (11th April). All pointed out that local communities and landowners were strongly opposed to the overhead line and the 300 pylons that would be erected across Monaghan, Cavan and Meath.

EirGrid again defended its choice not to put the cables underground for reasons of cost and security. But they were told by a Cavan farmer their plans to put a pylon near his house and the remains of a fort were a total disgrace. Paul Reilly from Gallonboy near Kingscourt said he did not know what EirGrid were up to. It was as though EirGrid were taking a bulldozer and pushing everything away in this big tourism area near the site of the Muff Fair. They were going backwards (in technology).

He explained to the planning inspectors that as a farmer he bought an up to date tractor; he did not buy a donkey. He had worked on the underground gas pipeline in County Meath and there was no problem about it at all. Mr Reilly was applauded by other land owners as he stated bluntly: either EirGrid put the cables underground or the project won’t go at all.

A number of other landowners, mainly farmers repeated the same message during yesterday’s proceedings. On Monday 18th April, individual land owners along the line from County Monaghan will make their submissions, starting with where the proposed overhead line crosses the border at Lemgare near Clontibret, close to the Monaghan Way. The hearing is expected to last until the middle of next month.

Sinn Féin TD for Cavan/Monaghan Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin said the vehement opposition to EirGrid’s plans he had witnessed and had experienced at successive public meetings knew no political or religious boundaries or borders. That opposition from Meath through Cavan and Monaghan to Armagh and Tyrone equated with a mighty roar and one that must be heard, heeded and respected. His party was not opposed to the development of a North/ South interconnector, a point that was also raised by former Stormont Agriculture Minister and former MP Michelle Gildernew. What they were against was the plan to put the power lines overhead, suspended on steel pylons. He also called for the project to proceed by putting the cables underground.

Fianna Fáil TD Niamh Smyth expressed her total objection to the proposed development in its current form and said it could not go ahead without public acceptance. Her constituency colleague Brendan Smith TD claimed people in the North East were being treated as second class citizens compared to other parts of the country.

As well as the TDs, evidence was also given to the inspectors by a former Fine Gael TD Sean Conlan and by eleven of the eighteen Monaghan Councillors. Cathaoirleach of Monaghan County Council, Cllr Noel Keelan, said he wanted to put on record the total opposition by the people of the county to the project in its current form. There was a sense of déjà vu: nothing had changed in the past six years since the previous application, he claimed.

Cllr Keelan later asked the presiding inspector what would be the response from An Bord Pleanála when a new government was formed and the new Dáil would have representatives from three main parties opposed to an overhead line, as had been made clear on Monday. He was informed that the Board would have to have regard to current government policy when it made its decision. 

 Following the submissions by public representatives EirGrid project manager Aidan Geoghegan again explained why the company had opted for the cross-country overhead route. He also denied that they had not consulted about an underground option and referred to a booklet that had been produced for stakeholders in 2009 containing a summary of a report by consultants. Mr Geoghegan also dismissed claims that the interconnector would bring no benefit to the three counties in the Republic that the proposed line would cross.

 

INTERCONNECTOR DAY21

by

This section was devoted to specific landowner and public issues from Co. Meath and around Kingscourt Co. Cavan

The hearing was told about specific landowner concerns in Co. Meath along the proposed line from Kilmainhamwood as far as Woodland, where it would enter the existing sub-station.

EirGrid was accused of spending its money on things like sponsorship of the Virginia pumpkin festival, the GAA (under 21 and Australian Rules), two local radio current affairs programmes and advertising in local media. A company spokesman said a key finding of a number of reviews of EirGrid’s operations and engagement with the wider community had shown the need for effective communication of the necessity for grid infrastructure to ensure a safe and sustainable electricity supply. As part of the company’s strategy to address this, it was placing an emphasis on improving how it communicated its role, including through advertising and sponsorship.

David Martin said “We welcome the strong engagement from landowners, public representatives and community members at the An Bord Pleanála oral hearing. The oral hearing provides an opportunity for all relevant information to be brought before An Bord Pleanála, and ensures that their concerns are addressed. We encourage all landowners and concerned residents to attend over coming weeks. If you would like more information on any aspect of the project, you can talk to our team on the ground, or drop in to our offices in Navan or Carrickmacross. Contact details for our Community Liaison Officer Gráinne Duffy and Agricultural Liaison Officer John Boylan are at www.eirgrid.com. Since submitting our planning application for the interconnector in June 2015, we have continued to engage with communities in Meath, Cavan and Monaghan.”

EirGrid said the consideration of alternatives to an overhead line, including underground cables (both cross-country and along public roads), had been outlined its planning application. This had relied on a suite of reports prepared by the government, third parties and EirGrid itself. One of these, prepared by PB Power, showed that an underground cable option is considerably more expensive, at €670 million more that overhead lines.

The government-appointed Independent Expert Commission found that an underground cable option would be €333million more expensive. The reason for the difference in these figures was that the PB Power report studied a cross-country option, while the IEC report considered a roadside route. The company said a further detailed study of roads in the project area had shown that the use of the M3 and local roads was simply not suitable for the interconnector project.

When considering alternatives for the project, cost was just one factor. Underground cables would also not be as reliable as overhead lines, causing greater complexity and greater risk. EirGrid said it also studied the use of disused railway lines and a subsea option for cables but they were not viable options for this project.

 

INTERCONNECTOR DAY20

by
BRITTASGATE

Entrance Gates and Gate Lodge, Brittas Estate Co. Meath

This section was devoted to specific landowner and public issues from Co. Meath and around Kingscourt Co. Cavan

 On behalf of the Brittas estate near Nobber in Co. Meath, Michael O’Donnell BL said the proposed line, which would cross one of the main entrance roads to the historic house, close to an occupied gate lodge, amounted to sheer devastation. He referred to the inadequacy of the EirGrid documentation and said it was not acceptable under Irish planning law or EU rules. The company was treating the public with a level of contempt, he said.

Mr O’Donnell pointed out that Brittas was a protected structure equal to any other great Irish house such as Castletown, Carton or Russborough. Every structure in the demesne had the same status. It was the oldest unfortified and continuously occupied residence in the country dating back to the early 17th century. It was an extraordinarily important piece of landscape with its own eco system. It was about to be devastated by a 400kV line traversing it, going through a section of mature woodland that would have to be removed.

 

 

 

 

INTERCONNECTOR DAY19

by

DAY 19

EIRGRID’S RESPONSE

EirGrid lawyer Jarlath Fitzsimons SC said the photomontages were not a clever manipulation, nor were they dishonest. It was unhelpful and inaccurate suggest this. He said a full suite of tools had been used in making assessments and a number of significant impacts along the route had been clearly identified regarding specific residences.

Consultant landscape architect for EirGrid Jeorg Schulze gave an extensive reply to the concerns about photomontages raised by Fine Gael Cllr Sean Gilliland. He said they helped to give an assessment of the visual impact of the line on specific vistas identified in the county development plan. In response to several queries about why houses had not been shown in the photomontages, Mr Schulze said it was the landscape that was being assessed. He pointed out that the residential impact assessment for residences had covered 1070 houses within 500m either side of the proposed line in the Monaghan area. At no point had they tried to hide any impact there would be on residences.

He said the environmental impact statement stated the impact on individual houses and gave conclusions. They did not need photomontages from all locations to come to those conclusions. He himself had seen some of the areas from the public road and had walked along part of the Monaghan Way. Cllr Gilliland listened to the explanation and said EirGrid were being “economic with the truth” and he would leave it at that.

Monaghan County Council Cathaoirleach Cllr Noel Keelan, asked the presiding inspector what would be the response from An Bord Pleanála when a new government was formed and the new Dáil would have representatives from three main parties opposed to an overhead line, as had been made clear on Monday. He was informed that the Board would have to have regard to current government policy when it made its decision.

Fine Gael Cllr Aidan Campbell asked the inspectors what weight was placed by An Bord Pleanála on the county development plan, which had been worked on by all the councillors and the planning officers. The EirGrid response was not what they wanted because it contravened a number of things in the plan. So what was the point of having one, he asked. Presiding inspector Breda Gannon confirmed that the Board also had to have regard for county development plans (as well as government policy) in coming to their decisions.

This section dealt with concerned residents’ groups from Co. Meath

The inspectors heard submissions from eleven groups of residents who had come together to lodge joint submissions to An Bord Pleanála. The effect of the planned line on historic areas such as Teltown and Donaghpatrick was again made clear. Many had sent in objections when the previous application had made. By making one objection, it meant each group had to make only one payment of €50. The hearing was told that as almost 1000 submissions had been made to the Board, this would have brought in nearly €50,000 in revenue.

INTERCONNECTOR DAY18

by

DAY 18

This section was devoted to elected representatives from Monaghan, Cavan and Meath

Michael Fisher      The Northern Standard

Public representatives from the three main parties in Meath and Cavan/Monaghan were united in their opposition to EirGrid’s plan for a North/South electricity interconnector when stage two of a Bord Pleanála oral hearing into the planning application began on Monday. All pointed out that local communities and landowners were strongly against the overhead line. EirGrid again defended its decision not to put the cables underground on grounds of cost and security.

CAVAN/MONAGHAN TDs

CAOIMHGHÍN Ó CAOLÁIN T.D. party spokesperson on health and Cavan/Monaghan TD said there was very real anger and anguish in families and communities along the proposed route of the interconnector and further afield. He had experienced the vehement opposition to EirGrid’s plans at public meeting after public meeting. It knew no political or religious boundaries or borders. That vehement opposition equated with a mighty roar and one that must be heard, heeded and respected.

Like the overwhelming number of those directly affected by EirGrid’s plans, his party did not oppose the development of a North/South interconnector. What they opposed was the proposal to introduce this infrastructure by means of pylon supported overhead power lines. They supported the project proceeding by underground cabling, a technically feasible and very affordable method of delivering what they were told was a necessary power delivery link-up. Undergrounding was not only the most cost effective way to proceed, it was the only way to proceed. Holding to the overhead pylon approach meant facing continuing strong resistance, including protracted and costly court appearances and likely physical blockading and ever deepening entrenchment, with growing public disquiet and negativity towards EirGrid.

He said the company had shown scant regard for the wellbeing of the targeted and unwilling host families and communities in the affected area. Those who lived in close proximity to the proposed route had suffered grievously from stress and anxiety that had impacted on their physical health and mental wellbeing.

He claimed people were suffering from depression, sleep disorders, concentration difficulties, nervousness, loss of appetite and from fatigue. Men and women, fathers and mothers, had lost the yen for life, he said, and the interest in investing their energies and talents into developing and improving their holdings, their homes, their enterprise.

While they were told that overhead power lines were low-frequency, there was no disputing the fact that the electromagnetic fields they created caused a heating effect in matter within a given proximity and this was increased by the degree of energy in transit. He quoted from a World Health Organisation report (2004) on ‘Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity’ that said between 1% and 3% of the world’s population were affected by electromagnetic hypersensitivity syndrome. Mr Ó Caoláin claimed this meant, by extension, that between one and three in every 100 people across five counties from Meath to Tyrone who would be exposed to the overhead power line EMFs would, because of their natural make-up and disposition, develop one or any number of potential ill effects.

NIAMH SMYTH T.D. Fianna Fáil expressed her total objection to the proposed development in its current form and said it could not go ahead without public acceptance. Local people were distraught by this development on the grounds of health, devaluation of land, destruction of local heritage, flora and fauna along with many other reasons, she said.

She told the inquiry government policy had been to allow such development to take place in the west as an underground project. She urged An Bord Pleanála to use the same social conscience for the people of Cavan, Monaghan and Meath. She accepted the need for the North-South interconnector but vehemently disagreed with both the scale of the proposal and the choice of overhead transmission lines instead of underground cables. She said people’s concerns had not been adequately answered by EirGrid to give them peace of mind. Therefore this application did not have the basic principle in place of “public acceptance” and could not go ahead.

The reasons why local people were so distraught by this proposed development related to health, devaluation of land, and destruction of local heritage, flora and fauna
along with many other reasons. She referred to the beautiful and historical Lough-an-Leagh mountain, a major tourist attraction in East Cavan with nature walks such as Adrian’s Way and home of the sacred grounds of an ancient mass rock which attracted thousands of visitors every year. This was in very close proximity to Muff National School with 130 children. There was also the famous and oldest festival in the country, “The Fair of Muff”. The proposed line would run near these locations.

People in that area were very concerned that if the North/South interconnector was approved, it would soon be followed by a major substation near Kingscourt. EirGrid had conceded the interconnector could only be built if public acceptance existsed. Why then was undergrounding being dismissed as if the will of the people was irrelevant? Great play was being made by the company on the ‘urgency’ of this project and on the risks to consumers in the North if it did not go ahead. If it was genuinely so urgent, then surely undergrounding was the best way forward, even if ‘sub-optimal’?

In the North it had been decided for the same project to have two separate stages to the public hearing: firstly determine if the application was valid, then and only then engage the public in the oral hearing process. Why was this not considered in the Republic, to reduce the public’s potential waste of time and resources? Why has NEPPC to go to the courts basically to achieve the same parity of esteem automatically accorded to the people in Northern Ireland?

BRENDAN SMITH T.D. her Cavan/Monaghan constituency colleague claimed people in the North East were being treated as second class citizens compared to other parts of the country. He said the proposed monstrous pylons were not acceptable. Undergrounding was not estimated to be 1.5 times the cost of an overhead line and the EirGrid Chief Executive had said it was ‘technically feasible’.

EIRGRID RESPONSE ON UNDERGROUNDING

Following the submissions by public representatives EirGrid project manager Aidan Geoghegan again explained why the company had opted for the cross-country overhead route. He also denied that they had not consulted about an underground option. Mr Geoghegan also dismissed claims that the interconnector would bring no benefit to the three counties in the Republic that the proposed line would cross.

MONAGHAN COUNCILLORS

As well as the TDs, evidence was also given to the inspectors by a former Fine Gael TD Sean Conlan and by eleven of the eighteen Monaghan Councillors.

CLLR NOEL KEELAN, Cathaoirleach of Monaghan County Council, said he wanted to put on record the total opposition by the people of the county to the project in its current form. There was a sense of déjà vu: nothing had changed in the past six years since the previous application, he claimed. It was unacceptable that people in this area were being treated totally differently than elsewhere by EirGrid. He claimed the application showed a number of possible breaches of the county development plan 2013-19.

CLLR PAT TREANOR of Sinn Féin (Ballybay-Clones) said at each meeting between the Council and EirGrid representatives the members had sought further information on undergrounding of the cables to allow construction of the interconnector on that alternative basis. But none had been forthcoming. He said there was almost absolute unanimity on this issue, with an estimated 97% of landowners in Monaghan opposing the application but supporting undergrounding. The plan before the Board did not have public or community confidence or acceptance, he said.

Cllr Treanor said the appointment of liaison officers and EirGrid’s references to ‘community gain’ were seen overwhelmingly as an attempt to divide communities. The call for real and meaningful engagement, with a full consideration of all options, including undergrounding, had long been voiced by residents, landowners, campaign groups and public representatives. But he had no confidence that this had happened.

The County Monaghan Development Plan stated that undergrounding should be considered in the first instance. The Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act 2006 (Section 36) required the applicant to submit information to allow An Bord Pleanála to decide on its jurisdiction over the project. But there had been so many amendments by EirGrid to the original application that in his view, An Bord did not have the proper information in order to make a decision. He urged the Board to reject the application. 

FIANNA FÁIL COUNCILLORS

CLLR SEAMUS COYLE introduced the Fianna Fáil representatives. He said the access routes EirGrid proposed to use for construction work were generally narrow country roads with no lay-bys for traffic to pass and their structural condition was already very poor. EirGrid had not carried out a detailed investigation about the road structures. They were proposing to use for access to pylon sites (in several cases) small private laneways that had been designed for a horse and cart.

The elected representatives in Monaghan strongly felt that the proposed overground option instead of undergrounding would provide long-term negative health, amenity and financial impacts for the residents and landowners in the affected areas. They felt the underground alternative had not been properly researched by EirGrid. In the case of the Grid Link and Grid West projects numerous alternative detailed options had been offered and the most advantageous solution accepted.

The potential for short-term cost saving gain had to be measured against the long-term overall implications for the most important factor: the residents of the area who would have to live their lives against the backdrop of unsightly intrusive pylons, a damaged roads infrastructure, potential pollution of ground waters, dramatically reduced land values and visual eyesores that would remain there for generations to come.

Cllr Coyle noted that this was a Project of Common Interest (PCI) as it was a transboundary application between two jurisdictions. In his party’s view, the quality of the applications should have been equal in detail. The major difference between the applications was that in the Northern Ireland application, access was given by landowners for Northern Ireland Electricity (NIE) to access their lands to carry out detailed surveys and assess the land terrain and access lanes, wildlife and hedgerows.

The absence of detailed measured and levelled surveys for each individual site was a source of concern. Access lane widths and road widths should be accurately measured to ensure that the proposed access by construction vehicles was possible, as well as determining if hedgerows needed to be removed to facilitate sight visibility splays. He said the proposal did not satisfactorily address the policies in the current Development Plan for County Monaghan that as councillors they had helped to prepare.

From an environmental viewpoint the protection of rivers and watercourses as well as the roads infrastructure was vital. The proposal did not in their opinion address these concerns to a satisfactory level, he said.

Protecting the landscapes and the tourism and amenity value of the county was another aspect that the elected representatives would fight hard to maintain. The EirGrid proposal did not provide enough information to ensure these core issues would be protected. The Fianna Fáil group strongly believed that the overground cable proposal selected by EirGrid was totally unsuitable for the project. They believed the provision of an underground cable network, clearly defined, offered the best way to achieve a sustainable and environmentally friendly solution. Facilitating the supply of power to another jurisdiction should not compromise the natural beauty of our countryside or result in long-term scarring of our landscape. Short-term gain would lead to long-term pain in this instance, he concluded.

CLLR PADRAIG MCNALLY said in more than thirty years as a councillor he had never before witnessed such a galvanisation against any project. There had been a lack of proper communication with the community by EirGrid, he said. They could not allow the company to come along and put a blot on the landscape in Monaghan among the hills, because the county was hoping to adopt a new strategy to attract tourism in the next few years.

Cllr McNally said EirGrid had lost a lot of credibility owing to the errors in the previous application. He referred to a planning application he had made to Monaghan county council, which he said operated strict criteria. One letter of the townland name in the address had been spelt incorrectly. He had been asked to withdraw it and re-apply because of that small mistake.

CLLR PJ O’HANLON queried why EirGrid had applied to open a temporary storage yard outside Carrickmacross for the sections of steel pylons and for soil removed from the various pylon sites beside one of the finest hotels in Ulster, where they were attending the oral hearing (a short distance from the Nuremore Hotel on a stretch of abandoned road beside the N2 Carrick bypass). That showed the amount of concern EirGrid had regarding tourism in the area, he claimed.

In the Corduff/Raferagh area the pylons would be placed close to one of the largest poultry producers in Ireland. Who was concerned about the effect on the chicken farmers? He claimed EirGrid was only thinking of its own balance sheet. All political parties were united against this application and it should be rejected, he said.

FINE GAEL COUNCILLORS

CLLR SEAN GILLILAND queried the photomontages that had been produced by EirGrid taken at various vantage points along the route. He showed the inspectors a series of photographs which he said gave more realistic views of the effects of individual pylons close to property and sited on top of drumlins. He claimed the line would be seen from a high point at Mullyash mountain even though it was 6km away.

He said EirGrid had gone to great length to persuade An Bord Pleanála that they had taken immense pains to minimalise the visual impact of the pylons on the environment. He said his photographs would show that (even at its least intrusive) a scar of 108 Pylons through the county of Monaghan would have a devastating impact on the visual environment, the people who lived there and their ability to promote the Farney county to potential tourists.

Cllr Gilliland pointed out that the shaping of the visual topography of County Monaghan was the legacy of the vast ice sheets during the last ice age and the deliberate human management over 5000 years of human settlement. EirGrid had described the landscape as ‘sparsely populated’, suggesting it was ‘uninhabited’. Nothing could be further from the truth, he said. County Monaghan was a patchwork of small residential farms adjacent to their land holdings. Families had inherited these small enterprises from their predecessors along with traditions and community bonds. The value of this inheritance and the value of the land and homes was inalienable. But if EirGrid got permission to overground the project then the farm and home would become worthless. Families would have nothing to hand onto the next generation; people would leave and then the land would become uninhabited.

The deliberate and careful management of the landscape had been ongoing for thousands of years; the issue at the heart of the matter was its protection. He would illustrate that the overgrounding of the North/South interconnector in no way protected the landscape; it defiled it.

EirGrid intended to place 65% of its 108 pylons on the top half or directly on top of hills and drumlins. This would have the effect of magnifying the visual impact of the pylon in the immediate environs. Many pylons would be towering over homes and in full view of scenic walks such as the Monaghan Way.

Cllr Gilliland observed that EirGrid had provided a series of photomontages to illustrate the visual impact. He claimed the company had been dishonest in the placement of many of the photos and it was his intention to provide additional photos so that presiding inspector could get a better understanding of the devastation the pylons would have on the environment. He suggested that the inspector should visit proposed sites herself as that was the only way to appreciate the damage that would be caused and what people were set to lose. (EirGrid responded later on the methodology used for the photomontages. The consultant involved said they had been out together in accordance with international guidelines).

CLLR CIARA MCPHILLIPS said EirGrid had not adequately responded to some of the issues raised by Monaghan County Council and the elected members. As the Board was aware, and as had been highlighted by other objectors, EirGrid had failed to identify a number of access points for tower construction. As even the most lay person applying for planning permission knew, and as common sense alone would dictate, an applicant must identify how the proposed development would be accessed.

A further point related to access to lands adjacent to the proposed access points. The applicant had, during the course of this hearing, provided details to affected landowners of the proposed location of access points. However, it was not clear whether the applicant had contacted the owners of adjoining land parcels. This was important and necessary in view of the County Monaghan Development Plan 2013-2019, which required at a very basic level and in line with national policy that sight splays or sight lines of up to 150m be available in some instances, varying on the seniority of the road upon which the access point protruded.

What was different in Monaghan though, was a requirement in the County Development Plan that there must be not only agreement with those landowners but also that permission to cut back trees, hedges and vegetation is registered as a burden on the adjoining landowner’s property. This clause was in place to ensure an ongoing and continuous ability to comply with a grant of planning permission.

Cllr McPhillips questioned if the applicant had identified the adjoining landowners? Had EirGrid contacted these landowners? Had the applicant consulted these landowners?

The company might argue that they intended to use, in at least some cases, existing access points. In that case, had they shown that the proposed development would not increase or intensify the use of the existing access point by more than 5%? Surely such a claim was utterly unfounded, particularly regarding construction phase?

The applicant stated that they might use flagmen during construction phase in order to allow for the safe movement of traffic to and from sites. Was that really a safe solution? Also, what would happen in 10-15 years’ time when the applicant wanted to access the site? Would they use flagmen then? Who would police this? A grant of planning permission should have the capability of being definitely complied with, without the need for ongoing policing, she added.

Sight lines and sight splays and the necessity in this county to register the right to cut back adjoining hedges on adjoining land folios was an onerous obligation on all applicants for planning permission within the county. In order to ensure road safety it remained an integral part of planning law within the area. All applicants must comply, even the applicant who might seek to rely on ESB wayleaves.

In relation to the potential for property devaluation, the applicant had stated that there was very little research in Ireland or Britain on the effect of overhead lines on adjacent property. The applicant sought to rely on research carried out in North America. She said comparing Irish farmland values to those in North America was an insufficient basis to make such a claim in circumstances where Irish agriculture was expected to meet European standards, and depended greatly on its reputation for overseas exports.

Pylon construction traffic would move from one land holding to another. This presents a risk of disease being spread, such as foot and mouth. What preventative measures would be in place? She said EirGrid seemed confused as to whether they would wash and disinfect lorries or not.

Cllr McPhillips then addressed a number of heritage issues. She expressed concern about the effect of the proposed line coming within 750m of St Patrick’s Church of Ireland church Ardragh and also near to Corvally Presbyterian church and former national school. She pointed out that the County Monaghan Development Plan resisted developments which “upset the setting” of heritage points. No specific mitigation measures were in place regarding St Patrick’s. Corvally Presbyterian Church and the former Corvally school were both included in the national inventory of architectural heritage, but neither appeared in Appendix 14.3, “Architectural Heritage”. The school was included in photomontage 30 and was in the vicinity of two towers. She wanted to know why these sites had been excluded.

Cllrs David Maxwell and Aidan Campbell also expressed their opposition to the overhead line.

INDEPENDENT COUNCILLORS

CLLR HUGH MCELVANEY said there was a clear need to put the cables underground. He posed a series of questions that he said must be answered by EirGrid. What benefit would the line be to County Monaghan? The answer was none, because there would be no substation built in the county or in close proximity that would be of benefit to the county.

Agriculture was the single biggest industry in the Republic. Monaghan farmers and landowners rightly claimed the project would devalue their land. They felt the plans to erect pylons would affect their livestock and turn their land into construction sites and had questioned the methods EirGrid would use for accessing their property.

Farmers he met told him the company had not gone out onto the ground and looked at the situation regarding access to their property for the construction work on the pylons. Was EirGrid aware this was contrary to the Monaghan County Council development plan 2013-19 and the sustainable development of the county? What had Eirgrid to say regarding farmers’ and landowners’ concerns regarding traffic on the local access roads needed for EirGrid construction work which would be totally unfit for purpose in areas such as Corduff and Raferagh?

Was it true that EirGrid representatives had not gone out onto the ground to inspect properties that would be affected, but had instead done an aerial survey? Why do the photomontages supplied by EirGrid not show the actual proximity of the pylons and their route to dwellings? Was it also true that EirGrid had not taken into account the implications for fauna and wildlife in the countryside as well as heritage spots such as ancient burial grounds?

The recent launch of new farming schemes showed certain requirements that were needed in order to be granted acceptance to the schemes. This meant land would be let go wild for gaming and wild bird cover. So if farmers on the grid were planning to let some of their crops go wild in order to meet these requirements, then the Department of Agriculture would find itself in contention with the Department for Energy, who are supporting the erection of pylons. It did not make sense when on the one hand the government was trying to help farmers, and this meant letting land go wild, and on the other hand, the same government was trying to let EirGrid go ahead.

Regarding the question of electricity supply: whose supply are we talking about here? EirGrid says there needs to be a 400kV line fit to carry 1500 megawatts of power, but the existing Louth to Tandragee interconnector can carry 1200MW and can be upgraded to carry 1500MW. Why can this not be done? Does this just not entail upgrading or using the existing system and pylon sites, a method which has already been conceded as an alternative in the south east of the country?

This line is being developed solely to supply electricity to Northern Ireland, plain and simple, and is not of strategic importance to the Republic of Ireland, he said.

Regarding the upgrading of our electricity supply, Why has EirGrid downsized the proposed Grid West project from Mayo to Roscommon and the proposed Grid Link Cork to Kildare project? Grid West was downgraded from a 400kV line to a 220kV line capable of carrying 500MW with an option that 30km of cabling capable of being undergrounded.

Regarding Grid Link which runs from Kildare to Cork the proposal is to now to underground a cable carrying 700MW.  So why can’t the proposed N/S interconnector be undergrounded?

Are our citizens and their families being asked to sanction an overhead line through their land and in sight of their homes (with possible health risks) so that the cost of electricity to Northern consumers is reduced?

SONI and EirGrid, the Transmission System Operators  (TSOs) for Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland respectively, publish an annual generation capacity statement which outlines the expected electricity demand and the level of generation capacity available over the next 10 years, together with an analysis of the adequacy of this generation to meet demand.

In the foreword to the most recent Generation Capacity Statement, published in January 2016, Mr Fintan Slye, the EirGrid CEO states , “ The medium term situation for security of supply in Northern Ireland has been alleviated by the recent signing of a contract which should provide sufficient generation capacity from 2016.” He does go on to say that the preferred solution is the installation of the North /South interconnector but this then begs the question as to the need for it at all as there is already an alternative supply contract now in place in Northern Ireland which could be enhanced in years to come.

Lots of questions arise out of this document not least of which is, are we, in this state, to subject our citizens, our tax and ratepayers, our farming community, and not least of all our children’s health to risk and ignore their concerns in order to bolster a failed electricity service in Northern Ireland?

Neither I nor any other right thinking EU citizen would oppose any such co-operation, including costs being borne equally between member states and indeed I will be the first to support this proposal if it was to be undergrounded but there are so many concerns regarding pylons and this planning process that neither I nor the electorate I represent can support the current proposal.

As you know the North-South interconnector project, announced in 2007, will stretch 140 km from Meath to Tyrone, with 40kms of that cutting through County Monaghan. This will entail the erection of hundreds of unsightly pylons through our county which is striving to attract tourism but worse still the proposal has raised major health concerns throughout our population. In particular, many people have expressed concerns about the effect on children’s health for those living along the route of the pylons.

A great deal of research has been carried out, with mixed results. However, the largest body of evidence relates to childhood leukaemia.. In 2005, the ‘Draper study’ was published in the British Medical Journal. This is the largest single study of childhood cancer and power lines. The authors reported an increased risk of leukaemia in children whose birth address fell within 600 metres of a high voltage overhead powerline. If there is any possibility of human health being affected, why then are Eirgrid insisting on putting huge pylons creating enormous EMF’s just 50 metres from some dwellings along the proposed route?  Indeed can Eirgrid explain why is it that those 50 metres is measured from the centre of the pylon and not as it should be measured from the actual cable nearest to the dwelling/building?

Locally the questions are : What benefit will this be to County Monaghan and the answer is none because there will be no substation built in the county or in close proximity to it which will be of benefit to the county. How do Eirgrid answer the charge that this project, despite 97% landowner opposition, is the only EirGrid project that remains unchanged since 2009 following its exclusion from the EirGrid national review? Why have there been no public or site notices about the proposed access routes for construction of the pylons?

Is it not true that report after report, including one published by the government appointed International expert commission have clearly proved that undergrounding of the power lines is both feasible and possible? Is it not also true that the Chief Executive of EirGrid told the Oireachtas Communications Committee that it is ‘technically feasible’ to put the lines underground?

I respectfully submit that all my questions must be answered to the satisfaction of, not only my electorate in County Monaghan, but to all concerned citizens of this state living along the proposed route of the interconnector. However it is my contention that the answer to all of them is clear….underground the cables!

CLLR PAUDGE CONNOLLY said archaeological sites such as the Black Pig’s Dyke were not being dealt with properly. The tombs and monuments along the route belonged to the people of Ireland, he said. There were also issues regarding wildlife such as otters and badgers.

CONLAN SAYS PYLONS WOULD LEAVE HUGE SCAR

The first person to address the inspectors on Monday was former Fine Gael TD Sean Conlan who lost his seat at the recent election and who acted as legal advisor to the Co. Monaghan anti-pylon committee. He said EirGrid’s refusal to include the underground option in the application was a grave error. There were concerns among property and land owners how the prices of their holdings would be affected by the proposed line. If it went ahead, farmers would not be able to farm the land for a period of up to three years. By planning a visually intrusive line with pylons situated on the top of drumlins leaving a huge scar on the landscape, the tourism potential of County Monaghan would be affected. It would be in EirGrid’s interests to withdraw the application now and to go back to the drawing board. EirGrid had put in nineteen new access routes after the event and this was a fundamental flaw in the application, which left the company’s action open to a legal review (a potential move which the NEPPC already has in train).

MEATH COUNCILLORS

CLLR DARREN O’ROURKE, leader of the Sinn Féin group on Meath County Council spoke about the serious and adverse visual impact the proposed 74 pylons and power line would have in scenic and historic areas such as Trim Castle, the Hill of Tara, Tailteann and Domhnagh Phádraig.

It would also affect the demesne landscapes of Ardbraccan, Brittas, Mountainstown, Gibstown, Teltown, Philpotstown, Rahood and Whitewood. He questioned whether the planning application was valid, and claimed the environmental impact statement was totally inadequate in terms of detailed information on flora and fauna, farming activities, soils and geology.

He said he found it incredible that Eirgrid announced, without any prior notice, 25 new access route changes to landowners’ properties. This included access entrances as far away as 135 metres from those submitted in the planning application. It also included now using private residence entrances as a means of access. Landowners had not been notified or consulted.

Cllr O’Rourke said the use of underground cable technology would solve all the issues created by the use of overhead lines and pylons. The cables can be placed alongside existing road infrastructure, without the need to pass through areas of historic importance such as Brittas or Teltown, and without the associated negative visual impact.

EirGrid has opted for what it sees as the easiest and most familiar technology of overhead transmission lines. It refuses to operate outside its comfort zone. The cost of this approach is for the County of Meath to bear the brunt of the negative impact of this technology, with zero benefit to its citizens.

 

 

 

 

 

INTERCONNECTOR LATEST

by

PLANNING INQUIRY ON EIRGRID NTERCONNECTOR TO HEAR VIEWS OF ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES

Michael Fisher

As the Bord Pleanála hearing into the proposed EirGrid North/South interconnector reaches the half way stage, public representatives will tomorrow (Monday) be asked to give their views on the development. A number of TDs from Meath and Monaghan along with local Councillors are expected to give evidence to the two inspectors in Carrickmacross. The oral hearing began on March 7th with an overview of the project and the views of the planners from the three counties involved. It’s expected to last a further five weeks, hearing mainly submissions from individual landowners.

EirGrid wants to erect a 400kV high voltage overhead line with 300 pylons extending from a substation at Woodland in Co. Meath near Dunshaughlin through part of Cavan and into Co. Monaghan, crossing the border near Clontibret. The Northern Ireland section of the line through Co. Armagh to Moy in Co. Tyrone is subject to a separate planning process. A preliminary public enquiry will be held in Armagh in June to assess the legality of the application by EirGrid subsidiary SONI.

The oral hearing got underway despite a legal move by anti-pylon campaigners to halt the proceedings. The presiding inspector said she was conducting an information gathering exercise and her report would be submitted at the end to the Planning Board for a decision.

In the third week of the hearing anti-pylon groups the NEPPC and Co. Monaghan Anti Pylon Committee withdrew from the proceedings, claiming they had become a farce. This was because EirGrid had added new information to the planning application submitted last June concerning 25 new or amended access routes out of a total of 584. These would be used by machinery carrying concrete and other material to the sites of the proposed pylons, mainly located in agricultural land. The hearing was told EirGrid had been granted access to only one quarter (25%) of the proposed sites in Meath, Cavan and Monaghan, owing to the strident opposition of local landowners.

Driving along some of the proposed route today the notices could still be found at various points such as Brittas, Donaghpatrick and Teltown in Meath (close to the historic Tailteann games site), as well as Shantonagh and Aughnamullen (Lough Egish) in Co. Monaghan, telling EirGrid staff or representatives to keep out of the fields. This meant the consultants for the semi-state company could not walk the ground and had to make use of other measures to draw up their reports on the proposed route, such as aerial photos, photomontages and views taken from the public road and ordnance survey maps, as well as Google earth material. There was some discussion about whether the photomontages taken at the Hill of Tara gave a true reflection of the impact of the line, which would be some 6km away from the historic site in the middle distance.

EirGrid told the hearing on day two that the temporary routes would not involve excavation or the laying of stones or wooden sleepers. Instead rubber mats or aluminium tracks would be laid on land required to gain access to 299 pylon sites.

Padraig O’Reilly of the North East Pylon Pressure Campaign said the hearing had developed into a charade second time round. A similar oral hearing on the interconnector six years ago ended when a discrepancy was shown in drawings including the height of the proposed towers in Co. Monaghan and EirGrid withdrew the application.

Meanwhile a legal action by the NEPPC, representing almost 200 landowners mainly in County Meath, went ahead at the High Court in Dublin. It is challenging the validity of the application. Mr Justice Humphreys is due to give a decision before May 12th on whether he will allow a judicial review.

Over 900 submissions comprising over 2000 people and some community groups were made to An Bord Pleanála. Most of them objected to the overhead power lines and pylons and called for them to be placed underground. The EirGrid project manager said last week the underground cable Direct Current (DC) option was the least preferred, primarily on the basis of cost effectiveness, its poor ability to facilitate future grid connections and because it would not be considered as complying with best international practice.