MS2004

everything else links off the Homepage

PART 4

Ms Joyce had previously given evidence as the Project Engineer for the Clonee to

Dunshaughlin to Navan Section to the south-east of Navan and proceeded in a northwesterly

roads, one Regional road (R161 Trim road) one National Secondary road (N51 Athboy

road) and joined the Navan to Kells Section to the north-west of Navan. She said the

Ms Joyce said the Scheme details were shown in Volume 5B and she then gave a detailed

description of the route of the proposed M3 , which is generally set out in Section 12 on

pages 24 and 25 of this Report and is not being repeated in full in this Section. She said

Cannistown road was realigned, as part of the Dunshaughlin to Navan Section, to cross

Ms Joyce said that the mainline levels had been kept as low as it was feasible to reduce

the environmental impacts and that, in general, it was the levels of the water table and

existing streams and the drainage design which dictated the extent those levels could be

lowered, with the requirements for underpasses and the geometric design criteria

resulting in some local raising of the alignment levels but that the design and location of

the underpasses were generally chosen to minimise the impact of raising the alignment,

where this was feasible. She said the Kilcarn Interchange was located south of Navan

between the Cannistown road and the R161Trim road and this would be a trumpet type

interchange with one bridge and with both north bound and south bound ramps which

would allow for entry and exit to and from the M3 in both directions. She said the Kilcarn

Road would tie-in to the east side of the Interchange and this road linked to the existing

N3 at a new Roundabout on the southern side of Navan near the existing Kilcarn Bridge.

She said the motorway was generally close to existing ground level from the Cannistown

embankment varying from 1.7 metres to 3 metres above ground level through Macetown

Hanlonstown townland where it ran through a 3 metre cutting for some 400 metres. She

said that beyond this cutting the motorway was again on an embankment which rose to

4.9 metres above ground level in as it approached the existing N51 Athboy road in

Boyerstown townland which crossed over the M3 at this point. Ms Joyce said the Athboy

Interchange was located in Boyerstown townland to the west of Navan and to the north of

the existing N51 Athboy road and on embankment some 2 metres above ground level at

this point. She said a new realigned section of the N51 will link from the northern side of

back to the existing N51 at Clarke's Cross Roads. Ms Joyce said the Athboy Interchange

would be a dumbbell type interchange with two roundabouts, one at either side of the

mainline, and a single bridge between these roundabouts. She said this would provide for

traffic movements in all directions and that the dual carriageway link to Navan at the

New Roundabout at Townparks would tie in to the eastern roundabout, with the new

single carriageway link to the Clarke's Cross Roads new Roundabout tying into the

Ms Joyce said that beyond the Interchange the motorway continued north-westwards on

an embankment, of up to 3 metres above ground level in places, before entering a cutting

of up to 3 metres as it approached the Boyerstown road crossing, and continued at ground

level northwards beyond the Boyerstown road crossing until it entered a cutting as it

crossed the Halltown road and continued in cutting of up to 4 metres as it passed under

the Bohermeen road to the west of Ardbraccan Glebe. She said the motorway went onto

embankment of 2 to 3 metres above ground level as it tied in the the Navan to Kells

Ms Joyce said there would be two new significant Roundabout junctions provided, the

new Kilcarn Roundabout on the N3 south of Navan which would be an urban junction

with dedicated left slip lanes to facilitate dominant traffic flows and the Athboy

Roundabout at in Townparks, about 1km. west of Navan Town Centre. She said this was

located at the intersection of the proposed Athboy N51 Realigned road (west), the

existing N51, the proposed Council Inner Relief Road Phase 2B, theTara Mines road,( L-

7418-16) and the link road to Gainstown road and this was also an urban roundabout

which tied the Link road into the existing and proposed local road network. Ms Joyce

also described the two new Link roads from the M3, the Kilcarn road and the Athboy

N51 Realignment. She said the Kilcarn road ran parallel to the Cannistown road from the

Interchange and crossed under the Ballybatter road ( L 8010-0) in a deep cutting and also

under Swan Lane (L 34141-0), which was to become a cul-de-sac with pedestrian traffic

maintained by a footbridge at that point, and tied in to the existing N3 at the New Kilcarn

Roundabout. She said the existing N51 was being realigned from Clarke's Crossroads all

the way into Navan and tied in to the local network at the New Townparks Roundabout.

She said the new Realigned Athboy road would run parallel to the existing N51and

generally ran through farmland with no side road crossings and it was on a 7 metre high

embankment where it crossed over the motorway at the Athboy Interchange. She said the

realigned N51 would be a single carriageway from Clarke's Crossroads to the Interchange

and continued as a dual carriageway from the Interchange to the Townparks Roundabout.

Regional and County Roads that would be affected by the scheme and said that, in all

cases, the new carriageways would be at least as wide as the existing roads. A number of

these works would arise from the location of over or underbridges where the road was

crossed by the M3 such as the Trim Road (R 161), Robinstown Road ( (L 4007-0), N51

Durhamstown Road (L 4005-11). She said Swan Lane would be closed on either side of

the Kilcarn Link road with no direct access to Swan Lane from that Link road and some

ancillary works provided between Swan Lane and the proposed footbridge crossing the

(L 80091-16) would both be made cul-de-sacs on either side of the M3 with a local

diversion on the Gainstown road but that none were required on the Halltown road since

there were no houses on that section. She said there would be some realignment required

on the N3 at the new Kilcarn roundabout and also at the Ballybatter Overbridge( L 8010-

Ms Joyce said that, as well as the two Interchange Overbridges, there would be 7

Overbridges to be constructed on this Section and she listed these as the Trim Road

R161, Robinstown, N51 Athboy, Boyerstown, Bohermeen, Durhamstown and Ballybatter

Accommodation Underpasses, one under the M3 for animals only at chn. 45860, one on

the Kilcarn Link for vehicles and animals at chn.1250 and Two on the Athboy road for

Ms Joyce said the details of the Motorway cross-section had previously been given by

Mr. Guthrie ( See Scetion 17.1. at page 69 of this Report) and she gave the following

details for the other roads in this Section. In the case of the Kilcarn and Athboy Road

dual carriageways the predicted traffic flows for the 2024 "do something tolled" scenario

was 22800 and 33500 AADT respectively and this required a standard dual carriageway

width, the same as that for the proposed M3, to provide for a level of service of "C". In

order to maintain consistency for drivers the section of the realigned single carriageway

N51 between Clarke's Crossroads and the Interchange would use the width of the existing

road and a carriageway width of 7.5 metrres with 2 no. hard shoulders of 3 metres and 2

no. verges of 2 metres was proposed, giving a total width of 15 metres excluding side

slopes. The cross-section of the R161 Trim Road was proposed to be the same as a

separate scheme for improving the Trim Road already prepared by the Council, and this

would use an 8 metre carriageway, 2 no. 0.5 metre hard strips and 2 no. 3 metre verges,

giving an overall width of 15 metres excluding side slopes. The cross-section for County

Roads would use that in Annex A of the NRA Road Geometric Handbook, for nonnational

carriageway and 2 no. 2 metre verges, giving a total width of 10 metres excluding side

slopes and this would apply to all of the county roads to be realigned as part of the

Ms Joyce said the Slip Roads, or ramps, at the Interchanges had their cross-sections

defined in the NRA document DMRB TD 27/00 and she gave the details as follows. For

all of the Athboy and for the northbound merge and southbound diverge lanes at Kilcarn

there would be a 4 metre carriageway with a 0.5 metre offside hard strip and a 1 metre

near strip with 2 no. 3 metre verges outside the strips. For the Kilcarn two lane

northbound diverge there would be 2 no. 3 metre carriageways with the same widths of

southbound merge there would be 2 no. 3.65 metre carriageways with the same widths of

excavated, of which up to 89000 cu. metres could be unsuitable, and this would have to

be disposed of off-site or used in landscaping on the site. They estimated there would be

a deficit of fill material requiring the importation of some 785000 cu. metres into the site.

She said the location of the borrow pits for this fill material and any disposal sites for the

unsuitable material would be the responsibility of the Contractor and both disposal sites

She said that the Navan By-pass Section crossed land that was mainly flat or gently

undulating and lay for the most part within the Boyne Catchment, and the River Boyne

was joined at Navan by the River Kells-Blackwater which rose north of Bailieboro.

She said the route crossed numerous drainage ditches and some small tributaries of both

Rivers. She said their preliminary drainage design indicated the following general

Appropriate outfall points had been identified for various sections of the roads

Attenuation measures to be implemented at each outfall point had been identified.

Ms Joyce then outlined the program of Public Consultation which they had used in their

study to identify and address the views of the public, which she said, included meetings

with interested parties and the public, the display of possible route options at different

centres and the distribution of a brochure and questionaire. She said written submissions

had been received from Residents Associations and Interest Groups as well as from

individuals and businesses, all of which were considered in the Route Selection process.

She said the first Public Consultation Meeting was held in Ardboyne Hotel, Navan on 24,

25 & 28 February 2000, with drawings showing 8 possible route corridors and known

constraints on display and that a presentation was made to the Meath County Council

Meeting was held in Ardboyne Hotel, Navan on 22 & 23 May 2000 and in the Headfort

Arms Hotel, Kells on 24 & 25 May 2000 and that this second Public Consultation was a

meetings the emerging preferred routes were presented, the likely impacts identified, the

public views and reactions were obtained and queries were responded to in the context of

the scheme development at that time. She said the meetings had been advertised in local

papers, on local radio and at Parish Churches, with leaflets also distributed and that about

2200 people attended the two consultation meetings. She said that after the second Public

Consultation the drawings were put on display in the County Library for a further 4

weeks and during this period Council's Design Team took written submissions and met

corridor/route options had been identified for the Navan By-pass Section, taking into

account the constraints identified in the Constraints Study, and said that four of these

routes were each on the east and west of Navan. She gave a brief description of each of

these routes as given in the Brochure used in the February 2000 Consultation ( Note -- a

copy of this was handed in to the Hearing on Day 18 and is listed in Appendix 4 of this

Report.) Ms Joyce described how each of the 8 routes was examined under engineering,

environmental, social and economic factors to identify a preferred route and she

concluded that Route A, the Purple route, was the preferred option for the reasons which

Note -- The comparison of possible options, the analysis to identify a preferred route and

the reasons for selecting the Purple Route are also given in Sections 4.2.3, 4.3.4 and 4.4.4

at pages 37-39, 44 and 50 in Vol.2 of the EIS and are not repeated in this Report.

residents in the Ardbraccan area which was where the Navan By-pass and the Navan to

Kells Sections interfaced and that at a meeting on 12 July 2000 the Council requested the

Consultants to undertake a a further study of this interface area to establish the optimum

line for the EPR there. Ms Joyce said that initially 4 route corridors were considered as

alternative options to the EPR in the Ardbraccan area and 3 other lines presented by the

public were then developed into a further 7 routes and also compared to the EPR. Ms

Joyce said that a total of 12 posssible routes were considered for the Ardbraccan interface

MD1 Route -- this was a route submitted by a landowner, Margaret Donaghy, in a verbal

Ms Joyce said that having assessed these options Route A was still the preferred route

and served the National road traffic demand with the least overall environmental impact

*This route impacted significantly less on residential buildings with only 5 buildings

*This route did not directly impact on any known NHAs or known archaeological sites

with most other routes impacting on known possible archaeological sites even if these

*This route had no impact on identified habitats for flora or fauna while some others had.

This route did not directly affect any known Historical or Architectural sites while some

*This route required a maximum of 4 bridges, or one less than most other routes.

*The construction costs, impact on 20 farms and design standards for Route A were

Ms Joyce then described the Route options considered for the N51 Athboy Road Link

where 5 options were examined all traversing the farmland to the north of the existing

N51 to meet the constraints dictated largely by the need to tie into the existing and

proposed local road network and to the Interchange on the M3; the proximity of Housing

Development and Farm severeance; condition of existing road network and that no direct

access was to be permitted to the Link road. She said each route was examined under

engineering, environmental, social and economic factors to identify a preferred route and

she concluded that Route 3 was the preferred option, for the reasons which she outlined.

The principal reason for selecting this route for the Link road were that it had the least

favourable in terms of farm severance than the other routes. Ms Joyce concluded that, on

balance, Route 3 was the preferred route for the Athboy Link road to Navan from the Bypass.

Ms Joyce said that 5 options were examined for the Kilcarn Link all of which generally

were parallel to the Cannistown road with 3 options crossing the Ballybatter road and 3

crossing the Cannistown road (i.e. one crossing both). She said 3 options crossed Swan

Lane, one crossed the Boyne requiring a significant bridge and another option used a

considered. She said the built- up nature and steep topography south of Navan made all

options difficult and the constraints were the urban nature and proximity to South Navan

and River Boyne; topography; condition of existing road network and no direct access to

Ms Joyce said each route was examined under engineering, environmental, social and

economic factors to identify a preferred route and she concluded that Route 4 was the

preferred option for the reasons which she outlined. The principal reason was that it had

the least farm severance impacts and it was one of three that had the second least number

of houses close to it, the route with the least houses directly impacted on Boyne Hill

House a house of Historical significance and in other respects it was similar to the other

options. Ms Joyce concluded that on balance Route 4 was the preferred route for the Link

Ms Joyce said that in responding to environmental need and the public's concerns the

alignments of some of the roads in the Section were re-examined and, that in some cases

the design was refined or revised with the more important measures which mitigated

significant adverse effects as identified by the EIS process were incorporated into the

Scheme. Ms Joyce then listed 17 revisions or amendments they had made to the Scheme

as a consequence of this review. These are all listed in Section 1.2 of Vol.5A of the EIS

consideration at all stages of the project, with a Constraints Report which identified

environmental sites on the route corridor being produced prior to the Route Selection

process. She said that the EIS on the likely impacts on the environment had been

prepared in accordance with section 50 of the Roads act 1993 as amended by the EC

1999 and that this EIS contained a description of the proposal, alternatives examined, the

receiving environment, as well as assessing the principle beneficial and adverse

environmental effects that would arise from the construction and operation of the

Scheme. She said it gave details of the measures proposed to mitigate likely significant

adverse impacts as well as the beneficial environmental consequences and she then

outlined the principal findings on the various impacts. These are dealt with in more detail

in the Evidence presented by the other witnesses for the Council and reported on in the

Ms Joyce said that if the tolling proposal did not proceed the main difference would be an

alteration in the traffic flows and that a greater number of vehicles would be attracted

onto the M3, which would require some minor alteration to traffic lane layouts at some

junctions. She said that, while air quality and noise impacts were dependant on traffic

flows, the flow changes in the Clonee to Dunshauhghlin Section were not sufficient to

significantly alter the impacts identified for the Tolled Scheme. She said, however, that a

noise barrier some 1.5 metres high would be required on the Athboy road near the

Ms Joyce said that there were 28 Public Rights of Way and 4 Private rights of Way to be

Extinguished and the details were attached to her Brief of Evidence. ( These are included

in the Lists set out in Appendices 6 and 7 attached to this Report ) Ms Joyce confirmed

that it was necessary to extinguish all those listed for the purposes of the Motorway

Scheme. She said that the landtake required for the Navan By-pass Section was some

132.4 Hectares of which some 58.3 Hectares were required for the actual Motorway with

the balance for non-motorway works and she confirmed that the acquisition of all of this

land was necessary for the M3 scheme. Details of the reasons for acquiring each plot

identified in the Schedules were given in Appendix D in Ms Joyce's Brief of Evidence.

Ms Joyce said she had prepared a folder that contained their response both to the original

objections that had been made and to supplementary objections submitted during the

Hearing and she said a copy of those responses had been posted out to all of the

individuals concerned at least two weeks previously. She then handed in a copy of the

folder of these responses to the Inspector . Mr Keane asked her to also hand in the folder

of resonses made to the supplementary objections received during the Hearing for the

Clonee to Dunshaughlin Section (Note -- These Folders are listed at Day 16 in Appendix

The Inspector asked if a Map showing the alternative routes suggested by the public in

the Ardbraccan area as referred to in her evidence be handed in and Ms Joycc said she

would provide this. ( Note -- This was included with the Constraints and Route Selection

Study documents for the Navan By-pass handed in by Ms Joyce on Day 20 as listed in

The Inspector also asked Mr. Keane to arrange for the submission of a summation of the

total areas of land being acquired in the CPO and this was handed in on Day 28 as listed

in Appendix 4 of this report. Mr. Keane then handed in a copy of the accident data on the

N3 as previously requested by the Inspector from Mr. Guthrie (See Section 19.9) and

detail's of the water levels in Seamus Farrelly's well on the Hill of Skryne as referred to in

86. 2. Susan Joyce cross-examined by Sean Carty, Cannistown, Navan -- Plot 1136 :

Interchange (Kilcarn) which was elevated 8 metres above the ground and with cars

traveling uphill to the overbridge there would be a lot of gear changing and a lot of noise

and there was no noise mitigation there that he could see. Ms Joyce said there were two

places in the EIS that dealt with his area, the first being Table 4.6 in Vol.5A at page 78

and then in Figure 4.1.1 and that the impact was severe in the EIS with the existing noise

being 46 dB and this was predicted to increase to 62dB in 2004 and to 66dB in 2024. She

accepted the jump was significant but said it was below the cut-off of 68dB which was

why there was no mitigation because that was only put in when the noise exceeded 68dB.

Mr. Carty said he worked in Tara Mines and that for most of the time there he wore

eareplugs and earmuffs and his garden was the place he relaxed in when he came home

Ms Joyce acknowledged his situation and agreed she would not like to have to wear

earmuffs at home and said the noise would be similar to that in a busy office if he took

this from Plate 4.1 in Vol.5A. She said she knew this was not much consolation for him

but said that when the prediction did not reach 68dB the practice was to provide no

mitigation and that while the increase was large, it was still below 68dB. Mr. Carty asked

if the cost of putting in banks to reduce the noise would be expensive and Ms Joyce said

she did not have a figure on that but if it had to be done it would be expensive as the

material would have to be brought into the site since they were short of material already.

Mr. Carty said the figures predicted were hypothetical and there was no-one coming to

check them and Ms Joyce said she had double-checked the figures and the 46dB was

what would be expected in a quiet rural area like his and that while the increase from 46

The Inspector commented that the issue of noise was likely to be raised again by Mr.

Macken as he would returning the following day and he had raised the Outer Ring Road

decision by An Bord on a noise restriction and when Mr. Butler said they now had a copy

of that decision and would be dealing with it, the Inspector said that he would be asking

for evidence of a written confirmation from the NRA indicating the statutory provisions

under which they were relying on the use of 68dB and that he was signalling this now.

Cannistown Residents Association were represented by Manus Tiernan, their Chairman,

and Jim McIntyre, a Committee member, and Mr. Tiernan said they represented an area

of between 150 and 200 households that was in the area between the Dunshaughlin to

documents to see how they would be affected. He said they had been in consultation with

the Council through the design stages and had a number of meetings with them. He said

Williamstown, or Bawn as it was known, and they had the Bective GAA football club

and the local school in their area. He said they still had a number of questions regarding

the impact of the motorway on their Community as some of their members felt some

questions had not been satisfactorily answered and said these generally related to the

construction stage, to the Noise issue and the Directive issued by the EU on 25 June

2002, the effects on Amenities in the area, Drainage impacts from the Williamstown

Interchange and Road Lighting effects, concerns about the cul-de-sacs at Ardsallagh and

Cannistown Roads and the need for footpaths. He said the Residents Asociation felt some

of the details in the EIS on habitats was inadequate from the Foot and Mouth restrictions

preventing surveys and wanted to know if these had been rectified since the restrictions

precedence in putting corrective measures in place to safeguard the health and well-being

of the Community since the motorway and link roads would be there for generations to

(Note -- As some of the queries relate to issues that were in both Sections, Alan Guthrie

Mr. Tiernan asked if there would be a temporary closure of roads in the Cannistown area

during the construction of the motorway. Mr.Guthrie explained that the Cannistown Road

was being realigned off-line so that there would not be a formal road closure but there

would be some disruption while both ends were being tied-in the the new section,. Asked

if this applied to the Ardsallagh and Botharalainnn roads as well. Mr. Guthrie said the

same situation applied to the Ardsallagh Road and Ms Joyce, having established that the

Botharalainn road was also the Balreask road, said that road would have to be closed

during the construction of the Kilcarn Link Overbridge on that road since it was an online

construction due to the houses adjacent to it. Asked for the timescale of the closure,

Ms Joyce said that it would be about nine months and that the existing local network

would have to be used as diversionary routes, with both the Trim and Cannistown Roads

being available. Mr. Tiernan asked what level of machinery would be used with the

construction of the Interchange, a cutting and two overbridges in the area and Ms Joyce

said she expected they were worried about construction traffic on the local roads and said

there would not be any since the Contractor would be limited to using National and

Regional roads which would be the N3 and the Trim road so that it was likely he would

start with the Kilcarn Link earthworks to create an access into the Section and she gave

Mr. Tiernan asked where would the Contractors get their water from and if the Residents

could be assured their water and power mains would not be affected. Ms Joyce replied

that the Contractor would be obliged to keep services going at all times and he would be

expected to give notice of the periods where re-connections were being done when short

stages of disruptions to supplies might arise. Regarding the supply of bulk water for dust

suppression or other purposes, when Mr. McIntyre expressed concern that this might be

taken from the mains system, which suffered from low pressure in the Summer, the

Inspector intervened and said he would see it as being unusual for a contractor to use a

mains supply to fill tankers and said the more usual source for this was from the nearest

river or stream. When Mr. McIntyre asked for an assurance of this water not coming from

the public supply, Ms Joyce replied that it was highly unlikely to be taken from that

supply and the Inspector repeated that a contractor was not going to take it from a public

main when he would have to pay for it and that he would go to the nearest stream to fill

Mr. Tiernan asked if access would be maintained into their area for local businesses, the

school and emergency services and when Ms Joyce said the Contractor would have to

maintain access but that there would be some diversions with the Ballybatter Road

Botharalainn Road and asked how would they have to travel when theat road would be

closed for nine months. Ms Joyce said they had considered the inconvenience which

would arise but there were major constraints in trying to do an off-line solution with the

deep cutting for the Link road, the railway bridge they had to preserve and with the

houses on both sides of the road. She said the Link was very significant for Navan in

overall terms with the traffic demand requiring two lanes in each direction and the

significant flow of traffic from Navan to Dublin requiring the link to be as close to Navan

as was possible and that all of this made the closure for nine months the best option in a

difficult decision. Asked if she was aware that traffic coming from Trim and going to

Dublin used the Botharalainn road, Ms Joyce acknowledged it was used as a "rat-run" at

present and said their traffic counts showed most of the traffic on the Trim Road was

McIntyre asked where the counts were taken and when Ms Joyce said it was an outbound

survey and south of Balreask crossroads, he said that did not address their concerns since

roundabouts on the by-pass. Ms Joyce suggested he was saying there were two choices

for that traffic of either going on the Cannistown road or staying on theTrim road and

crossing from Balreask to the Ballybatter road and she said that if the Ballybatter road

were closed, more were likely to use the Cannistown road. Mr. Tiernan pointed out that

the school was located at the junction of the Cannistown and Ardsallagh roads and that

the morning time had school traffic clashing with work related traffic and asked if they

Ms Joyce replied that they had not assessed that risk but they knew there would be

diversions onto both theTrim and Cannistown roads once Ballybatter was closed and said

that there was no other feasible solution to the short term closure. She felt that once the

Interchange was in place that Dublin bound traffic would find its way onto that and move

off the Cannistown road and she repeated the constraints they had faced with a 10 metre

cutting to be crossed and the railway bridge and corridor to be preserved and said that if

they could have left the road open they would have done so, as they had been able to do

in almost every other crossing. Mr. McIntyre said they accepted it was not feasible to

leave the road open but their concerns were of what was being put in place as an

alternative to accommodate morning time traffic. He pointed out how a three minute

drive to school in the morning could now become a 45 minute drive and he described

how this could happen and said his question was directed more at the County Council

rather than to the Consultants as it related to the planning of traffic management of Navan

for a nine moth period at least. Ms Joyce said she could see where he was coming from

but that the traffic figures for Ballybatter were not that large and, while it would create

local inconvenience, she felt that with signs it should be possible to adequately divert the

Mr. Tiernan said their concerns were for the safety of their children at the school and that

if traffic was increased there should be a traffic management plan in place and said that as

there were no evidence of this in the EIS they were looking for assurances this plan

would be in place if traffic was going to be diverted into their area. Ms Joyce said her

colleague had pointed out that the Contractor might use the Trim road as a diversion

during construction and they could look at that and also because the Trim link road had to

be built in advance there was a possibility of phasing this as a diversion for the

Ballybatter traffic and said she would look at this in more detail. The Inspector

intervened and said since this traffic was for a rush hour period only and probably all

one-way there was also a possibility of a temporary diversion road being put into the

fields on the town side of the Ballybatter road and to take the traffic around the bridge

site while it was being built. He said he accepted this would need filling to be put in there

and that traffic lights might be needed and it would not be to geometric standards but it

highlighted difficulties with retaining walls and the objection by Balreask House who

possible solutions, the Inspector said that it seemed traffic management arrangements

needed to be looked at by the Local Authority and the Contractor and Ms Joyce said she

would consider the points raised and come back at a later stage ( Note -- Ms Joyce

handed in her comments on the Ballybatter traffic management /diversion arrangements

Mr. Tiernan asked if there were proposals for a compound for construction vehicles in the

Cannistown road area and how much fill was needed and where would it come from. Mr.

Guthrie said there were no identified areas for construction plant compounds within the

scope of the EIS and it was up to the Contractor to make his own arrangements within the

limits of the CPO and said that if he wished to go elsewhere he would have to make a

perivate arrangement with land owners. Asked if blasting or piling had been identified,

Mr. Guthrie said they had not identified any rock south of the Cannistown road so

blasting was not anticipated but there would be piling for the foundations of the

Cannistown and Ardsallagh Bridges. Mr. Tiernan asked about vibration studies on the

effects of piling and Ms Joyce quoted from section 4.12 of Vol.3A on page 99 about

vibration impacts and said the same comments applied for each section and said that there

were "peak particle velocity" guidelines in Table 4.10 which would be the limiting

factors for vibration effects and Mr. Guthrie stated these would be monitored by the

Council supervisory team. Ms Joyce then gave details of the quantities of filling, which

were given in her Brief of Evidence, and said that the location of borrow pits and disposal

sites would be the responsibility of the Contractor and subject to the relevant legislative

requirements. Mr. McIntyre said he presumed this issue had been discussed previously

and the Inspector said that it had and that both sides of the argument had been put

forward and that An Bord would make its ruling on whether the EIS was adequate or not

Mr. McIntyre then asked if the Consultants were familiar with EU Directive 2002/49/EC

issued on 24 June 2002 and when Ms Joyce asked if that was a noise directive and Mr.

McIntyre said it was, she said she would like if their noise expert would deal, with that

question and Mr. Keane said that Mr. Dilworth could be made available later on that day

if necessary but would be at the Hearing on the following day anyway. Following some

discussion on his availability, the Inspector said he could raise their concerns and then it

Mr. McIntyre said that he would be making a personal submission at a later stage and

said the Association's concerns were that the noise levels of 68 decibels being used in the

design of the motorway were the highest in Europe at present and only the UK and

Greece had levels similar to Ireland. He quoted figures from Austria of 60 in daytime and

50 at night; from Denmark and Finland of 55 day and 45/50 at night; Germany of 59 day

and 49 night; the Netherlands 55 day and 45 night; Portugal 65 day and 55 night; Sweden

55 and the UK 68. He said he understood the Directive suggested certain measures had to

be put in place over the next number of years that would reduce the Ireland/UK/Greece

levels to a more reasonable EU average and he suggested that the Countries which were

now 45, 50, 55 would not be increasing their levels. When Mr.McIntyre asked if that was

their understanding Ms Joyce said she thought Chris Dilworth would be best placed to

answer that query and the Inspector said he recalled Mr. Dilworth saying there was a

Directive coming which signaled the start of harmonisation and he should be able to

elaborate. Mr. McIntyre said that from his background noise was a sensitive issue and

that the June Directive would cost aviation authorities and airline operators a lot of

Directive. He said we were members of the EU for 30 years now and were going to spend

a lot of money on this motorway and suggested that, rather than waiting to be told in a

few years time to improve the mitigation measures now being put in, we should be

anticipating what would be required to get us compliant with the EU average. He said he

was not saying that we should go down to levels of 45 or 50 but we should pick the

average and build the motorways and slip roads to be compliant with the EU average and

Mr. Tiernan asked what mitigation measures were being proposed at the Interchange and

slip roads as there were a lot of houses nearby. Ms Joyce explained that while the EIS

acknowledged the noise impact from the Interchange was severe, since the predicted

level was below 68dB no mitigation measures were being installed there and she referred

to Table 4.6 and Figure 4.1.1 and station points 29 and 2. A discussion followed with Mr.

McIntyre on the possibility of mitigation if different standards were to be applied and Ms

Joyce accepted it would be possible to put in noise screens but said she could not say to

what level a reduction could be achieved as that would be Chris Dilworth's area. She did

point out that there was extensive landscape screening at SLM 1 on Figure 5.1.4 and in

Table 5.5 in Vol.5A at Kilcarn Interchange. Mr. Guthrie said there were a series of noise

barrriers varying in height for 1.5 to 3.5 metres running from east to west as the old

Cannistown Road was crossed to give protection to the properties there, which he

indicated on the screen at the Hearing, and Mr. Tiernan asked about the length involved

and Mr.Guthrie said that the bunding was about 250 metre long from Cannistown road

towards the interchange and Ms Joyce said there was no bunding beyond that since the

noise levels were not predicted to exceed 68dB. Asked if there was screen planting Ms

Mr. Tiernan referred to the amenities in their area like the Bective GAA club, Tara Golf

interfered with during construction. Mr. Guthrie said that one of the reasons for the offline

construction of the realigned Cannistown road was to maintain local access during

the construction phase and that other for some disruption during the tie-ins there would

be access at all times to the football pitch and he said there would be a new footpath

along the full length of the realigned road. Mr. Tiernan asked if the footpath would be

extended to the school but Mr. Guthrie said that was outside the limit of their works and

was something they should raise with the Council. Mr. Tiernan suggested that this should

be done, as there would be more traffic and with the closure of the Botharalainn road but

Mr.Tiernan referred to the drainage from the Interchange area and asked how this would

be dealt with as it was on a well-known wetland. Ms Joyce said that all of the motorway

drainage would drain to a pond that was located in the centre of the Interchange at the

attempted to balance between the visual impact by keeping the road as low as poossible

and yet keep it high enough to be able to drain it and the concerns to have it moved away

from the football pitch and Cannistown so the pond acted as a sump for the Interchange

loop road and ramps and the motorway to the north with the road to the south going into

the Dunshaughlin to Navan drainage system. Asked where the water in the attenuation

pond went to, Ms Joyce said it stayed in the pond and said that David Wilson, their

construction work and Ms Joyce said that where there was direct impact the tanks and

precolation areas would be re-located but otherwise there should be no effect on the

operation of these septic tanks. Mr. McIntyre asked if the construction of the Kilcarn

Link and the motorway would affect the level of the water table and Ms Joyce said it

should not but that she would have to check the borehole results before giving an

absolute clearance and said that from memory there was only one location on this Section

where there could be an impact on the water table and that was at the northern end. She

said they had identified what might be regarded as high risk areas for wells and they

would be monitored on an on-going basis and said that if there were impacts, the wells

Mr. McIntyre asked if there would be an independent arbitrator to resolve any problems

the residents had with the construction works. Ms Joyce explained how there would be a

liaison person who would be available to the public as their point of contact for

complaints and problems and that the Resident Engineering staff would also be checking

the contractor against the contract conditions and said there would not be an arbitrator as

such. Mr. Tiernan asked about the proposals to stop illegal parking and dumping on cul642

de-sacs and Mr.Guthrie said that any redundant road surfaces would be ripped up and

topsoiled and returned to the local land owner unless they were neeeded for access as had

earlier been stated. Mr. Tiernan asked what type of fencing would there be on the

overbridges and Mr. Guthrie said there would be parapets which would be 1.5 metres

investigation of habitats and said that there was very little mention of the likes of

Cannistown. Mr. Guthrie said there had been surveys by their flora and fauna expert and

he had identified bats and badger locations and felt the other species would have been

generally dealt with and said that as they were not protected species they would not

necessarily be mentioned in detail in the EIS. When Mr. Tiernan suggested the survey

was incomplete due to foot and mouth restrictions, Mr. Guthrie said that surveys werc

done on the disused farm buildings at the old railway bridge at Cannistown and near

Bellinter Bridge for badgers, so that surveys were carried out. Ms Joyce said that there

were references to surveys in Vol. 5A and she quoted from this at page 188 about badger

activity along the Cannistown road, at chn. 40000 and chn. 950 about the need for further

investigations and several other references to hedgerows, trees identified as bat roosts and

so on. Mr. McIntyre said his concern was that a detailed inventory of the flora and fauna

in the area should be undertaken as part of the EIS and he understood the EIS said the

reference he was relying on which was in paragraph 6.2 of Vol.5A, but that also said that

further surveys had been undertaken in September 2001 which, she said, showed that

Mr. Tiernan asked what had they raised with the ERFB in the consultation they had as

there was nothing in the EIS to state what the ERFB had been asked about. Mr. Guthroe

replied that they presented their proposals for the Bellinter Bridge crossing and the

culverting of the Skane and Lismullin Rivers to the ERFB and discussed these in detail

with them to establish what their requirements were and the ERFB had set out their

structural requirements in the response Mr. Tiernan referred to. Mr. Guthrie gave as an

example the request by the ERFB to keep piers out of the River Boyne Channel and for

identified and said this was in the EIS, which was the outcome of the consultation. Mr.

Tiernan asked if the two streams in Cannistown had been examined and said one of these

flowed past the attenuation pond. Ms Joyce, having been given details by her colleague

said that there had been two sampling sites, 4 & 5, on those streams and they were shown

The Inspector said that from a reading of the EIS birds such as pheasants, wood pigeons,

blackbirds and others were mentioned in it as well as various mammals such as fox, hare,

hedgehog and others and he said the EIS appeared to have referred extensively to birds

and wild animals and gave mitigation measures for them. Mr. Tiernan asked about red

deer and the Inspector said deer were specifically mentioned in the EIS and Mr. Keane

said the reference was on page 102 in Vol.4A and at page 102 in Vo.5A as well. Mr.

Tiernan said their concerns were listed in their submission and he handed in a copy of

Mr. McIntyre asked why the proposed new road behind his house was raised significantly

above ground level and asked if this was because of a cattle underpass. Ms Joyce replied

that his property actually straddled the interface between the fill area and the cut area and

said the underpass was at chn. 1520 and said they were trying to keep the road as low as

possible while facilitating both the underpass and getting under the Ballybatter Road

without affecting the level on the existing Ballybatter Road where there were several

houses. Mr.McIntyre suggested that in doing this the gradient down to the N3 was being

increased and Ms Joyce said it was 3.5% and they could go steeper than that to about 4%.

Mr. McIntyre asked if they could lower the new road to bring it down to the existing

terrain but Ms Joyce said the extent of the embankment at present went to the corner of

the properties on the Ballybatter Road around the crossing point and said that was the

only opening they could get to cross under it. She said they had discussed this Road

crossing with the Cannistown Residents Association who wanted the road kept open. The

closeness of the houses meant keeping the existing levels on the Ballybatter Road

unaltered so that dictated the level of the new road at that point and the under-pass had to

Mr. McIntyre said that if the cut at the crossing was dropped by a further 2 to 3 metres

the new road could be dropped to ground level behind his house and those houses she had

been referring to would not be affected by this. Ms Joyce pointed out that such a further

reduction would mean a deeper cutting further on and would affect the side slopes on the

embankments which were designed at a one in two slope. She said they were presently

infringing on the corner of Balreask House grounds and on the entrance to another house

and any further reduction would increase that infringement and the impact. Mr. McIntyre

suggested that it was not necessary to keep to a one in two slope all the way down but Ms

Joyce said that would increase costs since a retaining wall would be required and said

there were also design problems with the vertical curve. Mr.McIntyre said that if the cut

was deepened there would be no problem with a vertical curve because the road could be

graded all the way down to the N3 from the Interchange and when Ms Joyce outlined a

further design problem, Mr.McIntyre suggested the underpass could be replaced by an

overpass. Ms Joyce said that underpass accommodated three landowners, M/s Keoghs,

Paul Foley and Frank Foley and moving the underpass increased the impact on them. Mr.

McIntyre suggested the underpass could be moved further south and said that might have

When Ms Joyce said his proposal was basically to raise the road elsewhere and lower it at

his house, Mr. McIntyre said what was being proposed did not make sense to him as a

continuous gradient would be better from a drainage aspect and could have the underpass

closer to the Foleys or an overpass could be located where there was suitable ground for

it that he pointed to. At that stage the Inspector intervened and said that he thought there

investigated and that it could not be designed by discussing the possibilities at the

Hearing. He said the CPO line and the houses were a constraint and there were obviously

cost implications from deepening the cutting if a retaining wall was needed. The

Inspector said that rather than debating it further the Council should look at the

possibilities of what was suggested by Mr. McIntyre and that they could come back the

following week with a suggestion or assessment. He told Mr. McIntyre he could discus

Mr. McIntyre concluded his cross-examination by saying to the Inspector that he wanted

to put something about the NRA website on traffic noise to him and said that in the

various sections of that site where it said "the most" he believed it should read "the least

commonly used". The Inspector said he would note this submission but said if he wanted

that to be sent in writing to the NRA he would have to do that himself as it was not a

Mr. Gunne said Mr. Murtagh was one of the few people who had a notice served on him

for a forfeiture of � 5000 for failing to allow the Council onto his lands and that his lands

were being severed and he was being provided with a shared access with Plot 2180. He

said Mr. Murtagh would have to travel for about 900 metres to get around to his lands

and his farmyard was on the other side of the Athboy Link Road. Mr.Gunne said he

would have about 65 to 70 acres severed across the road with about 25 acres left on his

own side and suggested that he should have been given a farm overbridge as against the

addition of nearly a kilometre and the underpass to get to his lands. Ms Joyce said they

had looked at that but a farm bridge would have cost over � 900000 when the underpassc

cost about �50 to 60000,but she said that it was not only on costs but because his farm

was all in grassland and there would not be cattle being moved on a daily basis. Mr.

Gunne said that Mr. Murtagh considered he should be given the same treatment whether

he was a dairy farmer or not but Ms Joyce explained that an access was provided where

the lands were being severed and in this case the most economic was an underpass .

The Inspector intervened and asked for clarification on the area of severance and was told

that the total area was 107 acres with about 9 being taken for the road and 70 acres

severed Mr. Gunne said the lands were let for over two years since Mr. Murtagh had been

in ill-health and that all of the land was used for grazing dry stock. Following further

discussion between Mr. Gunne and Ms Joyce about the costing for an overbridge and the

suggestion of Mr. Murtagh offerring to cede lands necessary for this at no cost, the

Inspector suggested that the farmyard appeared to be in the larger area of land and Mr.

gunne confirmed this was so and the Inspector commented that with the farmyard being

in the 70 acre part, the severance was on the 25 acres and not as was being implied on the

70 acres. He also said it was a dry stock farm and when Mr. Gunne said he accepted that

but said the house was between the yard and the road, the Inspector commented that the

One of the submissions to the EIS was from M/s Steen O'Reilly & Co. Solicitors Navan

on behalf of Ronald Sherlock, t/a Sherlock Furniture, Balreask Old, Navan who objected

to the proposed closure of Swan Lane by the extinguishment of the right of way at its

On Day 22 Mr. Burke advised the Hearing that agreement had been reached between Mr.

Sherlock and the Council on the details of an alternative access arrangement which

provided for a private access road being constructed, 6 metres in width with a 4 metre

paved surface through Plot 2121 with gates at both ends. This private road would only be

used by Sherlock Furniture in accessing and egressing their factory. Details of the Points

of Agreement from which the objection to the extinguishment of the right of way was

withdrawn were handed in to the Hearing by Frank Burke on behalf of M/s Sherlock

Note -- As Mr. Farrelly had already given evidence for the Council on the Clonee to

Dunshaughlin and Dunshaughlin to Navan Sections and as some of this is common to his

evidence on this Section, only the parts in his Brief of Evidence that are specific to this

Mr. Farrelly said said his Brief was to carry out a detailed assessment of each farm along

the selected routes impacted by the proposed M3 on the Navan By-pass Section for

inclusion in the EIS and to assess the macro effect of the proposed scheme on agriculture

locally and nationally for inclusion in the EIS. Mr. Farrelly said there were 47 farms

impacted on by the Navan By-pass Section with each of theses visited by a consultant

who interviewed each owner or occupier, using a set questionaire for all of them, with a

map of each farm showing the M3 impact prepared and a report prepared for each farm.

He said these reports were summarised in Table 10.6 in the Material Assets section in

Mr. Farrelly said they examined the nature and style of agriculture along the proposed

route corridor in the macro report, which commented on the soil types encountered and

specifically on the Soil Associations in the effected area, and that agriculture in the DEDs

along the route was examined and compared to agriculture locally and nationally. He said

that the soil types encountered were principally Soil Associations No. 38 and 40, as

defined on the Soil Association Map of Ireland, which were characteristically fertile and,

when well drained, were suitable to a wide range of crop production. He said that no

farming enterprise along the route was so severely severed as to render it non-viable and

that no farm of national or local importance was being impacted in a way that would

Mr. Farrelly said that the impact of the scheme would be felt by individual farmers and

farm units rather than nationally or regionally and that the area being acquired was

insignificant in terms of the national agricultural area or the agricultural area in Co.

Note -- As Mr.Dilworth had previously given evidence on Noise and Vibration for the

Mr. Dilworth said they had been commissioned to conduct a detailed appraisal of the

noise and vibration impacts associated with both the construction and operation of the

Navan By-pass Section of the proposed road scheme. He said the existing noise climate

was quantified by baseline noise surveys which were conducted in accordance with the

survey methodology set out in the Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN) published

by the Department of Traffic, Welsh Office in 1988 and measurements were performed in

the vicinity of noise sensitive locations close to the proposed scheme. He said the primary

contributor to noise build-up was found to be road traffic with contributions from

livestock, wildlife and occasional aircraft and he said that the measured noise levels were

typical of those found in this sort of environment with no significant sources of vibration

He said that it was generally not possible to conduct detailed construction noise and

vibration prediction calculations at the EIS stage of a development, as the program for

construction works was not sufficiently advanced and that the current best practice

dictated consideration be given to practicable mechanisms for controlling likely sources

of noise and vibration. He said that a variety of items of plant would be used in the

development and that rock breaking might be required on occasions. Mr. Dilworth said

that guidance on practicable control measures would be taken from BS 5228, Noise and

Control Measures on Construction and Open Sites, Part 1, Code of Practice for Basic

Information and Procedures for Noise and Vibration Control, 1997 and, where applicable,

reference would also be made to the EC Construction Plant Permissable Noise Levels

Regulations 1988. He said that typical control and compliance measures could include

the appointment of a site representative for noise and vibration matters; fitting effective

silencers to plant exhausts and pneumatic tools; selecting plant with low inherent

potential for noise generation; shutting down machinery rather than permitting it to idle;

limiting the hours during which specific activities such as piling might be conducted;

conducting noise control audits in accordance with BS 5228; communicating with local

residents and monitoring levels of vibration during critical periods and at sensitive

Mr. Dilworth said that traffic noise predictions for the proposed scheme when in

operation had been conducted for 2004 and 2024 in accordance with CRTN methodology

with traffic noise levels predicted for 20 locations as being representative of the closest

noise sensitive locations along the route. He said the predicted levels had been compared

to the target criterion of 68 dB LA10 18hour, which was the current best practice

advocated by the NRA. He said mitigation measures were deemed necessary whenever

the scheme had a nett negative impact and the predicted noise level was greater or equal

to the target criterion. He said this target of 68dB LA10 was neither met nor exceeded for

the tolled scenario at any receiver but that mitigation measures were required at one of

the locations assessed for the untolled scenario. He said the proposed mitigations

consisted of solid roadside barriers, the details of these being set out in the EIS and the

resultant predicted traffic noise levels satisfied the target criterion at all locations.

Mr. Dilworth said that it had been found the ground vibrations produced by road traffic

were unlikely to cause perceptible structural vibration in properties located near well

maintained roads and that maintaining the road surface would ensure vibration was not

He said that mitigation measures were required for one location under the untolled

scenario and this consisted of a solid barrier 1.5 metres high that ran from chn.2200 to

chn.2450 along the proposed Athboy Road and satisfied the target criteria. He said that

no further mitigation measures arose from the assessment for the Navan by-pass Section

but he said the cumulative noise level associated with the Navan By-pass Section when

combined with the Dunshaghlin to Navan Section was such that further measures were

required. He said this mitigation consisted of a solid barrier 3.5 metres high that ran from

chn. 41050 to chn.41300 alongside the southern carriageway and this satisfied the target

Mr. Dilworth then referred to the "Errata sheet" which he had prepared and which

superceded Tables 4.2 and 17.4 and Tables 4.6 and 17.5 in Vol.5A of the EIS. He said

that the reasons for the "errata sheet" were given on it and this arose from incorrect

descriptions of two of the links being given and one of the links being missing, which had

now been corrected in the "Errata sheet" . He said that, essentially, the descriptions for

the top two lines in table 4.2 were misplaced and the link for the N3 north of Navan, the

third line, was omitted. He confirmed that there were no materially different results and

( Note -- The Errata Sheets handed in to the Hearing are included in Mr. Dilworth's Brief

Mr. McIntyre asked if he was familiar with EU Directive 2002/49 EC of 25 June 2002

and when he said he was, asked if he could explain this in layman's language. Mr.

Dilworth said the Directive was one of the first instruments in an on-going process across

the EU to homogenise noise and said there were two thrusts to it, the first being a

proposed change in parameters to Lden which was the day/evening/night and Lnight

which was the night time parameter and the other was a protocol on noise mapping. He

explained that the noise mapping set out the circumstances where Member states would

map environmental noise from various sources such as rail, airports etc and present the

results with mitigation proposals to reduce exposure of persons to noise. He said there

were various steps to the exercise with criteria set for the level of traffic on a road or size

of airport requiring mapping and that by 2007 there had to be a report back, with further

stages by 2012 when the noise maps and mitigation measures were to be put in place.

Mr. McIntyre asked if he believed the provisions of 2002/49/EC should be considered if a

motorway was being built today and when Mr. Dilworth said "no", asked why not. Mr.

Dilworth said it was a question of prematurity as there was no guidance on what would

be the national methodology or proposed criteria or assessment methodologies. Mr.

McIntyre asked if he was paying him would his answer be different and Mr. Dilworth

said it would not and he was already being asked that by some clients and his advice was

that the Directive set out clear time scales. He said that for a scheme like the M3 where

planning started some time ago it would be premature to have used an as-yet unpublished

Directive. Mr. McIntyre suggested this Directive went back into the early 1990s and Mr.

produced the present Directive started later. Mr. McIntyre asked if the roads should be

designed to best European practice rather than using the highest decibel levels in Europe,

which were only used in Greece and the UK as well as in Ireland. Mr. Dilworth said the

Directive acknowledged there were differences and that it was appropriate for the

relevant authorities within Member States to set the criteria which meant localised

criteria. Mr. McIntyre referred to the "euro" and said if we had one currency why should

there not be one noise level. Mr. Dilworth said that was for the EU and his argument was

that you designed to an acceptable standard and said the present one represented an

acceptable level, but he agreed there could be a case argued for a more stringent level.

Mr. McIntyre referred to the modifications that airports would have to do to meet this

Directive and asked why was the motorway being built to a standard that would have

then to be modified within the next 2 to 12 years but Mr. Dilworth said it was being built

to standard practice and that to design to a hypothetical future level was premature and

not the best practice. Mr. McIntyre quoted the criteria from other European countries

(which he had previously quoted in Section 86.3 )and said all motorways in Ireland were

being built to a criteria that was 8 to 10 decibels above the European average and asked

why should he be asked to support the building of one at his backdoor where it would be

necessary to spend more money in 3 to 7 years time to replace the barriers to comply with

EU legislation, which he suspected would put the level in the low 50s but not in the high

60s. Mr. Dilworth said he had quoted a lot of figures, probably from the same Table as he

was looking at, and there were different parameters and different time scales used for

most of them and most were free flow rather than fa�ade levels. Mr. McIntyre said some

had fa�ade levels and Mr. Dilworth replied that some were LA10, some LA and most

63LAeq so the comparison should be with that figure. He said the question of why 68dB

was being used was a policy one and not for him to justify. He said that he considered it

was an appropriate level but that was not to say it would not be changed to a lower figure

at some future time. He said that it was possible the EU would continue to allow each

member state to fix its own level so it could still be an Irish limit would be used. He said

that in his opinion it was very unlikely that we would ever go into the low 50s and that

55 was the lowest he would envisage and said that 60dB seemed to be the more likely

figure, if an EU wide level was chosen. Mr. McIntyre said he was agreeing with him that

55 would be a more sensible level but Mr. Dilworth said he was saying that 55 would be

a more stringent level and that there were arguments for and against it and he would

Mr.McIntyre said the Directive gave guidelines and that certain elements of it would

happen in time but that it was effective now and when he was told that the UK CRTN

method was used in Ireland, he said the Directive stated the French national computation

method should be used and the French limits were 60/65 in daytime and 55/57 at night

and that he wanted those limits applied. Mr. Dilworth accepted the Directive was

published in June 2002 and that it made a recommendation but said the M3 scheme had

been designed some considerable time before that. Mr. McIntyre said the people living

along the route of the M3 were those who would be affected and that as the road might

not be built for several years, if ever, the EU Directive criteria should be used, not

historic criteria. Mr. Dilworth said that if a policy item was being considered and he was

consulted he would then offer an opinion but at this stage he had not, and did not intend,

Mr.McIntyre asked how long would it take to do this, if he were to be asked to do so and

Mr. Dilworth said it would take three to four months to complete. Mr. McIntyre asked if

he accepted the existing mitigation measures behind his house would have to be changed

if the French national standard for computation was used. Mr. Dilworth replied that he

would not comment on any specific situation as an analysis would have to be done, but

said he would accept that any change in the target level would make it likely that

Mr. Keane intervened and asked Mr. McIntyre to indicate where in the Directive did it

say that the French computation method was to be applied, as he had the Directive in

front of him and could find no such reference and he quoted several extracts from the

Directive. Mr. Dilworth said that he understood there was a provision that where a

country did not have its own standard or policy then the French method of computation

should be used as a default. He explained that the standards and method of computation

were two separate things with the method of computation only saying how noise levels

were to be calculated and it had no limits given in it as these were in a different document

which was the standard used. Mr. Dilworth said he had no recollection of the Directive

saying the French standards should apply but the computation method was the default

The Inspector intervened and said that for the purposes of the Hearing Mr. McIntyre had

outlined that he considered standards lower than the 68dB should be used and the

Council's case was that they were following the accepted practice. He said that it

appeared as if the French method of calculating noise was contingent on something else

not being specified and that did not affect the basic argument which was the mitigation

level should be set at a lower level. Mr. McIntyre asked if he was right in thinking there

had been another occasion where levels below the 68 had been applied and the Inspector

said there had been reference earlier on that Day of the Outer Ring Road case in Dublin

where there was an additional level below the 68 dB LA10 applied by An Bord but that

construction of that road had not yet started so it would not be accurate to say it was in

Mr.McIntyre asked if he considered there would be a limit in place of between 55 and 60

at some time in the next 5 to 10 years but Mr. Dilworth said that it might be left to

individual Member States to set their own limits and that he could not bank on there

being an EU wide limit. When Mr.McIntyre suggested the present differences ranged

from 45 to 68, Mr. Dilworth said he was not comparing like with like and that the present

range across the EU was 55 to 65 LAeq for daytime and 45 to 57 LAeq for night time and

said that by designing for a daytime 68 LA10, which was 65 LAeq, this gave a typical

nighttime level of 10 to 15 decibels lower because traffic noise was a function of total

traffic flow (AADT) in the period 6am to midnight. He said that outside that period

traffic flows were much lower giving traffic noise in the 40s and 50s. Mr. Tiernan asked

how noise was measured and Mr Dilworth explained the basis for the LA 10 18 hour

parameter presently used in Ireland for traffic noise measurements and how there was no

rule of thumb for relating noise to the distance a house was from a road, saying it

depended on variables like traffic flows, traffic speeds, gradients, HGV %s, topography,

Mr.Dilworth referred to these and explained why locations were selected and that unusual

noise sources would mean a particular location would not be used, as well as the

difference between baseline measurements and modeled noise levels. Mr. Dilworth said

that one of the difficult results to get across to people was where the noise level at a

prediction location showed a decrease, which he said would come from a redistribution of

traffic patterns by traffic moving off a local road and onto a new road. He said that the

cumulative effect of this traffic removal to another road some 100 to 200 metres distant

giving a benefit was a hard point to get across. Mr. McIntyre said that the Cannistown

Residents Association believed that figures lower than 68 dB should be used and that best

practice meant EU directives should be put into place now rather than having in the

future, as taxpayers, to pay for a modification to the presently proposed mitigation

measures. He said that environmental noise had several negative effects on humans and

the most important of these was annoyance and that it would annoy him to have a slip

road 170 metres from his back door where now he had green fields. He said it was also

the cause of mental stress, hearing damage, blood pressure and that he could not think of

one positive effect other than that he was actually in favour of the motorway but said he

could not abide a system whereby they had to accept design specifications knowing that

these would have to be changed within 3, 7 or 12 years time and at great expense which

Mr. Tiernan said that as a community they accepted the motorway was going through, but

they wanted assurances that it would have the least impact and that their concerns about

drainage, noise and the safety of their community and children would be taken on board.

Mr. McIntyre said his house was located at position P10 in Figure 5.1.1 of Vol. 5A of the

EIS on the Kilcarn Road and that his queries would follow on from where they had

reached when he was part of the Cannistown delegation and asked if the L10 18hour

dB(A) was the most commonly used parameter for assessing traffic noise in a european

or worldwide context. Mr. Dilworth said it was the only one used in a national context

but said the LAeq parameter was more widely used in a european context. Mr. McIntyre

referred to the reference to traffic noise assessment on the NRA website, which said the

most commonly used parameter was the L10 18hour dB(A), but Mr. Dilworth said they

were probably referring to the Irish context and when Mr. McIntyre said the website

intent was misleading as it implied that parameter was the most commonly used in

Europe, Mr. Dilworth replied that was a matter he should take up with the NRA. Mr.

McIntyre asked if the UK were the only other country using the CRTN 68 level and when

Mr. Dilworth confirmed that was so, he suggested that Australia used a figure of 55 with

mitigation at levels above 63, and when Mr. Keane intervened to ask what parameter was

the 55, he said it was in LAeq which would be about 58dB. Mr. Dilworth said that a freefield

Mr. McIntyre asked if the Australian criteria were to be applied what additional

mitigation measures would need to be applied to the proposed route between Clonee to

Kells. Mr. Dilworth said that the extent of additional measures would be a function of the

final selection of the criteria and that the Irish figure of 68 dB was 63LAeq in terms of

our European neighbours, a number of whom had limits of 60 LAeq, so that a further 3db

might need an alternative surfacing or barrier screening but he could not say if it would

require a 20% more mitigation or whatever. Mr. McIntyre asked if he accepted it would

require more mitigation if a level like Australia were used and Mr. Dilworth said that was

likely but said the Australian level of 55 was aspirational and they had a higher level

where mitigation was required which was, he thought, the 63 mentioned. He said the

lowest European level he was aware of was 55 and that the majority hovered around 60

but with lower night time limits. Mr. McIntyre then suggested that if the average

European limit was applied that would require significantly more mitigation than was

proposed for the slip road passing his house into Navan and Mr. Dilworth agreed but said

that a detailed assessment would be needed to determined the exact amount. He said that

if the goal posts were moved by 3 to 5 decibels it followed that additional mitigation

conduct a survey into effects of noise and as a briefing document for the 2002 EU

Directive which referred to the basis of the UK index of 68 dB as coming from the early

developed and he suggested the criteria had outlived its usefulness and said that it was

only be used in Ireland now to minimise the amount of noise mitigation that had to be

applied along new roads. He said he had purposefully applied for planning permission for

his house so that it was equally distant from the Cannistown and Borallion (Ballybatter)

Roads so he could stay as far away from road noise as possible but now the slip road

would be 170 metres from him at the nearest corner. He asked what level of noise would

be expected at his house and Mr. Dilworth replied that while the level would depend on

distance, geometry and ground cover, he would expect it to be in the high 50s. Mr.

McIntyre asked what his present noise level, without the motorway, was in his very rural

area with only distant traffic and Mr. Dilworth said he would expect that it could be in the

30s to 40s and Mr. McIntyre suggested it was in the low to mid 30s which would mean a

20 decibel increase in noise levels passing his back door. When Mr. Dilworth agreed it

would be of that order, Mr. McIntyre asked what mitigation measures would have to be

pout in place if the EU legislation came into force before the motorway came to be built

and figures of 55/60 were set. Mr. Dilworth replied that it was probable that none would

be required since the level at his property would be around 55 LAeq and the criterion he

had mentioned would be below that since it was measured at the fa�ade. When Mr.

McIntyre asked if he was a border line case at 170 metres for the expected EU legislation,

Mr. Dilworth said it was only a possible new limit and that it might be left to each

Mr. McIntyre referred to the likelihood of the Directive setting limits on noise and Mr.

Dilworth accepted that while 55 was one of the figures being discussed, his own personal

view was for 60 being the more likely figure if a limit was eventually set by the EU. Mr.

McIntyre referred to the noise mapping process in CRTN and asked if that was done for

the M3 but Mr. Dilworth said that was the terminology used and that a model was done

for the entire route with the baseline measurements only taken when the meteorological

Directive required noise mapping by the state by 2005, Mr. Keane intervened to say the

Directive did not say noise mapping had to be completed before 2005 as there were a

Mr. McIntyre asked what mitigation measures were proposed for the section of the

Kilcarn slip road behind his house and when Mr. Dilworth said there were none as the

predictions were less than 68dB, he suggested the raised road should worsen the situation

but Mr. Dilworth said that was taken account of. Mr. McIntyre asked if the proposed

screening and planting there had anything to do with noise or was it just a visual exercise

referring again to the NRA website but Mr. Dilworth said he could not comment on that

wording as it was something to be directed to the NRA. The Inspector asked if he had

been given a copy of the Council's proposed adjustment to the noise criteria and when

Mr. McIntyre said that he had not, Mr. Keane said they would get him a copy and the

Inspector reminded Mr. Keane to supply a copy to the Bellinter Residents Association as

Note -- Mr. O'Kelly-Lynch had previously given evidence on the Clonee to Dunshaughlin

Section in Section 30.1. of this Report and as the first two paragraphs are also relevant to

Mr. O'Kelly-Lynch said that the improved road network from the Scheme would provide

significant benefits at regional and sub-regional levels with travel times and transport

development, stimulate tourism activity and improve accessibility for recraetional and

cultural facilities. He said that at local level there would be positive and negative benefits

with positive benefits being experienced by communities along the N3 corridor by the

cleaner and safer environment from the reduced traffic volumes and that the residents of

Navan would enjoy benefits from being by-passed, with the reductions in the through

traffic giving relief from severance and improved amenity and safety. He said that the

improved traffic circulation and better road network would reduce delivery times which

would benefit the business community in the Navan area from the increased productivity

and greater reliability in the transport of goods and services. He said the accessibilty of

schools and recreational facilities would be significantly improved and the social

environment would be enhanced and that the reduced traffic would also create a safer and

Mr. O'Kelly-Lynch said that some businesses particularly those on the N3, the N51and to

some extent on the proposed cul-de-sacs would suffer from a reduction in passing trade

but that in the long term the improved traffic circulation and reduced congestion in Navan

would make this more attractive for shopping and business and the scheme was expected

to have a nett positive impact there in the medium to longer term. He said the improved

road network would increase the attractiveness of Navan and its environs for commuter

housing and retail / commercial development with pressure for out of town retail /

He said some of the road alterations in the scheme would have negative social impacts on

the local community, particularly the road closures and road realignments on Swan Lane;

R161, Trim Road; the Robinstown road, L4007-0; the N51 Athboy Road, the Boyerstown

road L 80008-20; Halltown road L 80091-16 and the Durhamstown road L 4005-11. He

said that measures to mitigate some of the negative impacts had been identified and these

included footpaths to reduce severance impacts for local communities and signs to reduce

impacts for businesses due to the loss of passing trade with measures to reduce negative

impacts during construction also identified. He concluded by saying that with the

outweighed the disadvantages with residual impacts being, in the main, minor. He said

that any major or moderate impact remaining after mitigation would only affect relatively

few individuals and that the nett socio-economic impact for society as a whole would be

Mr. Nairn, who had given evidence on Ecology in the Dunshaughlin to Navan Section,

Consultants and his firm had been engaged by MC O'Sullivans to deal with the Flora and

Fauna aspects of the EIS, except for fish or fisheries which would be dealt with by other

specialists. ( Note-- Some of his general evidence was the same as he had already given

for the Dunshaughlin to Navan Section and is not repeated here for the Navan By-pass

He said that all habitats along the proposed route were surveyed during September 2000

and classified with the dominant species recorded and hedgerows evaluated on a 3 point

scale of high, medium or low ecological value. He said that an inventory of all trees along

the line of the route was made in February 2001 and it was unlikely this environment had

changed since then. He said mammals and birds were assessed during the habitat surveys

using a combination of direct sightings and observations of signs, with some additional

field visits in September 2001 to locate badger setts and areas of high badger activity and

Mr. Nairn then described the route and said there were no designated areas along the

route but there were 3 proposed NHAs within 10kms.of the route, none being affected by

the M3. He said the habitat survey showed improved agricultural grassland and arable

crops as the dominant habitat along the route, these being highly modified habitats and

were of low ecological value. He said areas of semi-natural grasslands were scattered

along the route and were either heavily grazed and species poor or transient as in the case

of set-aside. He said the most significant habitat recorded in the survey was an area of

diversity and low levels of grazing meant the site was of high local ecological value. He

said a further area of wet grassland occurred beside the River Boyne at Kilcarn Bridge

and while species diversity was low it formed an integral part of the Boyne floodplain

He said other habitats of moderate ecological value included relatively undisturbed areas

of grassland, scrub and woodland at the northern end of the Athboy Link Road at chn.

1650 to 2300 and at Athboy Roundabout. He said woodland occurred in small bands or

blocks along the route and was mainly broadleaved woodland derived from past planting,

and that there were also areas of scrub and an immature broadleaved plantation of low

ecological value. He said hedgerows were a significant feature of the landscape along the

route and these were one of the main semi-natural habitats for flora and fauna in the

expanses of intensively managed farmland. He said while most were of low to moderate

local ecological value, there were hedgerows of high ecological value at a number of

Mr. Nairn said that a number of treelines occurred along the route and that these were of

providing valuable habitat for invertebrates, bats and birds. He said all trees of greater

than 30 cm. diameter at breast height along the route were recorded as part of a tree

inventory and that 624 trees would be felled during the road construction and that most of

the trees were in hedgerows and treelines along field boundaries and beside roads with

most being native species. Mr. Nairn said that the route crossed a number of watercourses

in lowland farmland, all being small streams in the upper reaches and all of low to

moderate local ecological value. He said that no Otter signs were noted during the field

He said Bat activity was noted at a number of locations with the species present being

Brown long-eared bats, Pipistrelles and Daubenton's bat and that a house at site 4 was

identified as a Bat roost, wth feeding bats being detected along treelines and along the

Mr.Nairn said that Badger tracks were noted at two locations but no breeding setts were

located during the survey but that this did not preclude the presence of breeding badgers

in the area as setts could be dispersed and were usually well-concealed in hedgerows,

scrub areas or woodland. He said no signs of Deer were noted during the field survey but

it was likely they passed through or feed in fields along the route occasionally and he said

Ardsallagh. He said that a wide range of common bird species was observed but that a

greater diversity of species typically associated with the range of available habitats would

Mr. Nairn said the impacts of the proposed route on improved grassland and arable land,

both of low ecological value, would not be significant and that on areas of semi-natural

grassland and wet flushes would be minor negative and only of local significance. He

said there would be a major negative impact of local significance on the wet grassland

area at chn. 48400, with most of this habitat being lost through construction, drainage and

re-direction of the water source. He said the loss of treelines would constitute a moderate

negative impact, except for the 250 metre stretch of beech treeline along both sides of the

He said the route would impact on minor watercourses at 4 main locations which would

construction, and that there would be some permanent loss of bankside vegetation where

He said there would be a negative impact on animal and bird populations near the

proposed road from disturbance during the construction and, to a lessor extent, from its

operation and also with negative impacts from the loss of areas of semi-natural habitat

for feeding, breeding and cover; and the creation of barriers to animal movement, habitat

fragmentation, severance of territories and isolation of populations. He said the road

construction would have a negative impact on Bats through the loss of foraging habitat

and roosting sites, with flight paths between foraging and roosting sites interrupted by the

removal of both hedgerows and treelines. He said lighting associated with the road might

disturb the feeding behaviour of some species or might discourage Bats from using

adjacent habitats and that potential breeding and hibernation sites would also be lost by

Mr. Nairn said road construction was likely to lead to fragmentation of the home ranges

of some larger mammals such as Deer and Badger but this was not significant as no large

concentrations of either species were affected and he said that animals would become

Mr. Nairn then referred to the mitigation measures proposed and said there would be no

hedgerow removal during the months of March to June inclusive to avoid impacts on

breeding birds, and that trees and hedgerows being retained would be fenced at the

canopy line prior to construction. He said buildings with bat roosts would not be

demolished or disturbed during the months of June to August, the breeding season, or

November to March, the hibernation season. He said the old stone railway bridges near

chn. 40000 on the M3 at Cannistown and at chn. 1650 on the Kilcarn Link would be

retained as these were likely to be used as Bat roosts. He said that impacts on the wetland

areas at chn. 48400 would be reduced by maintaining the hydrological integrity of the

He said that impacts on hedgerows and tree lines intersected by the new road would be

reduced by minimising the working area around these habitats with the working area

defined before siteworks by the erection of a fence to define the limits of the siteworks.

He said that any trees and hedgerows being retained within the site works would be

fenced at the outset, with the fence line set at the outer canopy line of the trees and that

Mr. Nairn said that bankside vegetation would be left intact where possible and that

adequate fencing would be provided by fencing it off prior to construction, with the

fences set at a minimum distance of 5 metres from the bank of the watercourse or the

edge of the woodland canopy whichever was greater. He said that where natural bankside

vegetation had to be removed it would be pulled back from the river edge by machinery

operating from the bank. He said that where temporary diversion of a watercourse was

required that should be done prior to removing bankside vegetation and where permanent

diversion was required, the existing vegetation would be removed in sods to be re-planted

on the new river banks. He said that no works would be conducted in bankside vegetation

during the March to June period if suitable habitat for breeding birds existed there and

that transplanting of bankside vegetation would be conducted during the dormant season,

except where salmonid restrictions were in force when transplanting would be in the

Mr. Nairn said that replanting or rehabilitation of banksides would follow a sensitive

grading of the banks to replicate topography and that planting would use native species

and would follow a natural zonation appropriate to the river profile. He said temporary

deer and hare proof fencing would be erected to protect newly planted areas. He said

hedgerows and treelines would be retained, where possible, for their value as ecological

corridors for wildlife in general, and for Bats in particular, and that mature trees would be

retained, where possible, to minimise unintentional destruction of Bat roosts. He said that

no special mitigation measures were required for improved grassland, arable land or areas

Mr. Nairn said that where the removal of hedgerows, treelines and mature trees could not

be avoided then compensatory measures, including the re-planting of hedgerows and

He said that areas of severed land would be planted with native broad-leaved trees, or set

aside to allow for natural re-vegetation, to compensate for the loss of woodland and

habitat fragmentation of ecological value and that those areas would be designed towards

ensuring ecological connections or wildlife corridors were maintained between existing

He said that where buildings containing bat roosts were to be demolished, bats must be

excluded prior to demolition and this can only take place under a licence from Duchas

and in the presence of a bat specialist and should not be done between the months of June

to August ( Breeding season) or November to March (Hibernation season). He said that

where the removal of buildings or mature trees could not be avoided, Bat boxes would be

erected in appropriate locations in the area, at least one month in advance of any

Ms Clarke said she would be dealing with the Non - agricultural Material Assets and that

TCD and had worked extensively on waste planning and environmental management as

Ms Clarke said there were some non-agricultural holdings which would be impacted by

the landtake and the alteration of access and these included residences, commercial

properties, recreational facilities and other non-agricultural lands which would be directly

affected by the proposed road. She said the compensation issues would be dealt with by

the Council at a later stage if the CPO were approved. She said that the assessment was

done by a combination of a desk study, orthophotography and a field study carried out in

May 2001 along the route of the proposed Navan By-pass with each property affectd

being classified as residential, commercial, recreational or non-agricultural land and that

Ms Clarke said 3 occupied dwellings were being acquired and a further 10 properties

would be affected by a partial acquisition of their landholding and that no commercial

properties were being acquired but one would be affected by the acquisition of part of its

holding. She said one field classified as non-agricultural would be acquired and a further

5 green areas would lose of part of the area and that 4 private driveways would be

affected by acquisition of part of the non-agricultural land. Ms Clarke said that

compensation payments for loss of land were outside the remit of the assessment and

when part of the curtilage of a property was to be acquired the details of the type of

replacement boundary or walls would be negotiated as part of the purchase negotiations.

Ms Clarke said that the acquisition of lands for roads schemes impacted on landowners

through a combination of landloss, alteration to accesses and changes to boundary walls

or fences and that every effort had been made in the Route Selection process and

Preliminary Design to minimise the impact on landowners, particularly dwellings through

considered design. She concluded that there would not be a significant impact locally on

Dr. Porter, who had given evidence on air quality impacts on the Clonee to Dunshaughlin

Section, said he was the Director responsible for Air Quality wth AWN Consulting who

had been commissioned by MC O'Sullivans to conduct a detailed appraoisal of the air

quality impacts associated with both construction and operation of the Navan By-pass

Section of the proposed M3. He said the existing ambient air quality was quantified by

means of an extensive baseline air quality survey with consideration being given, through

published guidance and standards, to suitable means of assessing the air quality impact

associated with the proposed By-pass. He said the likely levels of air pollutants

associated with both construction and operational phases had been assessed using the US

EPA approved air dispersion model CAL3QHCR, which was specifically formulated for

complex traffic junctions, with the predicted ambient pollutant levels at worst-case

Dr. Porter described how the existing baseline air quality along the route had been

assessed by measurements at sensitive locations and by an analysis of existing baseline

data in the region and by comprehensive dispersion modeling of the proposed road

infrastructure. He said the measured baseline air quality was compared to the existing and

proposed National and EU Air Quality Standards and an assessment made of whether

these air quality standards were presently being exceeded at the nearest sensitive

receptors. Dr. Porter said the results obtained from the monitoring of NO2, PM 10 and

Benzene indicated that, if the survey was extrapolated to a period of one year, it was

likely these pollutants would be in compliance with the appropriate significance criteria

and he said the results indicated there was good air quality in the area at present. He said

the baseline air dispersion modeling study carried out for both 2004 and 2024 indicated

Dr. Porter said the impact of traffic-derived emissions on ambient air quality had ben

extensively assessed by air dispersion modeling of the proposed road infrastructure for

both 2004 and 2024 and that ambient air quality levels had been predicted for both tolled

and untolled scenarios at 92 locations representing the closest sensitive locations along

the proposed route. He said this modeling study found that pollutant concentrations, with

the tolled scheme in place, were within significance criteria for all pollutants and that for

the untolled scheme the impact relative to the tolled scenario was minor, with some small

increases in concentrations and that, as a worst case, the increases would be only 5% of

the limit values. Dr. Porter said that, relative to baseline conditions, the impact of both

tolled and untolled scenarios was insignificant with some small increases and decreases

in pollutants. He said the worst-case impact of either scenario was to increase pollutant

levels by, at most, 14% of the EU limit value for any one pollutant. Dr. Porter said that,

as the cumulative impact of the scheme and baseline conditions were within significance

conditions, the proposed scheme would not result in a significant negative impact on air

Dr. Porter said that a dust minimisation plan would be formulated for the construction

phase of the project as construction activities were likely to generate some dust emissions

construction phase. He said these would include the regular cleaning of site roads; speed

restrictions would be applied to vehicles using site roads; that all vehicles exiting the site

would use a wheel wash facility prior to entering public roads; that water misting sprays

would be used as required, if particularly dusty activities were required during dry or

windy periods; that material handling systems and site stockpiling of materials would be

designed and laid out to minimise exposure to wind and that trucks would be stringently

covered with tarpaulin at all times during movement of soil both on and off the site.

Dr. Porter said that detailed modeling predictions had shown that concentrations of NO2,

PM 10 and Benzene present along the proposed route during the baseline year of 2004

were below significance criteria and that the impact of the scheme, relative to baseline

conditions, had been assessed and found to increase by, at most, 14% of the EU limit

values for all pollutants. He said that, compared to baseline conditions in 2004, levels

will decrease or remain at low levels in future years due to legislation-driven technical

conditions had been assessed and found to be within significance criteria and he

concluded the proposed scheme would not have a significant negative impact on air

quality. He also said that dust would be minimised during construction through the

94. Evidence of Bill Quirke, Ecologist, Conservation Services Ltd., for the Council :

Mr. Quirke who is a partner in Conservation Services Ltd., a Consultancy that specialised

in Freshwater Ecology, had given evidence previously in the Clonee to Dunshaughlin

Section and the general sections of his evidence are not being repeated here (See Section

34.1 of this Report). Mr. Quirke said that Conservation Services were retained to carry

out an assessment of freshwater ecology of the Navan By-pass Section of the proposed

M3 scheme which was to assess the invertebrate fauna, fish, aquatic flora, water quality

and salmonid habitat on all potentially affected streams and rivers and to assess salmonid

habitat quality for at least 1 km. downstream of each potential impact point and their

findings were set out in a Report of August 2001 " Aquatic Ecology Report". He said that

particular emphasis was given to the potential vulnerability of streams and rivers to

suspended solids and other pollutants generated in the construction and run-off from the

particularly salmonids, and to the potential loss of aquatic habitat as a result of the

Mr. Quirke said the proposed M3 had a potential impact at 3 locations on two tributaries

of the River Kells Blackwater and a potential impact at 2 locations on a tributary of the

River Boyne which is an EU designated salmonid water. He said the two potentially

affected tributaries of the Kells Blackwater were found to be moderately or seriously

polluted at the potential impact points and with, at best, poor to fair salmonid habitat on

the 1km. downstream. He said that poor or completely unsuitable habitats for salmonids

were found on the Boyne tributary at each of the potential impact points with no

salmonid populations recorded in the vicinity and said the main channel of this tributary

He said that both potential impact locations on the Boyne tributary had good or very good

salmonid habitat within 1km. downstream and they concluded the potentially affected

sections of this stream constituted significant spawning and nursery habitat in the context

of the Boyne system and it was classified as being of high value and locally important.

He said that no protected aquatic habitats existed in the immediate vicinity of the

proposed road and no rare or protected species were identified in their present survey

Mr. Quirke then listed the principal potential impacts on freshwater habitats in the

absence of mitigation measures. (These are the same as those he listed in the Clonee to

Dunshaughlin Section.) He said the proposed new road would not involve a significant

habitat loss on the River system but mitigation measures were required to prevent

pollution damage to salmonid fish both at construction and operational phases in each of

the streams crossed by the proposed road. and he said that minor obstruction to brown

He then outlined the mitigation measures required which are the same as those he

outlined for the Clonee to Dunshaughlin Section. Mr. Quirke said that if these mitigation

construction and operation of the road would be rendered insignificant or of minor

significance and that the potential for obstruction to upstream fish movement would be

greatly reduced by careful design of culverts but he said that some impact could still

The Inspector referred to the query raised by the Cannistown Residents Association about

a stream which they said was possible spawning ground for fish and asked if that

particular stream was one of the Boyne tributaries he had referred to. Mr. Quirke said

there were varying names for different tributaries but that location "C" of the two location

"C"& "D" seemed the one they referred to and said there was no significant salmonid

habitat at these sites. He said he thought that in this instance it was about 700 metres or

more down to a stream that had a very good salmonid habitat and was highly suitable for

young trout. He said they had electro-fished that stream and had found more than

significant densities of juvenile brown trout there and while the loss of habitat at that site

was not significant, it was not one of the locations where he had recommended a fish

considered that fish would not be passing up under the road. He said the important thing

there was that what was sent down the stream to the better habitat and that control of

pollution both during construction and in the operation of the road was important because

of the excellent population of trout and as it was a tributary of the Boyne He said they

had specifically recommended for that site that construction likely to generate suspended

solids should not take place during the October to April period which was when trout

would be spawning when they were most vulnerable to the effects of suspended solids.

Mr. Wilson had previously given evidence on the Clonee to Dunshaughlin Section and

some general comments on drainage design principles that are common to both his Brief's

undulating and was within the Boyne Catchment, with the Boyne being joined at Navan

by the River Kells Blackwater which rose north of Bailieborough in Co. Cavan and said

that it crossed numerous drainage ditches and a number of small tributaries of the Boyne

and Kells Blackwater Rivers. He outlined the principle objectives in developing the

motorway drainage and the design principles used in this drainage, including the

attenuation measures proposed ( See Section 35.1. of this Report ) and said that the fish

friendly design principles, established in consultation with the ERFB, were discussed in

He said the mainline had been divided into 5 sections based on road catchment drainage

areas with section 1 running from chn. 40000 to 41260 , including 1160 metres on the tiein

to the Dunshaughlin to Navan Section. He said the motorway rose to a high point at

chn. 40740, fell to a low point at chn.41070 and rose again to the next high point at chn.

41260 and said that as there was no stream for an outfall discharge at the low point it was

proposed to drain this section to outfall 1.1 which would carry it into the Boyne through

the Dunshaughlin to Navan section road drainage network. He said section 2 ran from

Robinstown road realignments and the motorway fell from both ends of this section to

chn. 41750 which was at the Kilcarn Interchange. He said they proposed a surface water

outfall to an attenuation pond located on the Interchange with an outfall to a tributary of

the Boyne from this pond and he gave details of all the outfalls in Table 2.3 in his Brief

of Evidence. He said section 3 ran from chn. 43990 to chn. 46560 and included the

Realignment, with the motorway falling to a low point at chn. 44440 and would drain

from this point to an attenuation pond. He said the outfall would include drainage from

two ramp roads on the west of the Athboy Interchange with details given in table 2.3 in

He said that section 4 ran from chn. 46560 to chn. 48980 and fell from a high point at

chn. 46560 to a low point at chn. 48100 and included the Athboy Road Realignment,

Athboy Interchange and Overbridge, and the Boyerstown and Bohermeen roads. He said

the section was drained to a low point and outfalled to an attenuation pond and then to a

tributary of the Kells Blackwater with details given in Table 4.2 in his Brief of Evidence.

He said section 5 ran from chn. 48980 to chn. 50700 and included the Durhamstown

road, with chn.48570 to chn.50700 being the tie-in to the Navan to Kells Section, and

said this section fell from a high point at chn. 48980 and would tie-in to the drainage

network for the Navan to Kells section with details given in Table 5.2 in his Brief of

Mr. Wilson gave details of the Design Standards used for the detailed design and these

are set out in his Brief of Evidence and then set out the type of wording that would be

used in the construction contract documents to ensure the detailed design was completed

to the required standards. This dealt with the Agencies to be consulted; the interception of

water from adjoining lands and from embankments or cuttings; how severed drainage

watercourses would be prevented; where and how settling ponds would be provided and

waste products including oils prevented from entering watercourses and how the capacity

of existing natural drains would be assessed and mitigation measures against flooding

adopted with attenuation to control discharges so run-off or flooding risks would not be

increased downstream of outfalls. He said that all existing foul and surface water

drainage would be maintained until the permanent drainage was installed with ground

profiles maintained to shed surface water efficiently into the nearest drain and that the

contractor would design the outfalls to control discharges in a manner that would not

increase the run-off to downstream watercourses, pipes or culverts or affect the return

period for flooding. He also outlined the consultation required with interested parties and

the approval required from relevant authorities by the designer of any outfall and by the

contractor in proposing to discharge water from the site and off-site areas on either a

Mr. Wilson concluded his evidence by saying that the preliminary drainage design for the

Navan By-pass section of the M3 indicated the appropriate culvert crossings to cater for

intersecting existing streams; identified the appropriate outfall points for the various road

sections and quantified the design discharges at each outfall point and identified the

attenuation measures to be implemented at each outfall point. He said that the drainage

criteria required to implement a satisfactory drainage system had also been identified.

Mr. Tiernan referred to the Kilcarn Interchange being built on an area known to be wet

and asked where would the water in the ground go to when the weight of the filling

pressed down on it. Mr. Wilson said it would only have a localised effect which would be

interceptor ditches at the base the water would be collected and said this would not be a

significant impact. He said that the topography was flat and that it would be the same for

the groundwater and when the gradient was flat there would be little flow through the

ground water. Mr. McIntyre asked which direction the ground water flowed and when

told it would be towards the nearest stream, he asked where would it would flow to from

the western side of the Kilcarn link when the Link road was put in place. Mr. Wilson said

there would be interceptor ditches along the side of the road and these would act like the

streams as the ground water would flow towards them and be carried down to a culvert

which would take the water from the western side and into a stream, which he indicated

on the screen at the Hearing, that eventually flowed into the River Boyne. Mr. Wilson

said he was not talking about deep ground water but the top one metre and said that the

aim of the design was not to alter the natural flow paths and not to move catchment

Mr. McIntyre said that stream drained his own lands down to the Boyne and would now

take some of the road surface water and the groundwater which presently went elsewhere

and asked if it was intended to modify the stream. When Mr. Wilson said that it was not,

Mr. McIntyre said the stream flooded at present and the extra water would increase this

flooding but Mr.Wilson replied that they had specified that the drainage system had to fit

the existing flows and that french drains would attenuate the flow to miimise the impact

and not allow any significant impact on flooding and he said the system could not impact

on the flooding. Mr.McIntyre referred to the attenuation pond at the Interchange and

asked where the overspill from it went to and Mr. Wilson said that it flowed into an

adjacent stream. Mr. McIntyre asked if they planned to modify that stream and Mr.

Wilson said the discharge rate was planned to be the same as would occur naturally, with

the pond being there to act as a store for the extra volume which was then released at a

natural rate which, he said, was their estimate of the existing run-off for that stream. Mr.

McIntyre said that stream was also subject to flooding at present and pointed to all of the

extra water from the slip road and part of the motorway and the attenuation pond and the

effects from recent storms but Mr. Wilson maintained the pond would be designed to

ensure the that the risk of flooding was not increased by controlling the discharge rate.

Mr. McIntyre asked if they had surveyed the stream and Mr. Wilson replied that they had

estimated a flow rate of 5 litres per second per hectare as the natural run-off rate and said

that when the detailed design was being done the capacity of the stream would then be

assessed and he said this was included for all outfalls in the construction contract

documents. When Mr. McIntyre asked if that meant the stream could be modified during

the construction phase, Mr. Wilson said it could not because land had not been taken for

such work and the contractor had to design for the water going into the pond with the

capacity of the strean dictating what the release rate could be but he did say that the pond

could be increased in size if necessary as there was land available for this. He said the

design for the pond was for a return period of 1 in 10 years and that was equivalent for

the November 2000 storm and that an event greater than 1 in 10 could result in some

overflowed and asked what was going to be done for the stream when the Interchange

was being placed on a known wetland area and the local knowledge was for all of that

area to be flooded so they felt that without the stream being modified and kept clean there

was bound to be increased flooding in the future. Mr. Wilson said that the pond was

being designed to a particular standard and that the contractor had to ensure the risk of

flooding was not significantly increased and they could not take the pond design any

further than that. Mr. McIntyre said they accepted the pond was being properly designed

but it was what was around it that caused them concerns. Mr. Wilson said there was some

flexibility as the pond could be enlarged and the culvert could be upgraded so there was

scope for some limited improvements but not to the extent they were talking about. Mr.

McIntyre asked who would be responsible if there was flooding afterwards and the

Inspector commented that the Local Authority, having built a new structure, would be

Mr. Tiernan asked if contaminants could enter the stream from the attenuation pond and

Mr. Wilson replied that the pond gave the benefit of collecting and breaking down any

contaminants that entered the drainage system and that the water would have gone

through an oil interceptor before it reached the pond as well and said that anything that

got through the interceptor would be kept in the pond as most pollutants attached

themselves to sediments that settled out in the pond. Asked how frequently would the

interceptors be cleaned and who would do this, Mr. Wilson said they would be checked

after significant storms and after dry periods ad the contractor maintaining the road

would be responsible for this and there were also Regulations on discharges to the stream

that would have to be met. Mr. Tiernan said they were concerned about this stream as it

was a recognised salmonid stream flowing into the Boyne and that if there was no

checking of the filters for contaminants those could get down to the Boyne. He said they

Cannistown road because of the stream not being upgraded. The Inspector suggested the

Council would take another look at the issues they had raised and suggested that the

possibility of draining the attenuation pond directly towards the Boyne along the route of

responsible for the design of Public Lighting. He said the lighting for the Clonee to

roundabouts and this was a safety requirement for road users and, where provided, it was

He said the areas to be lighted were the Kilcarn and Athboy Roundabouts and the Kilcarn

and Athboy Road Interchanges with the lighting schemes designed and installed in

recommendations for lighting roads for motor and pedestrian traffic. He said that Part 2

for traffic routes, Part 3 for subsidiary roads, Part 4 for junctions and roundabouts, Part 5

for interchanges, part 6 for bridges and elevated roads, part 9 for urban centres and public

amenity areas and Part 10 for motorways were the parts of the Code of Practice for

lighting as in BS 5489 of 1992 that would be applied in the design and installation of the

lighting. He said the lighting equipment which would be installed to the standards

detailed in the specification consisted of the lights, columns, cabling systems and power

distribution and the Contractor would be obliged to submit his detailed design for

approval by the Councils representative at design stage and that the design would have to

interface with any existing Public Lighting to give a seamless transition between the new

Mr. O'Connell said the preliminary lighting design was designed to comply, and the full

design would also comply, with the requirements of the current edition of the ETCI

Electricity Supply Company's standards and procedures. He said that all lighting would

use compact high pressure sodium lamps in flat glass IP65 lanterns of the fully cut-off

incorporating solar diode switching control. He said all columns would be of the slim

folded galvanised steel construction type with the general mounting height for columns

on the road junctions and interchanges being 8, 10 and 12 metres with no columns

mounted on bridges or other structures and that high mast lighting would only be

permitted in locations where wide area lighting was proven to be required to met the

Mr. Keane said an issue had been raised relating to Bats in the mitigation measures that

Mercury lights were preferable in attracting insects for Bats instead of Sodium lights and

since it was Sodium Lighting that was proposed asked him to outline why that was

chosen. Mr. O'Connell replied that Sodium Lighting was proposed as it had a greater

energy efficiency and also a greater spacing to height ratio which would allow a wider

spacing between columns and result in a lessor number of columns being used in the

Scheme. He said this would give a lessor visual impact and Sodium lighting would also

97. Evidence of Harold O'Sullivan, Historical Researcher, on behalf of the Council :

( Note -- As the first three sections of this is identical to his evidence as set out in the first

seven paragraphs in Section 37.1. of this Report on pages 249 to 251, it is not repeated

Mr. O'Sullivan said that in addition to surveying houses of architectural or historic

interest he had been asked to inspect and report on the condition of some former railway

bridges in the Kennastown ( Cannistown) area, which were part of the dis-used Dublin to

Meath Railway, and that this Report was set out in Appendix A of his Report of 6 August

2001 ( Note -- This Report is given in full as Appendix C of Appendix F in Vol. 4C and

Mr. O'Sullivan said he had consulted manuscripts, maps and other records relating to the

area, ranging from the 17th to the 19th centuries, particularly relating to land ownership

and habitation sites and he had also visited and photographed the following 5 houses :-

Mr. O'Sullivan concluded by saying he had also reported on the objections made in

respect of the Built Heritage by owners of the houses he had listed. ( See Section 131of

(Note -- The photographs and notes on each house appear in Vols. 5A & 5C of the EIS

Dunshaughlin Section, said he was a Director of the Valerie J. Keeley Ltd. Archaeology

Consultancy, who had been commissioned by MC O'Sullivans to carry out archaeological

assessment on the Navan By-pass proposals. He said they carried out the original paper

survey in two phases of the Preliminary Corridor for the By-pass, the first being in 1999

was on the "Preliminary Area of Interest -- N3 Dunshaughlin North to Navan South and

Navan West". He said this located 140 archaeological sites within the corridor west and

south of Navan and a further 41 outside it, but in close proximity. He said the second

phase was the " Paper Survey of the Preliminary Corridor for the N3 Navan By-pass, East

& North" which was done in 2000 and located some 70 sites and areas of archaeological

potential within a corridor located to the East and North of Navan and a further 43 sites

Mr. Breen said their second assessment phase dealt with the archaeology of the Preferred

Route option passing to the west and south of Navan which combined all of the data

gathered in the paper survey and in a surface field inspection of the preferred route

including the slip roads. He said this was to verify the location of the recorded sites in

relation to the route and to identify potential sites previously unknown within the

landscape and that this was done in February 2001. He said a further field inspection was

undertaken in September 2001 following some minor alterations to the route and the

inclusion of accommodation works and their final report "Archaeological Assessment,

Proposed Route, Navan By-pass" was revised and issued for inclusion in the EIS in

Mr. Breen said that their field inspection identified some 12 sites, 11 of these being

previously unrecorded, for inclusion in the report on the basis of their proximity to the

proposed road and they concluded that no recorded archaelogical sites would be directly

affected by construction. He said the field inspection identified 10 previously unrecorded

potential sites which would be directly affected by construction by being destroyed or

partially destroyed by the proposed road, with the 11th unrecorded site not being affected.

He said their assessment recommended that all sites be avoided, but where this was not

possible, then their recommendations were to fully resolve by excavation and to record

the archaeology in advance of construction. He said that as total avoidance had not been

possible in 10 potential cases, the following recommendations and mitigation measures

2. Archaeological Investigation in the form of Geophysical and Topographical Surveys

3. Archaeological Investigation and where necessary full Archaelogical Excavation of

4. Pre-construction Topsoil Stripping of the previously unrecorded site in close

5. Pre-disturbance Inspection by an Underwater specialist of Sites 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11.

6. Archaeological Monitoring of the construction phase for the length of the route and

its ancillary works, with the provision for full excavation of any archaeologically

Note -- Mr. Burns had already given evidence on the Landscape and Visual Aspects for

both the Clonee to Dunshaughlin and Dunshaughlin to Navan Sections and some of the

general comments in his evidence for this Section are common to those two sections and

landscape and visual impact assessment aspect of the EIS for the Navan By-pass Section

of the M3 Project and this was completed over an 18 month period from mid-2000 to the

He said that in general the landscape from Cannistown to Ardbraccan was good quality

associated with the Boyne Valley and the demesne landscape at Ardbraccan. He said the

strong tree-lined hawthorn hedgerows with the smaller copses on a flat topography gave a

more "wooded" and "secluded" character than actually existed in much of the area. He

said the landscape was visually rather level and rose gently from about 60m OD at

Valley, which skirted the southern end of the proposed route corridor, set low in a steep

Mr. Burns said that Ardbraccan House and its surrounds was a particularly distinctive and

attractive local landscape with the 17th century House and 12th century Church set in a

small mature parkland and that, in general, several groups and stands of mature trees

from the original estate were now incorporated into the general agricultural landscape.

He said that agriculture in both arable and pasture was the dominant form but that the

influence of the expanding urban settlement of Navan was clearly evident with increasing

residential development along the county roads and especially along the R161 Trim and

N51 Athboy Roads. He said sport facilities and local amenities included Borallion Riding

Centre and the Meath and District League Soccer Grounds, both located south of Navan

with the latter comprising a substantial sports facility including floodlit pitches and

associated clubhouse and parking facilities. He said Ardbraccan Church was listed as a

Mr. Burns said there was no significant woodland cover in the study area but strong treelined

road and field hedgerows with the small copses of trees were a feature of the area,

properties at Ardsallagh, Boynehill and Ardbraccan were all sizeable estate style

properties which continued to retain extensive woodland cover, parkland treeplantings

and a strong demesne character with intact entrances, walls, lodges etc.. He said

Ardbraccan in particular was once a substantially larger property but much of the wider

Mr. Burns referred to the Meath CDP as the statutory planning document for the area and

that the Navan environs Plan had no relevant landscape references relating to the study

area. He said the Meath CDP had no listings for Tree or Woodland preservations and no

scenic landscape designations or listed views and prospects within the proposed route

corridor. He said the Boyne Valley, an "Area of High Natural Beauty" lay to the south of

the route corridor and said the Meath CDP described 11 zones of "visual quality" within

the county as a whole and this section of the proposed route was all in zone VQ 11 Rural

and Agricultural which was the least sensitive. He quoted an extract from this zoning

which said the VQ11 zones comprised normal rolling lowland pastoral landscapes that

were not particularly sensitive except for occasional ridges or prominent areas and they

could absorb appropriately designed and located development in all categories. He said

that a second zone, VQ3 River Valleys, was located to the south of the route corridor

along the Boyne Valley. Mr. Burns said that Ardbraccan Church was listed as a SRUNA

in the CDP at no. 59 on the Navan Area Amenity Map, the main aim of these SRUNAs

He said that the landscape was of a high quality rural and agricultural character and was

unremarkable in the overall but there were some small areas of better than expected

Ardbraccan being the best example of this and the Boyne River Valley with its associated

period properties representing another area of high quality landscape. He said that in

terms of visibility it was a robust landscape where the flat tree-lined hedgerows limited

the extent of viewing. He said the inclusion of much of the area in the "Rural and

Agriculture" zone of visual quality and the general absence of amenity, landscape or

scenic planning designations confirmed this description of its visual attributes.

Mr. Burns said that this type of landscape had a high capacity to absorb developments

such as roads which tended to be ground based and that where such development avoided

landscaping. He said in the tree-lined landscape it was important to limit impacts on

mature trees and the scheme was designed to retain, wherever possible, existing trees. He

said the proposed road ran through an unremarkable good quality agricultural landscape

with strong tree-lined hedgerows and low visibility but the rural character of much of the

area was noticeably under pressure from urbanisation through the expansion of Navan.

He said that, for the most part, the route avoided distinctive landscape like Boyne Hill,

development could be readily incorporated into the existing landscape fabric, with minor

impact on the landscape character beyond the initial construction stage and of short term

proposed Kilcarn Interchange where a major junction with associated lighting was sited

in a rural context. He said that lighting at the Kilcarn and Athboy Link Roads would also

result in impacts of major local significance by increasing the urbanised character of the

localities and accentuating the visual presence of the road. He said that in the longer term,

the continued expansion of Navan would tend to subsume the impacted areas into its

expanding urbanisation and that, as such, the longer term impact of the road would be

more likely to be an increased rate of change, which was already noticeable in the area's

Curraghtown and Ardbraccan and had little effect on hedgerows where overall removal

was limited but it would have a locally moderate impact in removing a substantial

number of semi-mature beech and ash trees in the hedgerow along the northern side of

Mr. Burns said the visual impacts would be most pronounced during construction when

disturbance was greatest and mitigation least effective and there would be major adverse

visual impacts for residential and other properties close to or adjoining the construction

boundary, primarily from visual intrusion from tree and hedgerow removal, the alteration

He said some 104 properties were identified along the route corridor which would have

some degree of visual impact at either construction or operation stage and these were

shown in Figures 5.1.1 to 5.1.3 in Vol.5A of the EIS, with three of these being acquired

for the construction. He said 14 properties would experience severe visual impact during

the construction stage with a further 10 experiencing major visual impact, 71 having

moderate or minor impacts and 6 having no significant visual impact. He said the 14

properties with a severe impact were P3, P6 & P7 near the Kilcarn Interchange; P10 &

P14 at the Ballybatter road crossing; P21 & P23 off Swan Lane; P32 between existind

Hanlonstown; P58 to side of realigned N51;P82 isolated house off Boyerstown Road and

He said that in the operation stage the road would gradually establish in its setting and the

proposed landscaping would be increasingly effective in mitigating the severity of the

visual intrusion particularly where the road as at a distance from properties but some

degree of intrusion would remain in the medium and longterm as a reduced impact,

particularly where properties were in close proximity to embankments and in lighted

areas along the road, such as at Kilcarn Interchange. He said that 7 properties, P6, P14, P

23, P38, P58, P86 & P87 would continue to have a severe visual impact after the initial

construction and short term operation stages with a further 13 properties experiencing

major visual impacts, these being P5,P7, P10, P12, P13, P16, P18, P21, P32, P39, P48,

P62 & P82. He said 44 properties would have no significant visual impact and 37 would

have only minor or moderate levels of visual impact after the road was established and

the mitigation planting developed. He said the proposed M3 would have significant

positive beneficial impacts on the urban and commercial streetscape character of Navan

Mr. Burns said the existing N3 offered views to a good quality landscape of rural and

agricultural character and while unremarkable in the overall, areas of higher quality such

as Ardbraccan offered visual variety interest and local distinction. He said this was

typical of the Meath landscape, which was a good quality rolling agricultural land of treelined

hedgerows and one which was dotted with old estates, period houses and associated

mature deciduous tree plantings, but, he said, it was a landscape noticeably under

pressure from ribbon housing development and the expanding urbanisation of Navan.

Mr. Burns said that avoidance of impact was considered wherever possible during the

route selection and its design and the route had been selected to minimise impact on

residential property, trees and woodland but that some degree of impact was inevitable,

as with any development, and wherever possible mitigation measures had been proposed

to mitigate the adverse nature of those impacts. He said that as the proposed road passed

through a mainly rural area, lighting was restricted to junctions and interchanges with

light fixtures being fitted with fully cut-off glass type lanterns which would eliminate

light emission above the horizontal and limit light spillage beyond the road boundary.

He said visual impact would be ameliorated and the road appearance enhanced through a

series of landscape schemes consisting of landscaping along the road reservation and

described the general landscaping proposals that he had previously described for the

He said the planting of small areas of severed properties along the route with primarily

deciduous woodland, in copse style plantations (SLMs) that small areas within the

Kilcarn and Athboy Interchanges would be similarly treated to reduce visual intrusion of

the lighting and structures. He said to assist in integrating the proposed road into its

landscape setting that additional planting, generally a minimum of 5 metres wide, would

be planted along stretches of the proposed road to reduce the impact of the road, its traffic

and lighting on properties at Cannistown, Ballybater Road, Swan Lane, Hanlonstown,

Mr. Burns concluded by saying that, in the overall, the proposed road would not have an

appreciable residual impact and would quickly be assimilated into the fabric of the robust

Meath landscape, even though some locations would continue to suffer appreciable visual

impact for a considerable period of time. He said the M3 would significantly improve the

character and quality of life for those properties along the existing N3 and improve the

commercial and recreational core of Navan through the removal of additional through

traffic. He said, however, that it was likely an appreciable residual impact would arise at

the area surrounding the Kilcarn Interchange where the scale of the structure with its

associated lighting would permanently alter the existing landscape character of the area

Mr. Keogh made his submission to the Hearing on Day 22 and said that he was a full

time farmer as had six generations of the Keogh family had been before him and that he

had bought the 77 acre farm in Kennastown ( Cannistown) south of Navan in February

1989 and that his son, Nicholas junior, was running the farm with him since then. He said

bloodstock when they bought a racehorse and started training horses at Navan. He said

they had been successful 18 times with their last winner being "Forreal" on 7 August

2002 in a 9000 Euro race. He said they intended putting in a gallop on the Navan lands

but the road proposal now prevented this. He said their original objection to An Bord still

He said the M3 would sever the farm diagonally as could be seen on the map he handed

in ( Note -- This is the Kilcarn Link Road) and that there would be severe angulation of

the fields which would drastically reduce the value of the farm and he doubted if any

other holding was as divided in this way. He said the Council proposed to acquire some

12 acres from him and were only providing a 4.5 metre by 4.5 metre underpass to access

about 35 acres which was unsatisfactory since his combine harvester was 4.8 metres high,

and he handed in a specification sheet for the harvester, and said he could not take a full

load of hay or straw through at this height. He also said it was too low for horses and

would be dark and had sought a 5 by 5 metre underpass which the Council refused to

give him. He objected to the idea of sharing the underpass due to the problems of disease

such as TB, Brucellosis and the rare occasions of foot and mouth as diseases could be

spread by sharing access roads. He said his experience as Chairman of the Meath Animal

Health Committee supported his objection to a shared underpass and he handed in a

Leaflet produced by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development which

said there should be no sharing of equipment, cattle crushes, pens, housing or farm

Mr. Keogh said he intended converting the land to grass for horses and cattle and

required a collecting tank for soiled water at the underpass of about 5000 gallons with

kerbs to direct the soiled water into the tank which could then be emptied periodically by

the users. He said that if these types of tanks were not provided the underpasses could

become unsuitable for use with all of the requirements on farmers to protect the

environment. He said the Council had not adequately addressed the drainage of his land

which was presently free-draining and was complicated but worked well. He found if

difficult to understand why the Council had no mitigation proposals for noise as without

it he could not use the land for thoroughbred horses as had been his intention in recent

years. He concluded by saying he found Father Sean McDonagh's comments about the

lack of an ethical attitude to land acquisition on the part of the NRA or the Council

interesting as it tied in with his own experience of dealing with the Council in their

proposals to construct a road across his farm as he felt the Council had no ethical attitude

to land acquisition for the M3 motorway. He said that his son, Nicholas, had a few

completion of his course in Warrenstown College and while he recognised the need for

improving the infrastructure, he was disappointed by the lack of consultation with

farmers in the planning of the proposed motorway which directly affected their farm. He

said the acquisition of 12 acres, or 12%, of the farm would make the remainder very

difficult to work as the triangular fields would make ploughing and harvesting time

consuming and expensive and would threaten its viability in an already turbulent time for

grain producers and sheep farmers. He said it had been their intention to seek planning

permission for a horse training centre to expand on their past success in thoroughbred

horse racing and training but the proposed motorway threatened this entreprenurial and

cultural expansion. He said he had dedicated his life to continuing the long family

tradition in farming but wondered if there would be land or a farm or environment to

protect with the motorway being planned to run diagonally across the farm. He concluded

by saying it saddened him that he might be forced to leave the land and seek other areas

The Inspector asked Mr. Keane to have the size of underpass of 5 by 5 metres taken into

account when Ms Joyce was examining Mr. McIntyre's suggestion about regrading the

practised in the engineering, chemical and medical device industries for over 30 years

and had experience of preparing EIAs in industry. He said he was also the secretary of

the Boyerstown -Ardbraccan N3 Navan By-pass Group and represented people from their

area who could not be present at the Hearing. He said that he would not read all of his

He said that their Group were convinced the route should be rejected and re-examined

since the selection process was flawed and he said they believed the MRAG had put

forward a very strong case showing the weakness of the selection process and they

believed their Section was not prepared any better than the Dunshaughlin to Navan

Section. He said they also supported the alternative route put forward by the MRAG as

this would reduce the costs, solve the Slane Bridge problem and also provide by-passes

He said that one of the reasons for the formation of the MRAG was the frustration in

trying to get information from the NRA, the Council and their Consulting Engineers and

said that as late as 17 September they were still getting the same treatment. He said that

in the Council's response of 17 September to his objection and their concerns about two

schools in the area, it stated that construction traffic would not be permitted on local

roads in the area but he said that the Brief on Noise and Vibration said that there would

be vehicular movements to and from the site that would use existing roads and he asked

He said that since making their objection, their neighbour Colin Andrew, a mining

geologist who had worked in the mining, exploration and environmental industries for

over 25 years, had raised serious geotechnical issue regarding the relationship between

the road and underground mining in the area and said that these had not been addressed

statement which addressed certain omissions that he considered were errors in planning

for the preferred route in the vicinity of Portanclogh and Ardbracccan townlands.

Mr. Andrews stated that planning a major route above an existing and expanding mining

operation seemed to him to be unsafe since the road would be a barrier to the ability of

the mining company to develop an unfettered surface access to construct safety egresses

and to install ventilation shafts which they knew were going in. He suggested that the

proximity of mine workings to the road site took no account of safety for mine workers

during surface blasting operations by blast vibrations causing roof collapses and said his

concern. He suggested that a better location for a preferred route west of Navan was at

Liscarton where geotechnically the mine workings were less economic and said that any

development to the south and west of Ardbraccan should be avoided. He suggested that a

more suitable route from a blasting perspective would be to over-lie the so-called

Whistlemount Channel across Liscarton where bedrock was at a significant depth under

alluvium and glacial till. He said there were no account of mitigation from fly-rock in the

EIS and said the fly-rock problem was the main reason why planning permission was

Mr. Pagan said the Boyerstown-Ardbraccan group's main concern was the noise issue and

he said that the standards chosen were inappropriate with noise levels going from 30 to

35 dB up to 65dB which was a eight-fold increase since noise doubled every 10dB. He

said the NRA claim of 68dB in paragraph 3.3.3 being best practice was patently untrue

and he referred to the US Federal Regulation calling for a rural noise standard of 57 dB

which was still a four fold increase. He said there was no noise mitigation allowed for in

their area and that as much of the road was above ground level, this would worsen the

noise situation. He said that it was interesting to note that some 800000 cubic metres of

fill would be imported for this section when it would make sense, as an Engineer himself,

if the road was lowered to mitigate the noise and reduce the fill imports. He said that

whatever steps were necessary to reduce the noise levels by walls or reducing the road

He said they supported previous presentations made by people to the Hearing and said

that they deserved the courtesy of their concerns being taken into consideration as they

were making a sacrifice for the common good in having the peacefulness of the area

altered. He said additional measures should be taken to allow their concerns to be met

and said that noise was their biggest concern and there were others like lighting in the

understood the need to improve the country's infrastructure and its potential to some

degree for the good of their community, but said they objected to the format chosen and

that roads were being put before railways and he mentioned how his brother living in St.

Albans 22 miles outside London could get in by train in 18 to 24 minutes, while it took

1.25 hours by car and he wondered if the M3 was doing the same thing for people.

Mr. Pagan concluded by saying that they objected to the route selected and the standards

used and said that they had also looked at other issues which were that migrating

whooper swans were frequently seen in the fields near to where the motorway would be

and these were not mentioned in the EIS. He said that his wife was an artist and they had

taken some photographs of them when they came there a couple of years ago. He said

that they see bats feeding around their house when the EIS said they were elsewhere and

that the badgers that raided their rubbish bin did not come from miles way, while the EIS

Mr. Sweetman asked him what time the whooper swans would be seen in the area and

when Mr. Pagan said it was around October or November, he asked if the time varied

from year to year. Mr. Pagan said it could vary but he did not know for certain as he

Frank Burke, Consulting Engineer, advised the Hearing that the objections for Plots 1096

and 2162 were withdrawn. The Inspector asked about the objections of the Bradys of

Navan a more pleasant place but they had concerns about certain elements of the scheme

as it impinged on their neighbourhood and in particular to the effects of the Roundabout

They said the location of this roundabout would bring traffic 30 metres closer to their

houses, would mean the removal of part of a mature grove of trees planted by Tara mines

30 years ago to screen them from the nearby mining operations and asked why was it

necessary to remove these. They said there was no reference to landscaping at this

roundabout area and its raised level would make it very obtrusive and wanted it moved

further away from their houses. They said this could be done easily and a move of 25

They also objected to the land acquisition for the creation of a new entrance to their estate

and said the existing 10 metre road there seemed wide enough. They were concerned the

the outflow from the attenuation pond would aggravate the regular flooding that affected

the houses at no. 15 to 24 and asked what assessment was made of the outfall ditch to

determine its capacity to take the extra flow as they doubted its capability of doing so.

He said that all of his objections still stood and that the level of disturbance and severance

was so severe that it would be difficult to continue farming during and after the road

construction. He objected to the way in which the route had been selected as the Council

had initially proposed keeping the Trim to Navan road on its own alignment and out of

his land but subsequently moved it to an off-alignment situation and into his land.

objected to the Council's proposal to locate an agricultural entrance onto the housing

estate road, which bounded their property, as shown in Figure 9.4, Sheet 4 in Vol.5B and

asked that An Bord would remove this entrance as it was wholly inappropriate to have it

Overbridge realignment and said the realigned road should be tied in to the existing road

They said their original objections, particularly no. 1(A) still stood and they objected to

having to share an underpass which would have serious implications for their dairy

enterprise and said that with a large area of land in their farm they were entitled to their

own underpass, as this would not then undermine the viability of their dairying operation.

He said that all of his original objections still stood and that he was not satisfied with the

Council's responses to them. He said he farmed jointly with Mark Corley ( See Plot 2103

above ) and that the Council's action in moving the Trim to Navan road off-line into their

land by its realignment caused considerable damage to his operations from the severe

severance of Mark Corley's property. They still considered the road should have stayed

This was submitted on Day 5 and outlined their concerns about the location of the turning

circle near their house which they wanted moved further from them; that the turning

circle centre was not adequately protected to prevent unauthorised parking on it and that

the road bed in front of their house need not have been included in the CPO as this would

devalue their house if they wished to sell it before the scheme was completed, since the

Mr. Hilliard's submission was received by an Bord Pleanala on 11 February 2003 in

which he expressed his annoyance that, having been at the Hearing on the opening days

and having left his phone number, that he was not contacted when the Navan to Kells

Section was being dealt with. An Bord Pleanala in acknowledging his letter pointed out

that this phone number had been rang on several occasions without being answered.

As is detailed in Section 8 of this Report on appearances for and on behalf of objectors, at

entry 112 in the EIS list it was noted that H.R. & R.M. Pagan, Simon Hilliard and Sean

representing each of these and that "they would stand in for each other". Mr. Pagan

attended on a few days towards the end of the Hearing and made a verbal submission on

Mr. Hilliard said he had not been given the information he had sought from the Council

about actual noise levels for station 25 and other information and that he thought the road

should be moved to be halfway between his house and Ardbraccan Glebe. He referred to

response to his submission to An Bord last year, and this indicated the landscaping

proposals along the motorway in the vicinity of his house which is located just over 100

metres from the road line. He said he had been advised by a horticulturalist that he would

require a 10 metre planting strip on his boundary to block the noise and the view of the

Note -- The predicted noise level in the EIS at station 25 in 2024 for a tolled road

Overbridge northwards towards the Toll Plaza as shown on the composite map handed in

by the Council on Day 28, as listed in Appendix 4 of this Report, and as also refered to in

The Council's responses to the objections to the Motorway Order are all contained in the

Folder marked "K" which contains the responses to Plots 2102 to 2384, which are all in

the Navan Bypass Section. The responses to the submissions made to the EIS are in

Folder C which includes the responses for submissions made in both the Clonee to

Dunshaughlin and Navan By-pass Sections, where they are referenced as 5000 to 5080

and classed as C-D for the Clonee to Dunshaughlin Section and N for the Navan Bypass

Section. These correspond, generally, to nos. 45 to 68 for the Navan Bypass Section, as

The format of almost all of the Council's responses to the various objectors/submissions

is similar to that given in the responses read by Ms Joyce to the Hearing as detailed in

Section 25.1 of this Report and as referred to above and, in general, set out on a point by

point basis the Council's responses to the various matters raised by the objector and

referred, where appropriate and suitably referenced, to details in the EIS which dealt with

the matters raised. The Council's responses, in general, also referred to issues that related

to accommodation works, boundary treatments, maintenance of services etc as matters to

be dealt with at detailed design stage by the Contractor, or as matters to be discussed with

the Council at a later stage in the event of the proposal being approved by An Bord.

A Folder of responses, "E" also relate to the Clonee to Dunshaughlin and Navan By-pass

objections/submissions. These are Supplementary responses and refer to the evidence

given and submissions, either verbal or written, made at the Hearing up to Day 12. Folder

E refers to Plots 257, 294, 320, 326, 352/353, 470, 2103, 2183, 2324, submission 5045

and to Leshamstown Residents, those in bold type being in the Navan Bypass Section and

relates to the evidence and submissions at the Hearing made between Days 13 and 25.

There is also a separate File, "M" which contains the Council's responese to the

Folder C was handed in on Day 10, Folder K and File M were handed in on Day 16 and

Having regard to the format of these responses being generally similar to that given

previously in Section 25 of this Report, I do not consider it necessary to summarise the

objections/submissions, and in the Council's responses thereto, were all taken into

account when reaching my conclusions, as set out in Sections 149 and 150 of this Report.

Mr. Evans said he graduated in Civil Engineering from UCG in 1989 and had postgraduate

protection and an Associate director of Arup Consulting Engineers. He said was the

Project Engineer for the Navan to Kells and Kells to North of Kells Sections of the M3

existing N3 in Ardbraccan townland at the end of the Navan By-pass section and ran in a

north-westerly direction off-line of the existing N3 for its entire length, crossed 3 County

roads, the R 164 Athboy road and ended with a Twin roundabout junction on the N 52

Mullingar road north of Calliaghstown townland and said a Toll Plaza was to be provided

at Grange townland. He said the N52 Kells By-pass provided a new road to the west of

Kells and this would commence at the northern roundabout of the Twin roundabouts on

the N 52 and would run northwards to cross the R 163 Oldcastle road and the existing N3

between Kells and the Commons of Lloyd, the ran generally northeastwards to cross the

R 164 Moynalty road and rejoined the N52 Ardee road to the north of Maudlin bridge.

He said that an outline of the proposed scheme was given in Figure 1.0 in Vol.6A and the

scheme details were in Vol.6B and that the design speed for the motorway section was

120 km/hour while the N52 Kells By-pass was designed as a reduced single carriageway

road and a design speed of 100 km/hour and to meet the standards in the NRA DMRB

Vol.6 TD 9 for both roads. Mr.Evans then gave a detailed description of the route of the

proposed motorway, which is generally set out in Section 12 of this Report and is not

Underbridge and ran parallel to the Coolfore Road with central median widening for sight

distance through the first horizontal curve, and said that the Northern Toll Plaza, located

at chn.61600 in Grange townland, would be accessed from the Coolfore Road and would

be lighted for road safety reasons. He said the motorway crossed the former Navan to

Kells Railway line at chn.65600 where a significant badger sett was avoided to the north

and that thecroute climbed gently towards Kilmainham.. He said that an Interchange, the

carriageway road linking it to the existing N3 east of Kells and said the location of the

Interchange and Link road had been selected to minimise the impact on farm severance

and locally important ecological features. He said the motorway crossed the former

Navan to Kells railway line again beyond the Kells Si outh Interchange in Gardenrath

demolishing Newman's Farm and to minimise the impact on Rockfield Housing Estate

and Beech Lawn particularly with the motorway being in a deep cutting to reduce the

environmental impact on them. He said the motorway continued in cutting under the

Athboy road, R 164, with central median widening for sight disctance being provided

and, still in cutting, passed to the south of Tiermurrin Wood which would act as a natural

environmental impact. He said the motorway swung northwards to where it crossed the

described the termination point on the N52 Mullingar Road as being a set of twin

carriageway standard and said the twin roundabouts were being used, instead of a single

large diameter roundabout, to reduce circulatory speeds which would improve safety and

He said that from the twin roundabouts the Kells to North of Kells Section continued

eastwards, and this would be described later, and that the N52 Kells By-pass also

commenced and headed northwards to provide a western By-pass of Kells. He said the

alignment of the by-pass was constrained by ribbon development on the northern and

southern sides of Kells and by environmental considerations and followed a curved

between Mabe's Bridge and houses at Archdeaconry Glebe. He said the by-pass was a 7

metre wide single carriageway road with 0.5 metre hard strips and 2.5 metres grass

verges giving an overall width of 13 metres excluding sideslopes with climbing lanes

where required. He said the proposed By-pass cross-section was shown in Figure 5.4 in

around Newrath House to cross the former Kells to Virginia Railway at chn.470 and

crossed under the R163 at chn.1340 in a 6 metre deep cutting between a Nursing Home

to the east and a private house to the west, the depth being chosen to minimise the

environmental impact on the Nursing Home. He said the By-pass crossed the existing N3,

constructed, this being lighted for road safety reasons, and the By-pass would continue

through a 6 metre cutting towards the R164 Moynalty road where a Roundabout would

be provided at its crossing at chn.2602 and that this would also be lighted. He said that

from this roundabout the By-pass would cross the River Kells Blackwater at chn.2860 at

a point that maximised the distances from Mabe's Bridge, a ringfort to the north and

Roundabout would be provided, this being some distance to the north of Maudlin Bridge.

He said the Scheme required the realignment or crossing of a number of National,

Regional and County Roads and that these were designed to the standards in the NRA

He said that there would be 8 Road Overbridges ( Phoenixtown, Ballybeg, Cookstown

and Athboy Roads, Kells South Interchange, Oldcastle Road on N52 Bypass and Farm

Access Bridges at Grange and Nugentstown) and 3 road Underbridges ( Underpasses at

Nugentstown and Newrath Little and River Kells Blackwater) provided on the scheme.

He said the cross-sectional details for the motorway had been given by Mr. Guthrie ( See

Section 17.1 at page 69 in this Report ) and that for the N 52 Kells By-pass, which he had

given already, was chosen to provide Level of Service D in the design year, with the N3

link road being a reduced single carriageway of 7 metre width and two 3 metre verges for

an 11 metre overall width excluding side slopes. He said the Slip roads or ramps at the

carriageway with an 0.5 metree offside hard strip and a 1.5 metre nearside hard strip with

a 3 metre verge outside the hard strips. He said the Regional and County roads were

width and consisted of a 7 metre carriageway and two 2 metres verges for an overall

carriageway and two 2 metre verges for an overall width of 10 metres excluding side

slopes for County Roads and he said that earthwork slopes had been designed with 1:2

grades. He said the Northern toll Plaza would have 6 No. Toll Booths, a Toll Plaza

Building, a tunnel to provide access to the booths, car parking and an access road and it

excavated and some 665450 cubic metres of filling would be required over the Section

and that allowing for unsuitable material, some 327980 cubic metres of material would

have to be imported to the site with some 506100 cubic metres to be disposed of off-site.

He said that the locations of borrow pits and disposal sites was a commercial decision for

the Contractor to make and that all disposal and borrow pits would be in compliance with

He said the motorway crossed numerous drainage ditches and small stream tributaries if

influenced the drainage pattern of the road catchment with the majority of the site used as

farmland and gently undulated from 50m to 80m OD. He said the agricultural nature of

the land led to the drainage ditches being along field boundaries and that the flow was

generally from southwest towards the northeast with ultimate discharge into the River

Kells Blackwater. He said that 6 of the streams had been part of the Boyne Catchment

Drainage scheme carried out by the OPW in the 1980s and were all tributaries of the

Kells Blackwater and that the extensive records from the OPW office in Trim had been

used to study the watercourses and to set the culvert levels for the road crossing points,

with a visual and level survey undertaken to supplement that information. He said the

principle objectives for the catchments crossed by the motorway for this Section could be

*A drainage system that collected surface water run-off from the proposed road system

*Limiting the discharge to outfalls to greenfield run-off rates particularly where there was

He said the design principles for the preliminary motorway drainage included the

provision of adequate surface drainage to avoid surface flooding on the motorway;

adequate sub-surface drainage to properly drain the pavement sub-surface layers and the

identification of suitable road run-off outfall locations and the attenuation of run-off to

remove pollutants from run-off and the attenuation of run-off to prevent pollutant spills

from reaching natural waterways. Mr. Evans said that culvert crossings of streams and

rivers would use box and piped culverts and follow the OPW recommendation of 900

mm as the minimum size to minimise the risk of obstruction and that the culverts were

designed for a 100 year flood return period. He said that fish friendly principles were

established in consultation with the ERFB and said these were discussed in Section 7.5.2

in Vol.6A of the EIS. He said watercourse diversions were being avoided except where

the motorway footprint covered a significant length of the watercourse or the angle of the

crossing required a very long culvert. He said the realigned, regraded channels would be

sized to accommodate 100 year floods and the channels would be lined with natural

Mr. Evans said the drainage had been designed to provide for surface water and subgrade

provided by a system of filter drains constructed adjacent to the carriageway, where

possible, with kerbs and gullies used to control run-off from the paved areas where the

new road was on embankments 1.5 metres high or above this. He said that the surface

water run-off and sub-surface drainage wopuld discharge to outfalls as shown in Vol.6B

and that petrol/ oil interceptors would be provided at each outfall. He said that the

provision of attenuation storage provided an opportunity for effluent quality control by

facilitating the settlement of coarse silts and the incorporation of oil/grit interceptors at

each outfall location, and that trials had shown the combination off filter drains and

ponds achieved a high reduction in sediments and particulate pollution. He said that open

trapezoidal shaped cut-off drains or interceptor ditches would be provided at the top of

cutting slopes where the land sloped towards the cutting and at the bottom of the

embankment slopes where the land sloped towards the embankment and that in locations

where filter drains were not appropriate, such as at structures and interchanges and,

positive drainage using kerbs and gully drainage would then be provided. He said that a

continuous drainage channel would be used for the median drainage and could be used as

an alternative to the kerb and channel system in the verge. A list of the outfall locations

and preliminary run-off rsates are given in Tables 2.2.10.3. -1A and 1B in his Brief of

Mr. Evans said that the motorway drainage would be attenuated in attenuation ponds for

an equivalent inflow for a 1 in 10 year storm, with the discharge rate restricted to

greenfield run-off with an allowable rate of 5 litres/second being assumed. He said

storagc would be required to restrict the outfall disharges to those prior to the M3 being

constructed and the details of these storage ponds are given in Table 2.2.10.4.1 in his

Brief of Evidence. He said storage was also provided on the Newrath Stream which

would be crossed by the N52 Kells By-pass and as this stream passed through residential

areas in Kells, storage would be attenuated for a 100 year return period. He said the

considered this channel had adequate capacity at present for a 100 year flood from its

source to the existing N3 and said that all flows to be discharged from the link road to it

would be attenuated for a 10 year return period and that this section of the stream did not

require downstream improvement works. He said that the section of the stream below the

existing N3 was restricted in capacity with a history of flooding and, as it was a

developed area, they proposed to build a new culvert to take the increased flows from the

new road and that this culvert would run from west of the existing N3 to beyond the

developed area, with the remainder of the watercourse upgraded for a 100 year flood. He

said the new culvert was to be constructed for flows in excess of the capacity of the

existing channel, while maintaining existing normal flows in the stream via an overflow,

and that both the existing watercourse and the new culvert would discharge to the

upgraded channel downstream of the existing houses. He said that at the proposed

stream from the Kells Town Council Reservoir on the Commons of Lloyd and that the

existing cuverts did not have sufficient capacity under existing conditions. He said it was

intended to upgrade all the existing culverts to cater for catchment flow and the road

discharge and said the existing channel had adequate capacity for the 100 year flood.

Mr.Evans then outlined the program of Public Consultation which had commenced early

in the study period and continued throuighout it to identify and address the views of the

public, which he said, included meetings with interested parties and the public, the

display of possible route options at different centres and the distribution of a brochure

Associations and Interest Groups as well as from individuals and businesses. all of which

were considered in the Route Selection process. He said the first Public Consultation

drawings showing possible route corridors and known constraints on display. He said the

May 2000 and in the Headfort Arms Hotel, Kells on 24 & 25 May 2000 and that this

Dunshaughlin and Kells, namely, Dunshaughlin to Navan, Navan By-pass and Navan to

Kells. He said that at these meetings the emerging preferred routes were presented, the

likely impacts identified, the public views and reactions were obtained and queries were

responded to in the context of the scheme development at that time. He said the meetings

had been advertised in local papers, on local radio and at Parish Churches, with leaflets

also distributed and that about 1600 people attended the two consultation meetings. He

said that after the second Public Consultation the drawings were put on display in the

County Library for a further 4 weeks and during this period Council's Design Team took

Mr. Evans then outlined the Route Selection procedure and said that 6 possible route

alignment options had been identified for the Navan to Kells Section and 2 further routes

giving links to the N52 Kells to Mullingar Road, and he gave a brief description of each

of these options and said these were shown in Figure 4.4 in Vol.2 of the EIS. He said

thatafter the Public Consultation these were developed into the route Options shown in

Figure 4.14 in Vol.2 of the EIS. He said that Route 3, the Green route, was selected as the

preferred option for the reasons which he outlined and concluded from these that it was

the prefered route for the Navan to Kells Section on a balance of environmental,

Note -- The comparison of possible options, the analysis to identify a preferred route and

the reasons for selecting the Route 3 (Green) are also given in Sections 4.2.4, 4.3.5 and

4.4.5 at pages 37-40, 44 to 45 and 51 in Vol.2 of the EIS and are not repeated in this

Mr. Evans said that following from the Public Consultation a number of design changes

were made to the EPR which mainly involved the movement of the alignment to reduce

Rockfield Hiusing Estate in Kells and the Coolfore road area, an adjustment the the Kells

Nugentstown and Grange to reduce severance. The full details are given at Section 1.2 on

consideration at all stages of the project, with a Constraints Report which identified

environmental sites on the route corridor being produced prior to the Route Selection

process. He said that the EIS on the likely impacts on the environment had been prepared

and that this EIS contained a description of the proposal, alternatives examined, the

receiving environment, as well as assessing the principle beneficial and adverse

environmental effects that would arise from the construction and operation of the

Scheme. He said it gave details of the measures proposed to mitigate likely significant

adverse impacts as well as the beneficial environmental consequences and he then

outlined the principal findings on the various impacts. These are dealt with in more detail

in the Evidence presented by the other witnesses for the Council and reported on in the

He described the main findings of the geotechnical assessment of the Soils, Geology and

Hydrogeology aspects of the Scheme which Arup's had undertaken and said that the

rockheads being shallow and typically less than 10 metres in depth and that highly

weathered and potentially Karstic bedrock was encountered around the Kells area. He

said soil conditions were variable in the southern section of the route being mainly clat

and silt with interbedded granular deposits while in the northern section sands and

gravels predominated and alluvium could be found in the river flood plains. He said the

investigations so far indicated some soft deposits which would have to be replaced, that

glacial tills would be in the marginal range for embankment fill and that there would be a

He said that mitigation measures would include pre- and post-construction assessment of

wells considered at risk and well deepening would be used to mitigate any loss of yields;

that maximum use of natural resources would be used in the design and construction

methods employed to mimimise the importation of material; that excavated unsuitable

material would be used for landscaping areas to minimise off-site disposal and that there

Mr. Evans then referred to the Environmental Team's asssessment of the impact of the

Scheme on Climates, both macro and micro climate and said that since the major factors

in determining climate were solar radiation, topography and the ratio of landmass to

ocean, there would be no impact by the Scheme on the macro-climate of the area. He said

there would be a slight changes in the micro-climate of shelter, light and temperature

from the new structures in the road but that there were no particularly sensitive life forms

Mr. Evans said the the Environmental Team also assessed the Non-Agricutural Properties

as Material Assets and found that two occupied houses and one unoccupied house would

be acquired while three houses would have part of their holdings affected by acquisition

and that four commercial properties would have land acquired from them. He said the the

necessary accommodation works would be carried out and compensation would be paid

in mitigation and said that landscaping measures as described in the EIS would be put in

He said that if the Tolling proposal did not proceed the main difference in the scheme

would be an alteration in traffic flows with a greater number of vehicles being attracted to

the new motorway than if tolling was in place. He said that, while air quality and noise

impacts were dependant largely on traffic flows, the flow changes in the Navan to Kells

Section were not sufficient to significantly alter the impacts identified for the Tolled

Mr. Evans said that there were 12 Wayleaves to be Acquired and 12 Public Rights of

Way and 3 Private Rights of Way to be Extinguished and the details were attached to his

Brief of Evidence. ( These are included in the Lists set out in Appendices 5, 6 and 7

attached to this Report ) He confirmed that it was necessary to extinguish all those rights

of way listed for the purposes of the Motorway Scheme. He said they had carried out a

Planning search in November 2001 and at that date there were 5 Planning Permissions

that would be impacted by the Scheme and the details of these were attached to his Brief

of Evidence ( These are included in Appendix 8 attached to this Report). He said that the

landtake required for the Navan to Kells Section was some 136 hectares of which some

71 hectares were required for the actual Motorway with the balance of 65 hectares for

investigations had indicated the land was suitable for road construction and he confirmed

that the acquisition of all of this land was necessary for the M3 scheme. Details of the

reasons for acquiring each plot identified in the Schedules were given in Appendix D in

Mr. Evans then dealt with the Kells to North of Kells Section and said this commenced

from the southern of the Twin Roundabouts to the south of Kells and ran generally in a

north western direction and was off-line to the existing N3 for its entire length, crossed

the R 163 Oldcastle Road and four County roads to terminate in Derver townland, where

it tied back into the existing N3 at the Meath/Cavan boundary. He said it consisted of :-

He said an outline of the proposed Scheme was shown on Figure 1.0 in Vol.7A of the

EIS. He said that a wide single carriageway, as recommended in the National Roads

Needs Study, had been adopted with the predicted traffic flow in 2024 being 14600

AADT and that this was above the Level of Service D for this type of road but said that

the Roads Needs Study had said it was acceptable for this section of the N3 to operate at

a Level of Service D "based on overall route performance". He said the cross-section was

shown in Figure 4.1 in Vol.7B of the EIS and that the design speed of 100 Kms/hour had

been adopted for this Section in accordance with the principles set out in the NRA

proposed road, which is generally set out in Section 12 of this Report and is not being

He said the road started at the southern Roundabout of the Twin Roundabouts on the

M3/N3/N52 junction in Calliaghstown townland and swung westwards and crossed the

Boolies Road, L 68353-0, where it was in a 4 metre deep cutting with an at grade

junction for access from the northern end of the Boolies road being provided and said no

access was being given to the severed southern side of the Boolies Road. He said the road

contiued westwards and then turned northwestwards to cross the R 163 Oldcastle road at

through undulating topography, including crossing an esker, and crossed over the

Castlekeeran road at a gap in residential development on that road, with the Castlekeeran

Road taken under the mainline N3 there. He said that the road ran on an embankment

and an adjacent house with the former National School being demolished at that crossing

and the Woodpole road taken under the mainline N3. He said that the Balgree Road,

which ran parallel to the proposed N3, would be realigned through Woodploe Crossroads.

He said that the road crossed the former Kells to Virginia Railway line just after entering

Woodpole townland where it was also immediately adjacent to Woodpole Bridge which

carried an access road over the railway line and that the alignment continued towards the

River Kells Blackwater on a steadily falling grade, avoiding Woodpole fox covert,

Blackwater House and a pond and said that it crossed the river on an embankment almost

5 metres in height. He said that on the northern bank of the river the alignment entered a

cutting of up to 4 metres in depth and curved to the left to the Roundabout at Derver from

which there were connections to tie-in the existing N3 at the Meath/Cavan boundary,

which facilitated traffic on the R163 using the proposed N3 and the other at Derver which

facilitated traffic from Derver Lane and the existing N3 using the proposed N3. He said

there would be a T-junction to link the northern severed section of the Boolies road to

the proposed N3 while the southern severed section would continue to be served by its

link to the N52, as there would no link from the southern side to the proposed N3. He

said that the scheme would require the realignment of a number of National, Regional

and County Roads where the proposed N3 crossed them and that these had been designed

R163 Oldcastle Road realignment for 350 metres to facilitate the construction of

Balgree Road realignment for 280 metres to facilitate the relocation of L 6829-0

Existing N3 Virginia Road realignment for 400 metres to facilitate the connection

Mr. Evans said that there would be 5 Road Underbridges ( Castlekeeran & Woodpole

Roads and Farm Underpasses at Boolies, Pottlebane and Derver) and the River Kells

Backwater Bridge on this Section as well as a number of culverts of various sizes and

cross-sections. He said the proposed N3 National Primary wide single carriageway was

shown in Figure 1 in Vol.7B of the EIS and had a cross-section, compling with the NRA

DMRB type WS 2, of two 5 metre lanes, two 2.5 metre hard shoulders and two 3 metre

verges for an overall width of 21 metres excluding side slopes. He said the Regional and

with a reduced verge width and consisted of a 6 metre carriageway and two 3 metres

verges for an overall width of 12 metres excluding side slopes for the Regional Roads

and varying carriageway widths of 4 to 6 metres and two 1 metre verges for an overall

excavated and some 614800 cubic metres of filling would be required over the Section

and that allowing for unsuitable material, some 459750 cubic metres of material would

have to be imported to the site with some 232580 cubic metres to be disposed of off-site.

He said that the locations of borrow pits and disposal sites was a commercial decision for

the Contractor to make and that all disposal and borrow pits would be in compliance with

He said the motorway crossed numerous drainage ditches and small stream tributaries if

influenced the drainage pattern of the road catchment with the majority of the site used as

farmland and gently undulated from 80m to 110m OD. He said the agricultural nature of

the land led to the drainage ditches being along field boundaries and that the flow was

generally from southwest towards the northeast with ultimate discharge into the River

Kells Blackwater. He said that two of the streams had been part of the Boyne Catchment

Drainage scheme carried out by the OPW in the 1980s and were all tributaries of the

Kells Blackwater and that the extensive records from the OPW office in Trim had been

used to study the watercourses and to set the culvert levels for the road crossing points,

He then described the principle objectives for the catchments crossed by the road for this

Section, the design principles for the preliminary mainline road drainage, the cross

drainage and mainline road drainage principles and attenuation methods proposed which

are the same as those he quoted for the Navan to Kells Section and are not repeated here.

Details of the preliminary run-off rates for the proposed N3 are given in Table 2.2.10.3.1,

and details of preliminary attenuation pond sizes are given in Table 2.2.10.4.1 in his Brief

of Evidence. He said that no downstream improvement works were required for this

Section but that a new outfall would be constructed to carry surface water run-off from

the realigned Woodpole Road and sections of the local roads adjacent to Woodpole Cross

described for the Navan to Kells Section and which also was followed for this Section..

He said the first Public Consultation Meeting was held in the Community Hall, Carnaross

on 6 & 7 September 2000 with drawings showing possible route corridors and known

constraints on display and Engineers from the design team in attendance to answered

questions and said that, prior to the Public Consultation a presentation on the route

options was given to the Councillors of the Kells Area Committee. He said the second

Public Consultation Meeting was also held in the Community Hall, Carnaross on 15 & 16

May 2001. He said that at these meetings the emerging preferred routes were presented,

the likely impacts identified, the public views and reactions were obtained and queries

were responded to in the context of the scheme development at that time. He said the

meetings had been advertised in local papers, on local radio and at Parish Churches, with

leaflets also distributed and that about 500 people attended the two consultation meetings.

He said that after the second Public Consultation the drawings were put on display in the

County Library for a further 4 weeks and during this period Council's Design Team took

Mr. Evans then outlined the Route Selection procedure and said that 5 possible route

alignment options had been identified for the Kells to North of Kells Section further and

he gave a brief description of each of these options and said these were shown in Figure

4.5 in Vol.2 of the EIS. He said that after the Public Consultation these were developed

into the route Options shown in Figure 4.15 in Vol.2 of the EIS. He said that Route E, the

Pink route, was selected as the preferred option for the reasons which he outlined. He

said that this Section was a single carriageway road and safety was particularly important

and that route E was chosen as the safest route and had the least impacts on residences

and heritage and he concluded that it was the preferred route for the Navan to Kells

Note -- The comparison of possible options, the analysis to identify a preferred route and

the reasons for selecting the Route E (Pink) are also given in Sections 4.2.5, 4.3.6 and

4.4.6 at pages 41-42, 45 to 46 and 51-52 in Vol.2 of the EIS and are not repeated in this

Mr. Evans said that following from the Public Consultation a number of design changes

Castlekeeran and the Woodpole Road to reduce community severance and an access road

and underpass at the Boolies Road to allow continued access from the existing Boolies