Janssen Sciences Ireland UC · Janssen Sciences Ireland UC BioCork 2 EIAR IE0311854-22-RP-0004,...

Volume 1 - Main Report

Janssen Sciences Ireland UCProposed Expansion of the Existing Biomedicines Facility at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork (BioCork2)

Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) June 2017

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:08

BioCork2 Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR)

Issue date: June 2017

Janssen Sciences Ireland UC Proposed Expansion to the Existing Biomedicines Facility at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork (BioCork 2) IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue: A

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:08

Formal Issue

Document Sign Off

BioCork2 Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) Proposed Expansion to the Existing Biomedicines Facility at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork (BioCork 2) Janssen Sciences Ireland UC BioCork 2 IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A

File No: IE0311854.22.080

CURRENT ISSUE

Issue No: A Date: 28/06/17 Reason for issue: For Planning Application

Sign Off Originator Checker Reviewer Approver Customer Approval (if required)

Print Name Kayleen Curtin Tony McGrath Tony McGrath

Signature Authorised Electronically

Date 28/06/17 28/06/17 28/06/17

PREVIOUS ISSUES

Issue No

Date Originator Checker Reviewer Approver Customer Reason for issue

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:08

Janssen Sciences Ireland UC BioCork 2 EIAR

IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

i

Contents

1 Introduction 1-1

1.1 Overview – Janssen Sciences Ireland UC 1-1

1.2 Need for the Project 1-1

1.3 Site Location development 1-2

1.4 Project Overview 1-3

1.5 Governing Legislation 1-4

1.6 EIAR Methodology 1-10

1.7 Screening and Scoping of the EIAR 1-15

1.8 Consultation 1-17

2 Description of the Proposed Development 2-1

2.1 Existing Land Use & Activities 2-1

2.2 Project Overview 2-2

2.3 Products Overview 2-5

2.4 Description of the Production Process 2-5

2.5 Description of the Proposed Buildings 2-8

2.6 Utilities 2-14

2.7 Site Infrastructure 2-16

2.8 Sustainability 2-18

2.9 Construction Works 2-19

2.10 Decommissioning 2-22

3 Alternatives Considered 3-1

3.1 Introduction 3-1

3.2 Why Build this Facility? 3-1

3.3 Selection of the Preferred Site/Location for the Development 3-1

3.4 Selection of Preferred Manufacturing Process 3-2

3.5 Selection of Preferred Arrangement of the Proposed Buildings 3-3

4 Population and Human Health 4-1


4.2 Characteristic of the Existing and Proposed Development 4-2

4.3 Receiving Environment 4-3

4.4 Potential Impacts 4-8

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:08


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

ii

4.5 Mitigation Measures 4-10

4.6 Residual Impacts 4-11

5 Landscape and Visual 5-1


5.2 Assessment Methodology 5-1

5.3 Characteristics of the Proposed Development 5-3


5.5 Landscape Character, Values and Significance 5-6

5.6 Designated Scenic Routes 5-7

5.7 Other Designations 5-8

5.8 Tourism, Recreation and Amenity 5-9

5.9 Landscape Planning Context 5-10

5.10 Visual Context 5-10




6 Traffic and Transportation 6-1




6.4 Existing Environment 6-3



6.7 Mobility Management Plan (Updated) 6-82


7 Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology 7-1







7.7 Residual Impact 7-18

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:08


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

iii

8 Biodiversity 8-1








9 Noise and Vibration 9-1








10 Water and Wastewater 10-1


10.2 Existing Surface Water Environment and Natural Water Bodies 10-1

10.3 Existing Environment – Water and Wastewater 10-2

10.4 Potential Impacts - Wastewater 10-3

10.5 Mitigation Measures – Wastewater 10-3

10.6 Existing Environment - Storm Water Run-Off 10-6

10.7 Potential Impacts - Storm Water Run-Off 10-8

10.8 Mitigation Measures - Storm Water Run-Off 10-10


10.10 Flood Risk 10-11

10.11 Firewater Run Off 10-14

11 Air Quality and Climate 11-1





For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:08


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

iv




12 Waste Management 12-1





13 Material Assets 13-1







14 Archaeology, Architecture and Cultural Heritage 14-1







15 Interaction and Cumulative Impacts 15-1







Appendix A

Landscape and Visual – Additional Information

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:08


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

v

Appendix A.1

Landscape Planning Context

Appendix A.2

Landscape Masterplan (Drawing 401)

Appendix B

Traffic and Transportation – Additional Information

Appendix B.1

2016 Junction Traffic Volumes

Appendix B.2

BioCork2 Construction Manpower, Site Population, Parking and Vehicle Traffic Profile Projections

Appendix B.3

ARCADY and PICADY Junction Capacity Analysis

Appendix B.4

RSA Collisions Database Outputs

Appendix C

Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology - Additional Information

Appendix C.1

Details of 1997 and 2005 Site Investigations

Appendix C.2

Location of IGSL Site investigation Works Dec ’16 / Feb ‘17

Appendix C.3

Nearby Groundwater Abstraction Wells

Appendix D

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:08


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

vi

Biodiversity – Additional Information

Appendix D.1

Extent of Desktop Study

Appendix D.2

Ecological Evaluation of Sites (after Nairn & Fossitt 2004)

Appendix D.3

Impact Assessment Criteria (EPA 2003, as amended 2015)

Appendix D.4

Details of Survey Schedule & Prevailing Weather Conditions

Appendix D.5

Summary Information regarding Designated Conservation Sites in Hinterland

Appendix D.6

Desktop Study and Overview of Previous Studies On Site

Appendix D.7

Bird Species Survey and Non Volant Mammal Survey

Appendix D.8

Habitat Survey Details

Appendix D.9

Summary of Potential Construction Phase Impacts on Designated Conservation Sites

Appendix D.10

Extract from Landscape Design Report BioCork2 -

Section 5 Suggested Species (Ref: 6366 RP02 BSM June 2017)

Appendix D.11

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

vii

Bibliography

Appendix E

Noise and Vibration – Additional Information

Appendix E.1

2017 Noise Survey Monitoring Notes

Appendix E.2

Indicative Construction Phase Sequencing and Associated Plant

Appendix E.3

Operational Noise Modelling report (PM reference IE0311854-22-RP-006)

Appendix F

Air Quality and Climate - Additional Information

Appendix F.1

Air Quality Limit Standards and Ambient Air Quality Data

Appendix F.2

Air Dispersion Modelling Report (PM Group Report No. IE0311854-22-RP-0005)

Appendix G

Archaeology, Architecture and Cultural Heritage - Additional Information

Appendix G.1

Bibliography

Appendix H

DoHPC&LG EIA Circular Letter May 2017 – Checklist

EIAR Volume 2 Photomontage Views

EIAR Volume 3 Transport Assessment Report

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

viii

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Neighbouring Seveso Sites and Land Use Planning (LUP)

Table 1.2 Matrix to advice on suitable development for LUP Zones

Table 1.3 Study Team for EIA

Table 1.4 EIA Directive Topics and relevant chapters

Table 1.5 Impact Assessment Criteria

Table 2.1 Project Milestones

Table 5.1 Significance of Effects Terminology

Table 5.2 Nature of Impacts

Table 5.3 Duration of Impacts

Table 6.1 EPA EIA Guidelines Significance of Impacts

Table 6.2 EPA EIA Guidelines Duration of Impacts

Table 6.3 2016 Two-Way Peak Hour Link Traffic Volumes

Table 6.4 TII November 2016 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes

Table 6.5 TII N28 2016 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes

Table 6.6 TII N40 2016 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes

Table 6.7 Estimated 2016 AADT Volumes

Table 6.8 November 2016 Half-Hourly Total Junction Traffic Volumes

Table 6.9 November 2016 N28 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes

Table 6.10 November 2016 N28 Link Traffic Volumes to Ringaskiddy Area

Table 6.11 November 2016 N28 Link Traffic Volumes from Ringaskiddy Area

Table 6.12 November 2016 N28 Total Junction Traffic Volumes (Vehicles)

Table 6.13 November 2016 AM Junction Traffic Queue Lengths

Table 6.14 November 2016 PM Junction Traffic Queue Lengths

Table 6.15 N28 Eastbound AM Peak Journey Times

Table 6.16 N28 Westbound AM Peak Journey Times

Table 6.17 N28 Eastbound PM Peak Journey Times

Table 6.18 N28 Westbound PM Peak Journey Times

Table 6.19 Comparison of BioCork2 Base Year Journey Times with Cork County Council’s M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project EIS Base Year Journey Times (Reference: Cork County Council M28 EIS May 2017 Tables 5.10, 5.11, 5.12 and 5.13)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

ix

Table 6.20 BioCork2 Base Year Journey Times’ Date (Wednesday 7th Dec 2016) – TII Data

Table 6.21 Summary of 2016 N28/L2492 Shanbally Roundabout Junction Capacity Analysis (Recorded Observed Base Year Model and Arcady Base Year Model)

Table 6.22 Summary of Local R613 Collisions Data

Table 6.23 Summary of Local N28 Collisions Data

Table 6.24 Summary of Local R611 Collisions Data

Table 6.25 R613 Road Safety Problems/Observations

Table 6.26 N28 Road Safety Problems/Observations

Table 6.27 R611 Road Safety Problems/Observations

Table 6.28 Predicted 2026 to 2023 Ringaskiddy Area Traffic Growth

Table 6.29 Predicted N28 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Table 6.30 Predicted N28 Link Traffic Volumes to Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Table 6.31 Predicted N28 Link Traffic Volumes from Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Table 6.32 Predicted N28 Total Junction Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Table 6.33 R613 Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Table 6.34 Predicted N28 2018 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes with TII High Growth




Table 6.38 Estimated AADT Volumes without BioCork2

Table 6.39 Summary of 2018 (November 2016+TII High Growth) Junction Capacity Analysis without BioCork2

Table 6.40 Summary of 2023 (November 2016+TII High Growth+GE) Junction Capacity Analysis without BioCork2

Table 6.41 Predicted N28 Peak Journey Times without BioCork2

Table 6.42 Comparison of Predicted BioCork2 2023 Operational Baseline with Cork County Council M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project EIS 2035 Baseline Highest Traffic Volumes (Reference: Cork County Council M28 EIS Table 5.14 and Table 5.15)

Table 6.43 Peak Construction Staff Traffic Volumes During Peak CSA

Table 6.44 Peak Construction Staff Traffic Volumes During Peak Mechanical/E&I/HVAC (Overall Peak)

Table 6.45 Peak Daily Construction Delivery and Heavy Vehicle Traffic Volumes

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

x

Table 6.46 Predicted N28 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) with BioCork2 Peak Construction

Table 6.47 Predicted N28 Link Traffic Volumes to Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) with BioCork2 Peak Construction

Table 6.48 Predicted N28 Link Traffic Volumes from Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) with BioCork2 Peak Construction

Table 6.49 Predicted N28 Total Junction Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) with BioCork2 Peak Construction

Table 6.50 Predicted Daily Traffic Volumes with BioCork2 Peak Construction

Table 6.51 Summary of 2018 Junction Capacity Analysis with BioCork2 Peak Construction 06:30 to 07:30 @ 15 Minutes Intervals

Table 6.52 Predicted N28 2018 AM Peak Journey Times with BioCork2 Peak Construction

Table 6.53 Existing and Proposed Janssen Sciences Operational Staff

Table 6.54 Predicted BioCork2 Operational Weekday Staff Vehicle Trips

Table 6.55 Predicted 2023 N28 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) with BioCork2

Table 6.56 Predicted 2023 N28 Link Traffic Volumes to Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) with BioCork2

Table 6.57 Predicted N28 2023 Link Traffic Volumes from Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) with BioCork2

Table 6.58 Predicted N28 2023 Total Junction Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) with BioCork2

Table 6.59 Predicted 2023 R613 Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) with BioCork2

Table 6.60 Predicted 2023 Daily Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) with BioCork2

Table 6.61 Summary of 2023 Junction Capacity Analysis with BioCork2

Table 6.62 Predicted 2023 N28 Peak Journey Times (Seconds)

Table 6.63 Proposed BioCork2 Parking and Development Plan Parking Standards

Table 6.64 BioCork2 Overall Peak Construction Staff Vehicles (September 2018) Table 6.65 Predicted 2018 N28 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With

BioCork2 Peak Construction Additional Mitigation Table 6.66 Predicted 2018 N28 Link Traffic Volumes to Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles)

With BioCork2 Peak Construction Additional Mitigation Table 6.67 Predicted 2018 N28 Link Traffic Volumes from Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles)

With BioCork2 Peak Construction Additional Mitigation Table 6.68 Summary of 2018 Junction Capacity Analysis With BioCork2 Peak

Construction With Additional Mitigation - 06:00 to 07:00 Morning Peak Generation Hour

Table 6.69 Summary of 2018 Junction Capacity Analysis With BioCork2 Peak Construction With Additional Mitigation - 15:00 to 16:00 Afternoon/Evening Peak Generation Hour

Table 6.70 Indaver Peak N28 Construction Vehicles (2019 3rd Quarter) With Eight Weeks of Night Working During BioCork2 Construction Traffic Generation Hours

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xi

Table 6.71 Peak Construction Staff Vehicles During BioCork2 Construction Staff Traffic Generation Hours

Table 6.72 Janssen Sciences Staff Travel to Work Modes

Table 6.73 Janssen Sciences Staff with School/Crèche Linked Trip

Table 6.74 Janssen Sciences Staff Car Lift Sharing

Table 6.75 Measures for Potential Travel Mode Shift from Private Car

Table 6.76 Car Lift Share Participation Availability Indicated by Staff

Table 6.77 Janssen Sciences Peak Operational Car Parking Demand with BioCork2

Table 6.78 Staff Travel Mode Share Targets

Table 7.1 Criteria for rating impact magnitude at EIS (now referred to as EIAR) stage – Estimation of magnitude of impact on soils, geology and hydrogeology attribute (NRA, 2008)

Table 7.2 Groundwater monitoring wells borehole log information

Table 8.1 Bat Registrations recorded on the Passive Bat Detector from the 20th to the 24th of February 2017.

Table 9.1 Maximum Permissible Sound Levels at the Façade of Dwellings

Table 9.2 BS 5228-1 Construction Threshold Limits

Table 9.3 IE Licence Limit Values -Schedule B.4 Noise Emissions

Table 9.4 Relationship of Noise Impact Magnitude (Adverse), Effect and Significance

Table 9.5 Transient vibration guide values for cosmetic damage (BS 7385-2)

Table 9.6 Allowable vibration during road construction in order to minimise the risk of building damage

Table 9.7 February 2017 Noise Survey Results

Table 9.8 Comparison of 2005 and 2017 Sound Pressure Level Data

Table 9.9 Separation Distances between Noise Sensitive Location and Proposed Development

Table 9.10 BS 5228-1 Predicted Construction Sound Levels

Table 9.11 Overall Construction Traffic Sound Levels at Receiver NSL1

Table 9.12 Predicted Operational Sound Pressure Levels

Table 9.13 Predicted Overall Sound Pressure Levels at Site Boundary Locations

Table 9.14 Predicted Overall Sound Pressure Levels at Noise Sensitive Locations

Table 9.15 Predicted Overall Sound Pressure Levels Including Turbine Source

Table 9.16 Predicted Operational Traffic Sound Pressure Levels

Table 9.17 Cumulative Operational Level at Location NSL3

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xii

Table 10.1 Existing and Projected Future Water and Waste Water Volumes

Table 10.2 Anticipated Waste Water Loads & Limits

Table 11.1 Summary of Main Weather Conditions at Cork Airport Meteorological Station (1981-2010)

Table 11.2 Scenario 1 – Air Dispersion Modelling Results

Table 12.1 Janssen Sciences Ireland UC - Waste Summary 2015 to 2016

Table 12.2 Potential Impacts During the Construction Phase

Table 12.3 Potential Impacts During the Operational Phase

Table 14.1 Criteria Used to Determine Impacts on Cultural Heritage Sites

Table 14.2 List of recorded archaeological monuments in the vicinity of the study area

Table 14.3 Record of Protected Structures for Ringaskiddy

Table 15.1 Matrix of Environmental Disciplines & Interactions

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xiii

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Site Location – Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, Cork (Map Data 2017 Google)

Figure 1.2 Aerial Photograph Showing Janssen Sciences Ireland UC

Figure 2.1 Extent of the Proposed Development Area

Figure 2.2 Overall Site Layout including Proposed BioCork2 Project

Figure 2.3 BioCork2 Production Process Block Flow Diagram

Figure 2.4 Existing and Proposed Buildings

Figure 2.5 View of the Proposed BioCork2 Production Building (3D Model Viewed from North)

Figure 2.6 View of BioCork2 Production Building, Waste Management Area and High Bay Warehouse (3D Model Viewed from South / Southwest))

Figure 2.7 Overview of the Warehouse Extension Areas

Figure 2.8 Proposed Lab/Admin Extension

Figure 2.9 View of Lab/Admin Extension (3D Model Viewed from South)

Figure 2.10 Proposed Canteen Extension (3D Model Viewed from North / Northwest)

Figure 2.11 Current Site Development Works Programme

Figure 2.12 Site Access Arrangements

Figure 3.1 Alternative Options Assessed

Figure 3.2 Selected Preferred Option

Figure 4.1 Map of Zoned Areas with Existing Site and Other Existing Industrial Facilities Highlighted

Figure 5.0.1 Site Context And Landscape Character Types (CCDP 2014)

Figure 5.0.2 Landscape And Visual Designations (CCDP 2014)

Figure 5.0.3 Tourism/Recreation/Amenity And Other Significant Planned/Permitted Developments

Figure 5.0.4 Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence (ZTVI)

Figure 5.0.5 Photomontage Viewpoints

Figure 6.1 Site Location Map

Figure 6.2 November 2016 AM Total Junction Traffic Volumes Profile

Figure 6.3 November 2016 PM Total Junction Traffic Volumes Profile

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xiv

Figure 6.4 November 2016 06:30 to 07:30 AM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles)

Figure 6.5 November 2016 18:30 to 19:30 PM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles)

Figure 6.6 29th November 2016 N28 (East of Shanbally) 24-Hour Traffic Volumes Profile

Figure 6.7 30th November 2016 N28 (East of Shanbally) 24-Hour Traffic Volumes Profile

Figure 6.8 Journey Times Route Locations Map

Figure 6.9 Journey Times Route Locations Map (Reference: TII Collision Rate Analysis Network Ranking)

Figure 6.10 Predicted 2023 06:30 to 07:30 AM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Figure 6.11 Predicted 2023 18:30 to 19:30 PM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Figure 6.12 Janssen Sciences Site Access

Figure 6.13 Predicted 2018 06:30 to 07:30 AM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction (Peak Generation 06:30 to 7:00)

Figure 6.14 Predicted 2023 06:30 to 07:30 AM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2

Figure 6.15 Predicted 2023 18:30 to 19:30 PM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2

Figure 6.16 Predicted 2018 06:00 to 07:00 AM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction (AM Peak Generation Hour)

Figure 6.17 Predicted 2018 15:00 to 16:00 PM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction (PM Peak Generation Hour)

Figure 7.1 Soil underlying and surrounding the site

Figure 7.2 Subsoil underlying and surrounding the site

Figure 7.3 Bedrock geology around the site

Figure 7.4 Bedrock Aquifer Map

Figure 7.5 Groundwater Flow Directions (figure reproduced from Verdé Mar’17 groundwater monitoring report)

Figure 7.6 Groundwater Vulnerability

Figure 7.7 Location of Groundwater Monitoring Wells (AGW01 to AWG04) and Abstraction Well (PW1)

Figure 7.8 Conceptual Site Model (produced by Verdé – taken from Mar’17 groundwater monitoring report

Figure 8.1 Bird Survey Transects – 2017

Figure 8.2 Designated Natura 2000 Sites within 15km

Figure 8.3 Designated pNHA Sites within 15km

Figure 8.4 Habitat Map

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xv

Figure 9.1 Noise Sensitive Locations in Proximity to the Site

Figure 9.2 2017 Noise Monitoring Locations with Site Boundary and Highlighted Proposed Development

Figure 9.3 Construction Traffic Access

Figure 9.4 Location of Proposed Utility/Warehouse and Laboratory Noise Sources

Figure 9.5 Location of Proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant Noise Sources

Figure 9.6 Scenario 1 Predicted LAeq Levels in dB at 1.5 m Receiver Height

Figure 9.7 Scenario 2 Predicted LAeq Levels at 1.5 m Receiver Height



Figure 9.10 Construction Sites Relative to Janssen Sciences Site

Figure 9.11 Excerpt from N28 Scheme Figure 14.10 (Sheet 6 of 7) ‘Do Something with Mitigation Lden Noise Contour Map’ with Proposed BioCork 2 Development

Figure 10.1 Indicative Route for Treated Wastewater Discharge to Cork Harbour

Figure 10.2 Schematic Diagram, On-Site Waste Water Management

Figure 10.3 Indicative Layout – WWTP Expansion

Figure 10.4 Indicative Route for Storm Water Run-Off to Cork Harbour

Figure 10.5 Schematic Diagram, On-Site Storm Water Management

Figure 10.6 Current enabling works mitigation measures for run-off management

Figure 10.7 OPW Summary Local Area Report

Figure 11.1 Worst case traffic junctions in terms of location to sensitive receptors for air traffic emissions

Figure 11.2 Sensitive Receptors for air emissions – surrounding the site

Figure 14.1 Site location (red dots indicate Recorded Archaeological Monuments (RMPs))

Figure 14.2 1st Edition OS (1837) map showing field boundaries within the area proposed for development

Figure 14.3 2nd Edition (1908) OS map showing tree lined avenue in north central area of site providing access to Ballybricken House demesne

Figure 15.1 Other known projects (current & planned) in the environs of the Janssen Sciences site

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xvi

Glossary of Terms

AA Appropriate Assessment

AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic

AERMOD Air dispersion modelling software

AG4 EPA Air Dispersion Modelling from Industrial Installations Guidance Note

AGI Above Ground Installation

AHU Air Handling Unit

AQSs Air Quality Standards

ARCADY Assessment of Roundabout Capacity and Delay – Traffic Computer Programme

As Arsenic

BAT Best Available Techniques

BATC Best Available Techniques Conclusions

BCI Bat Conservation Ireland

BCT Bat Conservation Trust

BD I Birds Directive Annex I

Bgl below ground level

BL Boundary Location

BoCCI Birds of Conservation Concern in Ireland

BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand

BREF BAT Reference Document

BS British Standard

BSM Brady Shipman Martin

CCC Cork County Council

CCTV Closed Circuit Television

Cd Cadmium

CDP County Development Plan

CEMP Construction Environmental Management Plan

cGMPs current Good Manufacturing Practices

CIP Clean in Place

CMP Construction Management Plan

CMT Construction Management Team

COD Chemical Oxygen Demand

COMAH Control of Major Accidents Involving Dangerous Substances

COP Clean Out of Place

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xvii

CO Carbon Monoxide

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

CRTN Calculation of road traffic Noise

CSA Civil Structural Architecture

cSAC candidate Special Area of Conservation

CSM Conceptual Site Model

CSO Central Statistics Office

CTMP Construction Traffic Management Plan

CUB Central Utilities Building

C&D Construction & Demolition

C & D WMP Construction & Demolition Waste Management Plan

C6H6 Benzene

dB Decibel, standard unit for expressing the noise level (sound pressure level).

dBA A-weighted Decibel Decibels measured on a sound level meter incorporating a frequency weighting (A weighting) which differentiates between sound of different frequency (pitch) in a similar way to the human ear.

DMR Dry Mixed Recyclables

DMRB Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

DoCCAE Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment

DoHPCLG Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government

DoAHRRG Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs

DPC Direct Product Capture

EC European Community

EcIA Ecological Impact Assessment

ECM Energy Conservation Measures

EEC European Economic Community

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EIAR Environmental Impact Assessment Report

ELC European Landscape Convention

ELV Emission Limit Value

EMP Environmental Management Plan

EMS Environmental Management System

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

ERTP Emergency Response Team Plan

ESB Electricity Supply Board

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xviii

ETS Emissions Trading Scheme

EU European Union

EWC European Waste Catalogue

E & I Engineering and Installation

FDA US Food and Drug Administration

FDI Foreign Direct Investment

FPO Flora Protection Order

GHG Green House Gas

GLCs Ground Level Concentrations

GMM Genetically Modified Microorganisms

GMO Genetically Modified Organisms

GNI Gas Networks Ireland

GSI Geological Survey of Ireland

GSK GlaxoSmithKline

HBWH High Bay Warehouse

HDII/IV EC Habitats Directive Annexes II/IV

HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle

HSA Health and Safety Authority

HT High Technology

HVAC Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning

HWS Hot Water / Steam

Hz Hertz

IDA Industrial Development Authority

IE Industrial Emissions

IED Industrial Emissions Directive

IEEM The Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management

IGH Irish Geological Heritage

IGI Institute of Geologists of Ireland

IGVs Interim Guideline Values

IEL Industrial Emissions Licence

IMB Irish Medicines Board

IPA Iso Propyl Alcohol

IPPC Integrated Pollution and Prevention Control

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xix

ISO International Standard Organisation

JSI UC Janssen Sciences Ireland UC

kVA Kilo Volt Amps

kV Kilo Volt

LAeq,T The equivalent continuous sound level – the sound pressure level of a steady sound having the same energy as a fluctuating sound over a specified measuring period (T). It can be considered similar to an average level. The LAeq value is the A-weighted Leq.

LA90 The A-weighted sound pressure level exceeded for 90% of the monitoring period and is a good indicator of the background noise level excluding peak noise events.

LA10 The A-weighted sound pressure level exceeded for 10% of the monitoring period and is a good parameter for expressing event noise such as passing traffic.

LAMax (dBA) The maximum RMS A-weighted sound pressure level occurring within a specified time period.

LAr, T (dBA) The Rating Noise Level - the equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level during a specified time interval, T, plus specified adjustments for tonal character and impulsiveness of the sound.

LAP Local Area Plan

LCP Large Combustion Plants

LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

LPHW Low Pressure Hot Water

LV Low Voltage

LVIA Landscape Visual Impact Assessment

MCP Medium Combustion Plant

MIAI Member of the Institute of Archaeologists of Ireland

mOD depth of water in metres ordnance datum

MV Medium voltage

MVA Mega Volt Amps

MW Megawatts

MW Monitoring Well (groundwater)

NBDC National Biodiversity Data Centre

NG4 EPA Guidance Note for Noise: Licence Applications, Surveys and Assessments in Relation to Scheduled Activities

NHAs Natural Heritage Areas

Ni Nickel

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xx

NIAH National Inventory of Architectural Heritage

NMI National Museum of Ireland

NMP Noise Monitoring Points

NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide

NOx Nitrogen Oxides expressed as Nitrogen Dioxide

NPWS National Parks and Wildlife Service

NRA National Roads Authority

NSL Noise Sensitive Location

OD Ordnance Datum

OFG Oils, Fats and Greases

OPW Office of Public Works

OSI Ordnance Survey of Ireland

O3 Ozone

PAHs Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons

Pb Lead

PBC Polychlorinated Biphenyl compounds

PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyls

PE Population Equivalents

PEC Predicted Environmental Concentration

PICADY Priority Intersection Capacity and DelaY

PID Photo Ionisation Detector

PLC Programmable Logic Controller

PM Project Management

PM10 Particulate Matter less than 10 microns in diameter

PM2.5 Particulate Matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter

pNHA proposed Natural Heritage Area

PPE Personal Protective Equipment

PPV Peak Particle Velocity

PSDP Project Supervisor, Design Process

PSCS Project Supervisor Construction Stage

QC Quality Control

RA Risk Assessment

RBD River Basin District

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xxi

RDRA Ringaskiddy and District Residents Association

RFC Ratio of Flow to Capacity

RMS Root Mean Square

RMP Record of Monuments and Places

RO Reverse Osmosis

RPG Regional Planning Guidelines

RPS Record of Protected Structures

R&D Research and Development

SAC Special Area of Conservation

SB Soil Boring

SI Statutory Instrument

SMR Sites and Monuments Record

SOP Steam Out of Place

SO4 Sulphates

SO2 Sulphur Dioxide

SPA Special Protection Area

SUDS Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems

SVOCs Semi Volatile Organic Compounds

SWLs Static Water Levels

TII Transport Infrastructure Ireland

TKN Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen

Total P Total Phosphorus

TOC Total Organic Carbon

TP Trial Pit

TSS Total Suspended Solids

UF/DF Ultrafiltration/Diafiltration

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

UWWTP Urban Waste water Treatment Plant

VIN Viral Inactivation & Neutralization

VMI Vendor Managed Inventory

VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds

VSD Variable Speed Drive

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

xxii

WA Wildlife Acts

WEEE Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment

WFD Water Framework Directive

WFO Water for Operations

WFI Water for Injection

WMO World Meteorological Organisation

WMU Water Management Units

WWTP Waste Water Treatment Plant

ZTVI Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-1

1 Introduction

Janssen Sciences Ireland UC (see Figure 1.1 for site location) is proposing to expand its Biomedicines Manufacturing Facility at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork. The following chapter provides an overview of the existing biomedicines facility (BioCork1), the proposed expansion of the existing biomedicines facility (BioCork2), hereinafter referred to as the proposed development and the associated requirement for an Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR).

Figure 1.1 Site Location – Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, Cork (Map Data 2017 Google)

1.1 Overview – Janssen Sciences Ireland UC

Janssen Sciences Ireland UC (JSI UC) (formerly Janssen Biologics Ireland and previously Centocor Biologics) and hereinafter referred to as Janssen Sciences, is part of the Johnson & Johnson Family of companies, the world’s most comprehensive and broadly based manufacturer of healthcare products and related service.

For more than 25 years Janssen has been a global leader in the field of biomedicines, in particular pioneering monoclonal antibody technology, a cutting-edge approach to producing medicines that launched a new generation of products to treat immune related diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and plaque psoriasis.

Janssen Sciences established its operation in Barnahely, Ringaskiddy in 2005 (then named Centocor Biologics) on a 40.1 hectare site with an investment of €400 million. The existing manufacturing facility produces biomedicines for both the treatment of immune related diseases and new and innovative cancer treatments. Four commercial products are currently manufactured here (Simponi, Stelara, Darzalex and Sylvant), along with a range of other products currently in development and undergoing clinical trials.

1.2 Need for the Project

The proposed BioCork2 project comprises an expansion of the existing Biomedicines Manufacturing Facility located at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy and will involve the construction of a new

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-2

production building and the expansion of the existing warehouse building, laboratory and administration building and site facilities required to support the new building and expansions.

The need for the project is driven by a number of factors, in particular;

- Requirement for expansion of manufacturing capacity within Janssen’s global network

- Ability to meet forecast sales volumes on key biomedicine products

1.3 Site Location development

The site of the proposed development lies approximately 8km south east of the Cork City boundary and is separated from the city suburbs by open green belt land. It is located c. 0.6km west of Ringaskiddy Village in the townland of Barnahely, approximately 2.5km east of Carrigaline and directly south across from the Pfizer Ringaskiddy plant on the N28.

The site covers an area of c. 40.1 hectares and has elevations ranging from 30m to 55m in height (Malin Head Datum). It forms part of a secondary ridgeline in the area located on a peninsula extending eastwards into the harbour. The existing Janssen Sciences facility, utility structures and car park currently occupies the eastern side of the site with a 150m wind turbine west of the facility forms part of a secondary ridgeline in the area. The existing Janssen Sciences biomedicines facility comprises four main buildings (production, central utilities, laboratory and administration and warehouse) all linked by a longitudinal spine corridor constructed in 2005.

Land use in the immediate environs is a mixture of industrial activity and farming. The land to the immediate north and west of the facility within the site is currently used for agricultural purposes.

Figure 1.2 Aerial Photograph Showing Janssen Sciences Ireland UC

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-3

As illustrated in Figure 1.2, the main thoroughfare of the N28 runs along the entire northern boundary of the site. The Pfizer Ringaskiddy plant, Pfizer OSP 04 building, Biomarin, a 9 hole golf course and deep-water berthing, are all located along the N28.

The Ringaskiddy settlement consists of two small villages, Ringaskiddy and Shanbally village, within which there are a number of residential and amenity uses. The village of Shanbally is located c. 1km from the site to the west. There is an existing site entrance to the northwest, adjacent to the N28, which is located c. 500m to the east of the Shanbally Roundabout.

To the west, the Janssen Sciences site is immediately adjoined by lands which remain in the ownership of IDA Ireland. The existing Novartis site is located c. 230m to the south of the site. The eastern boundary wraps around the Port of Cork Logistics Centre and contains the main site entrance for operational activities accessible from the R613.

To the east, the Barnahely graveyard is located on the R613 and directly across from the local access road leading to the Janssen Sciences facility and former Port of Cork Logistics Centre.

There is a proposal to develop an upgraded N281 to facilitate access to the port. The alignment of the new route passes to the south of the existing Janssen Sciences site through the intervening space between the Novartis site and the Janssen Sciences site.

1.4 Project Overview

The proposed BioCork2 development consists of the following

- New Production Building, with capability to manufacture biologic drug substances utilising four 15,400L production bioreactors and capacity for future installation of four additional 15,400L bioreactors

- Expansion of the existing Warehouse Building to accommodate increased material weighing, dispensing and storage including waste material segregation and storage

- Modification and expansion of the existing Laboratory and Administration building to accommodate additional lab, office and canteen requirements for new staff associated with the proposed development

- Extension of the existing link corridor to connect the new Production Building with the existing facility

- Expansion of the on-site wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) to accommodate increased volumes due to the new production building

- Modification and expansion of other aspects of the existing site infrastructure including; utilities, car parking, underground services, internal roads, yards and pipe racks

The total gross floor area of the proposed development is c.19,116m2 and represents a total capital investment of c. €300m.

A detailed description of the proposed development is provided in Chapter 2 (Description of the Proposed Development).

1 http://www.n28cork-ringaskiddy.com/

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-4

1.5 Governing Legislation

This section describes the framework for the project under current planning, environmental and related relevant legislation.

1.5.1 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

Environmental Impact Assessment is defined by the revised EIA Directive 2014/52/EU as a process consisting of:

“(i) the preparation of an environmental impact assessment report by the developer, as referred to in Article 5(1) and (2);

(ii) the carrying out of consultations as referred to in Article 6 and, where relevant, Article 7;

(iii) the examination by the competent authority of the information presented in the environmental impact assessment report and any supplementary information provided, where necessary, by the developer in accordance with Article 5(3), and any relevant information received through the consultations under Articles 6 and 7;

(iv) the reasoned conclusion by the competent authority on the significant effects of the project on the environment, taking into account the results of the examination referred to in point (iii) and, where appropriate, its own supplementary examination; and

(v) the integration of the competent authority's reasoned conclusion into any of the decisions referred to in Article 8a.”

Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) are carried out in response to the requirements of the EU Directives on the assessment of the effects (direct and indirect) of certain public and private projects on the environment.

Currently the principle national legislation which implements these obligations into Irish law, is Part X of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, and Part 10 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001, as amended. These Regulations outline the classes of projects subject to EIA and the statutory format and content for an EIA report. These Regulations are due to be updated to take account of the additional requirements of the revised EIA Directive 2014/52/EU including the above definition and the replacement of term Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR).

The Fifth Schedule of the Planning & Development Regulations, 2001 (SI No. 600 of 2001) as amended sets out a comprehensive list of project types and development thresholds that are subject to EIA.

The proposed BioCork2 development falls within the list of project types requiring an EIA as detailed in Paragraph 13 (a)(ii) of Part 2 of the Fifth Schedule of Planning & Development Regulations 2001 as amended:

“13. Changes, extensions, development and testing

(a) Any change or extension of development already authorised, executed or in the process of being executed (not being a change or extension referred to in Part 1) which would:-

(i) result in the development being of a class listed in Part 1 or paragraphs 1 to 12 of Part 2 of this Schedule, and

(ii) result in an increase in size greater than –

- 25 per cent, or

- an amount equal to 50 per cent of the appropriate threshold,

whichever is the greater”

Whereby the relevant authorised development class within Schedule 5, Part 1 is Paragraph 6 (e)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-5

“6. Integrated chemical installations….……(e) for the production of basic pharmaceutical products using a chemical or biological process.”

Accordingly, the application for planning permission for the proposed BioCork2 project must be accompanied by an EIAR.

Current Status on Implementation of the revised EIA Directive 2014/52/EU

As the new 2014/52/EU Directive necessitates changes in laws, regulations and administrative provisions across a range of legislative codes, including the Planning Code, the Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government launched a Public Consultation on implementation of the Directive in May 2017 where by transposition of the Directive will be informed by the responses to this consultation process:

“Key Issues in Transposition of 2014 EIA Directive - Stakeholder Consultation Document”2

The closing date for this consultation was 5pm on Friday 2nd June 2017.

Subsequent to the launching of the public consultation, the Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government issued a Circular Letter PL 01/2017 on the 15th May to competent authorities in the planning system providing advice on administrative provisions in advance of transposition of the Directive:

“Implementation of Directive 2014/52/EU on the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (EIA Directive)”

3

This Circular advises competent authorities to consider applying the requirements of the 2014 Directive in advance of completion of the transposition into law.

The above consultation document and Department Circular Letter have been taken into account in the preparation of this EIAR, to this effect, a copy of the Circular Letter is included in Appendix H complete with a check list identifying where all requirements of the Circular and in turn the 2014 Directive are met within this EIAR.

Table 1.4 provides an overview of the key EIA Directive 2014/52/EU topics and the relevant Chapters within the EIAR where they are assessed.

1.5.2 Appropriate Assessment

The Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora) is the main legislative instrument for the protection and conservation of biodiversity in the EU. Under this Directive Member States are obliged to designate Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) which contain habitats or species considered important for protection and conservation in a European Union context.

In 1997, the Habitats Directive was transposed into Irish national law and the relevant Regulations, the European Communities (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1997, S.I. 94/1997. These Regulations were amended by S.I. 233 of1998 & S.I. 378 of 2005. These were subsequently revised and consolidated in the European Communities (Birds and Natural Habitats) Regulations 2011, S.I. 477 of 2011.

In accordance with the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2010 and the European Communities (Birds and Natural Habitats) Regulations 2011, S.I. 477of 2011 an Appropriate Assessment (AA) has been carried out to assess the potential to affect the integrity of the Natura 2000 network. The AA Screening Report is included as part of the planning application.

1.5.3 Industrial Emissions Directive

The Directive on Industrial Emissions 2010/75/EU (IED) was transposed into national legislation by Member States (including Ireland) in January 2013. The Directive aims to simplify existing

2 http://www.housing.gov.ie/planning/environmental-assessment/environmental-impact-assessment-eia/public-consultation 3 http://www.housing.gov.ie/planning/environmental-assessment/environmental-impact-assessment-eia/public-consultation

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-6

legislation related to industrial emissions which applies minimum standards for the prevention and control of industrial emissions across the whole Community. IED consolidates a number of separate Directives into a single legislative instrument. Those consolidated Directives directly or indirectly relevant to this proposed development include;

- Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive (2008/1/EC);

- Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Solvents Directive (99/13/EC);

- Large Combustion Plants (LCP) Directive (2001/80/EC).

The existing development falls under the listed activities in the First Schedule of the EPA Act 1992 (as amended) defined as requiring an Industrial Emissions Licence (IE Licence);

“Activity 5.16 The production of pharmaceutical products including intermediates (production means the production on an industrial scale by chemical or biological processing”

Accordingly Janssen Sciences’ IPPC Licence P0778-01 was amended in December 2013 and deemed thereafter to be IE Licence P0778-01.

In light of the proposed expansion and this associated EIAR, an IE Licence Review Application will be required as part of the process. The IE Licence Review Application is being prepared for submission to the EPA and will contain the information prescribed in the Environmental Protection Agency (Industrial Emissions)(Licensing) Regulations, 2013 (S.I. 137 of 2013). Regulation 9 of the Regulations sets out the statutory requirements for information to accompany a licence review application.

In accordance with Article 14, 3 of the IED “BAT conclusions shall be the reference for setting the licence conditions”.

BAT Conclusions, Best Available Techniques (BAT) Guidance Notes and BAT Reference (BREF) documents applicable to Janssen Sciences proposed development include;

- BAT Conclusions: Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/902 of 30 May 2016 Establishing Best Available Techniques (BAT) Conclusions, under Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, for Common Waste Water and Waste Gas Treatment/Management Systems in the Chemical Sector

- BREF: Best Available Techniques (BAT) Reference Document for Common Waste Water and Waste Gas Treatment/Management Systems in the Chemical Sector, 2016

- BAT Guidance Note on Best Available Techniques for Pharmaceutical and other Speciality Organic Chemicals, EPA 2008,

- BREF document for the Manufacture of Organic Fine Chemicals, August 2006,

Other relevant documents include,

- BREF Document on Best Available Techniques for Energy Efficiency, February 2009,

- BREF Document on Best Available Techniques on Emissions from Storage, July 2006,

- REF Document on the General Principles of Monitoring, July 2003

Pre-application consultation has taken place with the EPA and other relevant consultees during the production of both the EIAR and the IEL review application. In terms of the scope of the EIAR, S.I. 137 of 2013 Environmental Protection Agency (Industrial Emissions) (Licensing) Regulations, require that issues raised during consultation on the IEL application, also need to be considered during preparation of an EIAR. This is to ensure

(a) that the EPA, which is the decision making authority for IELs, is adequately informed in its considerations as a statutory consultee in the planning process and

(b) that the continuation of the EIA process through the IEL application stage is also duly considered.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-7

This results in additional and specific coverage of certain items in the EIAR, such as detailed description of wastewater, air and noise emissions including precise emission point locations; control and monitoring systems and BAT.

1.5.4 Other Relevant Legislation

Emissions Trading

The member states of the European Union (EU) are signatories to the Kyoto Protocol, which requires reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases by specific amounts over a period from 2008 to 2012 and beyond. The EU committed to an average reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 8% below 1990 levels. The EU Emissions Trading Directive (Directive 2003/87/EC) is being implemented to achieve this target.

Directive 2003/87/EC establishes an allowance-trading scheme for emissions to promote reductions of greenhouse gases, in particular carbon dioxide. Directive 2003/87/EC as amended has been implemented into Irish Law by EC (Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading) Regulations 2012, (S.I. No. 490 of 2012) and amending Regulations.

The trading scheme applies to facilities with combustion installations with a rated thermal input exceeding 20 MW (except hazardous or municipal waste installations). The Directive requires these installations to obtain a Green House Gas (GHG) Permit from the EPA. The total rated thermal input from the existing installations on the site exceeds 20 MW therefore a GHG Permit is in place on site (Permit No. IE-GHG151-10420-2). A notification will be submitted to the EPA under Condition 2 of the GHG Permit as the increased steam demand from the proposed development will increase the output from the existing boiler installation.

Energy Efficiency Regulations

The European Union (Energy Efficiency) Regulations 2014 (S.I. No. 426 of 2014) states in Part 5 (11) where required to support an application to the Environmental Protection Agency under the Act of 1992, a cost-benefit analysis shall be carried out by an economic operator when the economic operator plans to carry out one of the following:

(a) to install a new thermal electricity generation installation with a total rated thermal input exceeding 20 MW that is not already a cogeneration unit;

(b) to substantially refurbish an existing thermal electricity generation installation with a total rated thermal input exceeding 20 MW and the refurbished unit will not be a cogeneration unit;

(c) to install or substantially refurbish an industrial installation with a total rated thermal input exceeding 20 MW generating waste heat at a useful temperature level and where the waste heat is not being used to satisfy economically-justified demand;

(d) to construct a new district heating and cooling network or to install a new energy production unit with a total rated thermal input in excess of 20MW in an existing district heating or cooling network or to substantially refurbish an existing such installation and waste heat is not being used from nearby industrial installations.

Part 1 (3) 1 states that these Regulations do not apply to persons holding a greenhouse gas emissions permit granted in accordance with Regulation 7 of the European Communities (Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading) Regulations 2012 (S.I. No. 490 of 2012).

As stated previously Janssen Sciences currently hold a GHG Permit (IE-GHG151-10420-2), therefore the above regulations do not apply.

Large Combustion Plant Regulations

The IED also applies to large combustion plants designed for production of energy, the rated thermal input of which is equal to or greater than 50 MW irrespective of the type of fuel used (Article 28).

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-8

European Union (Large Combustion Plants) Regulations 2012, S.I. 566 of 2012, came into effect on 7th January 2013 and transposes Chapter III and Annex V of IED, revoking and replacing the Large Combustion Plant Regulations 2003 (S.I. No. 644 of 2003).

The total rated thermal input for the Janssen Sciences facility (existing and proposed) is less than 50MW and as such these regulations do not apply.

Medium Combustion Plant (MCP) Directive

The new MCP Directive (due to be implemented in Member States by December 2017) is applicable to this facility and as such there are two implications of the MCP Directive in relation to existing boilers at Janssen Sciences:

- New limits are specified within the new MCP Directive for existing plant. The existing plant is EPA IE licensed for dual fuel (natural gas or biodiesel), all limits specified within the MCP Directive are either greater than or equal to the IE Licence limits for Natural Gas. However, for biodiesel a limit of 30 mg/m3 is stipulated for particulate emissions versus an IE Licence limit of 50 mg/m3 (Reference: - MCP Directive (EU) 2015/2193, Annex II, Part 1, Table 2.). Although the site is licensed to use biodiesel, Janssen Sciences have not to date used biodiesel within the boilers. These revised biodiesel particulate limits will be incorporated within the forthcoming IE Licence Review Application.

- CO is to be monitored at least every 3 years, within 4 months of grant of a licence under the MCP Directive. Currently it is not clear when this applies to existing IE licenced facilities. This will be confirmed as part of IE Licence Review Application process and/or when the Directive is transposed into Irish Legislation.

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) Regulations

In March 2001, the GMO (Contained Use) Regulations, 2001 (S.I. No. 73 of 2001), came into force under Irish law, giving effect to Directive 98/81/EC which amends Directive 90/219/EEC on the contained use of GMOs (Directive 2009/41/EC recasts Directive 90/219/EEC).

The GMO (Contained Use) Regulations, 2001 to 2010 require the classification of all GMO (and GMM – Genetically Modified Microorganisms) activities into one of four classes - Class 1, Class 2, Class 3 or Class 4 - as appropriate, depending on the level of risk the activity poses to human health or the environment. A risk assessment is required to determine the class (Class 1, 2, 3 or 4) into which the GMO/GMM contained use activity will fall, with Class 1 representing the lowest risk category.

The EPA is the Competent Authority in Ireland for the implementation of the GMO (Contained Use) Regulations. In order to use GMOs or GMMs the user is legally obliged to submit a notification to the EPA in accordance with the requirements of the Contained Use legislation, seeking the EPA’s consent before commencing work with GMOs or GMMs.

The existing Janssen Sciences facility involves the contained use of Class 1 GMMs and therefore comes within the requirements of the Regulations as specified above and accordingly maintains a GMM permit (GMM Permit 217 (2006)).

It is currently proposed that only Class 1 GMMs will be introduced to the site as part of the BioCork2 project. Therefore, the requirement is that a Risk Assessment (RA) is carried out for the new Class 1 cell lines introduced, and that this RA is made available to the EPA as part of the GMM annual reporting process.

Seveso Regulations

EU Directive 2012/18/EU on the Control of Major Accident Hazards Involving Dangerous Substances (COMAH or Seveso III Directive) has been implemented into Irish law under S.I. No. 209 of 2015 EC (Control of Major Accident Hazards Involving Dangerous Substances) Regulations, 2015. The activities at the existing Janssen Sciences facility as well as the proposed BioCork2 facility relate to the manufacture of biopharmaceutical medicines that do not involve the use of significant quantities of dangerous substances. Based on maximum anticipated material

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-9

inventories, it has been established that the Seveso III Regulations are not applicable to the Janssen Sciences site under both current and future proposed operating conditions. Whilst the Janssen Sciences site including the proposed expansion is not subject to the Seveso III regulations, the boundary of the site is in proximity to neighbouring industrial activities which are designated as a Tier I and Tier II Seveso III sites: Table 1.1 Neighbouring Seveso Sites and Land Use Planning (LUP)

Establishment Tier Approx. Distance from Site

Consultation Distance

Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals, Ringaskiddy Upper (Tier I) 50m 1000

Novartis Ringaskiddy Ltd. Upper (Tier I) 230m 1000

Carbon Chemicals, Raheens East, Ringaskiddy Lower (Tier II) 700m 700

Seveso Sites - HSA website accessed February 20174

The Health and Safety Authority’s (HSA) policy in relation to land use planning advice to planning authorities is set out in the document “Policy & Approach of the Health & Safety Authority to COMAH Risk-based Land-use Planning (19 March 2010)”. As set out in this policy and in accordance with Seveso Directive 2012/18/EU, the HSA are required to write to the relevant planning authority, giving them a consultation distance around each relevant Seveso establishment. The HSA recommends that applications for development within this consultation zone should be referred to it, for technical advice.

Current consultation distances used by the HSA5, indicate that for Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals and Novartis a consultation distance of 1000 metres is recommended and for Carbon Chemicals a consultation distance of 700 metres is recommended. As such it is anticipated that the planning application for this proposed development will be referred by Cork County Council to the HSA for advice.

HSA land use planning advice in accordance with the Seveso Directive is generally based on a zoning diagram which is prepared for each Seveso establishment. In the zoning diagram, 3 risk zones are delineated within the specified consultation distance. The advice in relation to development applications within each zone is dependant on the type of development proposed. Four development types have been identified as follows;

- Level 1: People at work, Parking

- Level 2: Developments for use by the general public

- Level 3: Developments for use by vulnerable people

- Level 4: Very large and sensitive developments

A risk matrix is then used to determine LUP advice based on the risk zone and the development type. The risk matrix is shown in Table 1.2.

4 http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Your_Industry/Chemicals/Legislation_Enforcement/COMAH/List_of_Establishments/Upper-Tier-Establishments.pdf 5 http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Your_Industry/Chemicals/Legislation_Enforcement/COMAH/Land_Use_Planning/

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-10

Table 1.2 Matrix to advice on suitable development for LUP Zones

Level

Zone

Zone 1 (Inner) Zone 2 (Middle) Zone 3 (Outer)

Level 1 ��

Level 2 × ��

Level 3 × × ��

Level 4 × × ×

The proposed BioCork2 development can be defined as a Level 1 type development i.e. “People at work, Parking”. As such, and in accordance with Table 1.2, there should be no reason for advice against the proposed development in the context of Seveso risk-based land use planning.

With regards to the potential for an incident at an external Seveso facility, Janssen Sciences will update its emergency response plan SOP “Emergency Response Team Plan - DS-SOP-5424” to incorporate the proposed development.

1.6 EIAR Methodology

1.6.1 EIAR Preparation

The primary objective of the EIAR is to identify baseline environmental and socioeconomic conditions in the area of the proposed development, predict potential beneficial and/or adverse effects of the proposed development during both construction and operational phases and propose appropriate mitigating actions where necessary.

In preparing this EIAR, the following regulations and guidelines were taken into account:

- The requirements of EC Directives and Irish Regulations regarding EIA;

- ‘Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements’ (EPA, 2002); and

- ‘Advice Notes on Current Practice in the Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements’ (EPA, 2003).

- Draft Revised Guidelines on the Information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements (EPA September 2015)

- Draft Advice Notes for Preparing Environmental Impact Statements (EPA September 2015)

- Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government Circular Letter PL 1/2017 “Implementation of Directive 2014/52/EU on the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (EIA Directive) – Advice on Administration Provisions in Advance of Transposition (15th May 2017)

- Transposition of 2014 EIA Directive (2014/52/EU) in the Land Use Planning and EPA Licencing Systems Key Issues Consultation Paper (May 2017)

Information on the proposed development and the receiving environment was obtained through a number of means including:

- Aerial Photographs;

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-11

- Site Visits;

- Field Surveys;

- Site Investigations;

- Meetings with Cork County Council and the EPA;

- Review of existing site data;

- Review of previous studies and EISs carried out at the proposed development site and locality, including EISs for nearby developments; and

- Consultation with other interested parties and stakeholders.

The EIAR has also considered cumulative impacts. Cumulative impact is defined by the EPA (2002) Guidelines on information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements as ‘The addition of many small impacts to create one larger, more significant, impact’ and by the EC (1999) Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impacts as well as Impact Interactions as ‘impacts that result from incremental changes caused by other past, present or reasonably foreseeable actions together with the project’.

1.6.2 The Study Team

PM Group has fulfilled the role of Lead Consultant and Project Coordinator for the preparation of the EIAR. PM Group has been directly responsible for the preparation of the following chapters and management of the specialist contribution from sub consultants listed following these:

PM Group:

Chapter 1 Introduction

Chapter 2 Description of the Proposed Project

Chapter 3 Alternatives Considered

Chapter 4 Population and Human Health

Chapter 7 Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology

Chapter 9 Noise & Vibration

Chapter 10 Water & Wastewater

Chapter 11 Air Quality & Climate

Chapter 12 Waste Management

Chapter 13 Material Assets

Chapter 15 Interactions and Cumulative Impacts

Specialist contributions to the EIAR were made as follows:

Chapter 5 (Landscape and Visual): Brady Shipman Martin (BSM)

Chapter 6 (Traffic and Transportation): Malachy Walsh & Partners

Chapter 8 (Biodiversity): Ecology Ireland Ltd.

Chapter 14 (Archaeology, Cultural Heritage & Architectural Heritage) Margaret McCarthy Archaeological Consultant

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-12

Table 1.3 Study Team for EIA

Name Company Title EIA Responsibility

Kayleen Curtin

• BSc. Environmental Science, MSc. Environmental Engineering

• 19 yrs experience in environmental consultancy

PM Group Senior

Environmental Consultant

Chp 1 Introduction

Chp 2 Description of the Proposed Development

Chp 3 Consideration of Alternatives

Chp 12 Waste Management

Chp 13 Material Assets

Chp 15 Interactions and Cumulative Impacts

Collation & Management of EIAR

Aoife O’ Leary

• BSc. Environmental Science & Sustainable Technology

• 1 yr experience

PM Group Environmental Consultant

Chp 4 Population and Human Health

David Bosonnet

• B.Ag.Sc. (Land Hort), MILI, CMLI

• 21 years of experience

Brady Shipman Martin

Senior Landscape Architect &

Partner

Chp 5 Landscape and Visual

Seamus Quigley

• BE Ceng., MIEI, MCIHT • 26 years of experience

Malachy Walsh and Partners

Traffic Consultant Chp 6 Traffic and Transportation

Frank Buckley

• BEng (Chemical & Process); H.Dip. App. Sci. (Modelling & Numerical Computing); Member of the Institution of Engineers of Ireland (MIEI); Associate Member of the Institution of Chemical Engineers (AMIChemE)

• 13 yrs experience

PM Group Environmental Consultant

Chp 7 Land and Soils

Chp 11 Air Quality and Climate

Dr. Gavin Fennessy

• B.Sc., Ph.D. MCIEEM • 19 yrs experience

Ecology Ireland Ltd.

Principal Ecologist

Chp 8 Biodiversity

Sinead McAleer

• BSc Environmental Chemistry, Dip Pollution Control, MSc Environmental Management, Dip Acoustics and Noise Control

• Practitioner Member of the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) and Associate Member of the Institute of Acoustics (IOA)


PM Group Senior


Chp 4 Population and Human Health

Chp 9 Noise and Vibration

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-13

Name Company Title EIA Responsibility

Dr. Barry McDermott

• BSc, PhD, CSci, CEnv • 20 yrs experience

PM Group

Principal Environmental

Consultant

&

Group Head of

Sustainability

Chp 10 Water and Wastewater

Tony McGrath

• BE, MEngSc., MIEI • 27 yrs expierence

PM Group Director of Strategic Planning

Chp 10 Water and Wastewater

EIAR Review

Margaret McCarthy

• MA, MIAI • 30 yrs experience

Margaret McCarthy Archaeologist

Chp 14 Archaeology, Cultural Heritage & Architectural

Heritage

Brian Tiernan

• BSc (Hons) Earth (Environmental) Sciences, MSc Environmental Engineering, Full Member (Chartered Waste Manager)of Chartered Institution of Wastes Management (CIWM), Associate Member of the Institution of Chemical Engineers (IChemE)


PM Group Senior


EIAR Review

1.6.3 Format of the EIAR

The EIAR contains 3 volumes. Volume 1 (this document) is the Main Report. Volume 2 contains the photomontages associated with the visual impact assessment, and Volume 3 is a separate Transport Assessment Report prepared in response to a Scoping Note provided by Cork County Council for Traffic Impact Statements in the Ringaskiddy Area.

This EIAR has been prepared according to the ‘Grouped Format Structure’ as outlined in the EPA’s Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements (EPA, 2002). The EIAR is divided into a Non-Technical Summary and 15 chapters. Each environmental topic has been examined in a separate chapter under the following headings:

- the characteristics of the proposed development;

- the receiving environment;

- potential impacts;

- mitigation measures; and

- residual impacts (where relevant).

Cumulative effects are assessed as appropriate in the relevant chapters and summarised in Chapter 15, Interactions and Cumulative Effects. Interactions between issues that arise under separate headings are assessed as they arise in the relevant chapters and summarised in Chapter 15, Interactions and Cumulative Effects.

The amended EIA Directive (2014/52/EU) highlights specific topics that are now required in an EIAR. Table 1.4 outlines these topics and the corresponding chapters in this EIAR.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-14

Table 1.4 EIA Directive Topics and relevant chapters

Directive Topics EIAR Headings

Population and Human Health Population and Human Health (Chapter 4)

Human Health also indirectly assessed within Noise, Air and Water Chapters in terms of impact on quality of

these health related receptors

Biodiversity Biodiversity (Chapter 8)

Land, Soil Soils, Geology & Hydrogeology (Chapter 7)

Water Water & Wastewater (Chapter 10)

Air and Climate Air & Climate (Chapter 11)

Material Assets Material Assets (Chapter 13)

Cultural Heritage Archaeology, Architecture and Cultural Heritage (Chapter 14)

Landscape Landscape & Visual (Chapter 5)

Interactions Interactions & Cumulative Impacts (Chapter 15)

In the completion of each chapter consideration was given to both the importance of an attribute and the magnitude of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed activities on that cited attribute. These impact ratings are presented in the Table 1.5 and are in accordance with impact assessment criteria provided in Section 5.0 of the EPA (2002) publication.

Table 1.5 Impact Assessment Criteria

Impact Characteristic

Term Description

Quality

Positive A change which improves the quality of the environment

Neutral A change which does not affect the quality of the environment

Negative A change which reduces the quality of the environment

Significance

Imperceptible An impact capable of measurement but without noticeable consequences

Slight An impact which causes noticeable changes in the character of the environment without affecting its

sensitivities

Moderate An impact that alters the character of the environment in a manner consistent with existing and emerging trends

Significant An impact, which by its character, magnitude, duration or intensity alters a sensitive aspect of the environment

Profound An impact which obliterates sensitive characteristics

Duration

Short-term Impact lasting one to seven years

Medium-term Impact lasting seven to fifteen years

Long-term Impact lasting fifteen to sixty years

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-15

Impact Characteristic

Term Description

Permanent Impact lasting over sixty years

Temporary Impact lasting for one year or less

Type

Cumulative The addition of many small impacts to create one larger, more significant impact

‘Do Nothing’ The environment as it would be in the future should no development of any kind be carried out

Indeterminable When the full consequences of a change in the environment cannot be described

Irreversible When the character, distinctiveness, diversity, or reproductive capacity of an environment is not

permanently lost

Residual Degree of environmental change that will occur after the proposed mitigation measures have taken effect

Synergistic Where the resultant impact is of greater significance than the sum of its constituents

‘Worst Case’ The impacts arising from a development in the case where the mitigation measures may substantially fail

1.7 Screening and Scoping of the EIAR

1.7.1 Screening

The proposed development falls within the list of project types requiring an EIA as detailed in Paragraph 13 of Part 2 of the Fifth Schedule of Planning & Development Regulations 2001 as amended:

“13. Changes, extensions, development and testing

(a) Any change or extension of development already authorised, executed or in the process of being executed (not being a change or extension referred to in Part 1) which would:-

(i) result in the development being of a class listed in Part 1 or paragraphs 1 to 12 of Part 2 of this Schedule, and

(ii) result in an increase in size greater than –

- 25 per cent, or

- an amount equal to 50 per cent of the appropriate threshold,

whichever is the greater”

Whereby the relevant authorised development class within Schedule 5, Part 1 is Paragraph 6 (e)

“6. Integrated chemical installations….……(e) for the production of basic pharmaceutical products using a chemical or biological process.”

Thus, the application for planning permission for the proposed project must be accompanied by an EIAR.

The EPA 2003 Advice Notes on Current Practice (in the Preparation of Environmental Impact Statement) details environmental topics that should be addressed for each project type classification. The proposed facility falls into Project Type 7, as described in the EPA Advice Notes

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-16

- Installations for treatment of intermediate products and production of pharmaceutical products using a chemical or biological process.

The primary purpose of the EIAR is to define the anticipated environmental impacts as a result of the construction and operational phases of the proposed development and any associated mitigation measures and residual impacts.

1.7.2 Scoping

The scoping exercise is an important element of an EIAR, incorporating inputs from relevant experts, statutory bodies, the applicant, and interested members of the public.

As part of the scoping process, a desk based study was carried out examining the existing baseline conditions at the site along with other comparable developments and EIS prepared for similar schemes. The EPA Advice Notes for Preparing Environmental Impact Statements (Draft 2015) were consulted as guidance on important environmental topics for consideration under principal project types. Each aspect of the environment was looked at individually to identify (as far as possible at scoping stage) the potential for likely and/or significant effects which may arise during all stages of the proposed development from initial site investigations, construction, commissioning, and operation through to eventual decommissioning. Available methods for reduction or elimination of any likely and/or significant effects were also considered as part of the scoping process.

The determination of potential impacts to be addressed in this EIAR was largely based on:

- The requirements of the EIA and Planning Regulations;

- Site history and baseline assessments;

- Consultation with relevant statutory bodies and other stakeholders (See Section 1.8);

- Scoping Note for Traffic Impact Assessments in Ringaskiddy Area, as provided by Cork County Council Traffic and Transportation Section (May 2017) as included in and addressed in Volume 3 (Transport Assessment) and Chapter 6 (Traffic & Transportation) of this EIAR.

- The requirements of Cork County Council, as detailed in the Cork County Development Plan 2014 and the Carrigaline Local Area Plan (LAP) 2011 as amended 2015

- Cork County Council, 2016. Draft Ballincollig Carrigaline Municipal District LAP 2016.

- ‘Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements’ (EPA, 2002);

- ‘Advice Notes on Current Practice in the Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements’ (EPA, 2003);

- Draft Revised Guidelines on the Information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements (EPA September 2015)

- Draft Advice Notes for Preparing Environmental Impact Statements (EPA September 2015)

- Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government Circular Letter PL 1/2017 “Implementation of Directive 2014/52/EU on the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (EIA Directive) – Advice on Administration Provisions in Advance of Transposition (15th May 2017)

- Transposition of 2014 EIA Directive (2014/52/EU) in the Land Use Planning and EPA Licencing Systems Key Issues Consultation Paper (May 2017)

- Environmental Considerations and BAT

- Regular updates from and meetings with the Project and Design Team

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-17

1.8 Consultation

Extensive consultation was carried out with statutory bodies and bodies with environmental responsibility and interest. The objective of consultation was to ensure that the views and concerns of all stakeholders were taken into account in the EIA process. The following bodies were directly consulted in the preparation of this EIAR:

- Cork County Council, including the following departments:

- 1.1 Planning Department

- 1.2 Environment Department/Heritage Officer

- 1.3 Archaeology

- 1.4 Water Services Department

- 1.5 Roads and Transportation Department

- EPA

- Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine.

- Dept. of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural & Gaeltacht Affairs

- NPWS (part of the Heritage Division of Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affair (DoAHRRGA)

- Department of Communications, Climate Action & Environment (DoCCAE)

- IDA Ireland

- Irish Water

- HSE

- HSA

- Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII)

- An Taisce

- ESB Network

- Gas Networks Ireland

- Failte Ireland

A public consultation meeting was held between local residents and a number of Janssen Sciences representatives on 26th and 27th May 2017 to inform of the proposed BioCork2 expansion and ensure that any concerns raised were addressed. The attendees were given the opportunity to view story boards on the proposed expansion and meet with some of the project team. All of the comments, suggestions and written responses provided where relevant have been taken into account in the preparation of this EIAR.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

1-18

This page is left blank intentionally

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-1

2 Description of the Proposed Development

2.1 Existing Land Use & Activities

The Janssen Sciences site at Barnahely covers an area of c.40.1 hectares within which the BioCork2 development works are proposed within an area of c.22.9 hectares as illustrated within Figure 2.1. The site of the proposed development is zoned ‘Existing Built up Area’ in the Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Plan 2011 (as amended 2015).

Figure 2.1 Extent of the Proposed Development Area

Janssen Sciences is a biotechnology company involved in the manufacture of antibodies and therapeutic proteins derived from cell cultures of GMMs. The process can be divided into two stages:

- Cell Culture in which cells form a specific working cell line are grown under controlled conditions and the protein from these is then harvested

- Purification in which the product is taken through a series of purification steps before being filled and frozen as finished product.

Due to the continuous operational of the bioreactors, the plant operates continuously 24/7 i.e. there is no shutdown period.

Currently the existing manufacturing facility as shown in Figures 2.1 and 2.2, includes four main buildings all linked by a longitudinal spine corridor;

- Production Building – this building consists of 2 floors for production, purification and product fill/finish.

- Central Utilities Building(CUB) – this building houses primary utilities (steam, chilled water, electrical power, compressed air, gases) and clean utility generation (e.g. purified water, water-for-injection, clean steam) for the installation.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-2

- Laboratory and Administration Building – this is a four storey building, with offices, administration and cafeteria on the first and second floors, QA and QC laboratories on the third floor and a mechanical plant room on the fourth floor.

- Warehouse – a central warehouse is located south of the CUB which is designed to hold 8 ambient pallet storage spaces, loadings docks and a central covered-in waste sorting, recycling and storage area are located on the west side of the warehouse.

The existing facility comprises c. 28,400m2 of buildings and employees approximately 555 people across a range of manufacturing, operations, engineering, laboratory, HR, finance and related functions.

On the western side of the Central Utilities Building (CUB) a utility yard provides accommodation for the following:

- 2 No. cooling towers (10,300kW total capacity)

- 2 No. 1,500kW emergency generators

- 10,000 Litre diesel storage tank for emergency generators

- Bulk salt saturation skid for make up of brine solutions for purified water generation systems

- 1 x 5,000 Litre liquid nitrogen storage tank

- 1 x 5,000 Litre liquid oxygen storage tank.

- 1 x 5,000 Litre liquid CO2 storage tank

- 1 x 400m3 potable water storage tank

- Pipe rack to run services eastwards into the CUB

Located south west of the warehouse adjacent to the site southern boundary is a recently relocated 700m3 fire water storage tank with adjacent pumphouse and diesel pumps.

The onsite WWTP located at the lowest elevation of the site at the south eastern corner provides full biological secondary treatment prior to discharge to the IDA / Irish Water long sea outfall to Cork Harbour. The existing on site WWTP, which operates in compliance with Janssen Sciences’ IE Licence (P0778-01), has capacity and permission to treat and discharge up to 800m3 of waste water per day, with current emission levels <300m3/day.

The WWTP includes the following unit operations in above-ground structures:

- Balancing and neutralisation

- Secondary biological treatment

- Sludge treatment

2.2 Project Overview

Figure 2.2 provides an overview of the proposed BioCork2 development. The proposed development will comprise of the construction of the following buildings and expansions:

- A new Production Building mainly designed as a single storey production facility with the core process area located on the ground floor for ease of operations and maintenance. The facility is designed with capability to manufacture biologic drug substances utilising four 15,400L production bioreactors and capacity for future installation of four additional 15,400L bioreactors.

- Expansion of the existing Warehouse Building to accommodate increased material weighing, dispensing, storage including waste material segregation and storage.

- Modification and expansion of the existing Laboratory and Administration building to accommodate additional laboratories, office and canteen requirements for new staff associated with the proposed development

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-3


- Expansion of the on-site WWTP to accommodate increased volumes due to the new manufacturing facility

- Modification and expansion of other aspects of the existing site infrastructure including; utilities, car parking, underground services, internal roads, yards and pipe racks

The total gross floor area of the proposed development is c. 19,116m2 and represents a total capital investment of c. €300m.

The outline schedule for the development is as follows;

Table 2.1 Project Milestones

Key Milestones Date

Commence Construction (pending Planning Permission)

Q4 2017

Construction substantially complete Q4 2019

Commence Process Validation Q4 2020

Commence Production Activity Q4 2021

It is envisaged that the new manufacturing and associated support facilities will add approximately 250 employees (200 staff and 50 contractors) to the current workforce when operational.

It is also envisaged that an average of 450 construction jobs will be created over the 24 month construction period.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-4

Figure 2.2 Overall Site Layout including Proposed BioCork2 Project

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-5

2.3 Products Overview

The existing manufacturing facility (BioCork1) in Ringaskiddy produces biomedicines for both the treatment of immune related diseases and new and innovative cancer treatments. Four commercial products (Simponi, Stelara, Darzalex and Sylvant) are currently manufactured here, along with a range of other products currently in development and undergoing clinical trials.

The proposed BioCork2 manufacturing process with capacity to produce approximately 72 batches/yr (depending on specific product) is based on a process called Daratumumab process (hereinafter called Dara II), and is intended to utilise the same unit operations and core process parameters within the proposed BioCork2 production building for similar monoclonal antibody products to Dara II.

2.4 Description of the Production Process

2.4.1 Introduction

The manufacturing processes to be employed by Janssen Sciences in the proposed BioCork2 production building are similar to the processing techniques within the exiting BioCork1 facility and follow what are now considered as industry standard techniques for the production of “medicines for patients” using biotechnology derived processes. Today, this approach is favoured over traditional organic chemistry routes used in the past because it is capable of yielding more complex molecules for medicinal applications, is more efficient in terms of productivity, poses lower safety risks, and has less environmental impact in terms of hazardous chemicals used or waste generated for disposal.

The primary process steps as outlined in Figure 2.3 are as follows;

- Upstream: Cell Culture and Harvest

- Downstream: Purification and Product Formulation

Figure 2.3 BioCork2 Production Process Block Flow Diagram

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-6

The monoclonal antibody products are manufactured in an 19-stage process consisting of fed batch cell culture followed by purification and formulation. The process areas proposed can be separated into Cell Culture, Purification and Support operations. The process design is based on the judicious use of single use technology where appropriate.

Cell Culture areas include:

Stages 1-4: Preculture and Seed Expansion Preculture is initiated from a working cell bank vial with a dedicated cell line. The culture is serially expanded in culture flasks and bags until sufficient cell suspension is available for inoculation of a seed bioreactor.

Stages 5-9: Cell Culture (Production in Bioreactor) The culture is expanded through single use seed bioreactors of increasing volume until the viable cell density (VCD) and volume required for inoculation of a stainless steel seed bioreactor and sequentially the production bioreactor are obtained. Daily media feeds result in increased cell culture volume over the duration of bioreactor production.

Stages 10-11:Harvest Clarification (cell separation)

Cell culture is clarified using continuous centrifugation followed by depth filtration. Purification areas include: Stage 12: Direct Product Capture (DPC) (Protein A Chromatography)

The product is captured from clarified harvest using a Direct Product Capture (DPC) (Protein A) chromatography column to remove process-related impurities.

Stages 13-14: Viral Inactivation & Neutralization (VIN)

The DPC eluate is processed by low pH treatment to inactivate any viruses that are potentially present.

Stages 15-16: Polishing Chromatography

The product and process related impurities are removed from the product using 2 stages of polishing chromatography

Stage 17: Virus Removal Filtration

The product is filtered through a virus retentive filter and is now classified as virus free.

Stage 18: Concentration and Diafiltration

The ultrafiltration step concentrates the product and the diafiltration step adds the formulation excipients and removes the in-process buffer salts. The Stage 18 product is referred to as pre-formulated bulk (PFB).

Stage 19: Bulk Formulation and Fill

Final formulation of the bulk takes place in Stage 19. The product is filled into 10 L bottles using an automated bottle filler and stored at -40oC.

Support areas include:

The above operations will be supported by the following process areas:

- Media Preparation and hold

- Buffer Preparation and hold

- Column Packing

- Component Preparation

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-7

- Refrigeration

- Clean in Place (CIP) and process support areas washer systems and

- Waste Water Treatment

- Process Utility Supplies

2.4.2 Media Preparation and hold

The process by which media ingredients are hydrated and mixed as per defined recipe. The hydrated components are then filtered into bags contained within media storage containers (Bag stations and drums). Media is used in Preculture and Cell Culture operations.

2.4.3 Buffer Preparation and hold

The process by which buffer raw materials (mainly salts and sugars) are dissolved in solution as per defined recipe, followed by transfer and filtration (as required) to buffer hold bags and containers (Bag Stations, Stainless Steel Vessels and Polymeric Containers).

2.4.4 Column Packing

Column chromatography is used to separate protein molecules in complex mixtures. Chromatography columns are packed in situ with product specific resins for subsequent use in Direct Product Capture (DPC) and Polishing Chromatography stage 1 and 2

2.4.5 Component Preparation

The process by which mobile vessels, equipment, parts and materials are prepared for manufacturing use at the various process stages. This includes Washing, Clean Out of Place (COP), Assembly, Steam Out of Place (SOP) and/or Autoclaving as required.

2.4.6 Equipment Cleaning

All process operations in Upstream (Cell Culture) and Downstream (Purification) production occur in a combination of fixed vessels and disposable bags (static and mobile), depending on the capacity. The fixed vessels are all cleaned via an automated CIP system. All equipment (vessels and process lines) will be cleaned using recirculation cycles. There will be no “once through” CIP cycles to process drain. All aqueous waste water from cleaning systems will be directed from the process drains to the on site WWTP.

2.4.7 Waste Water Treatment

Waste water, or effluent, will arise from a number of sources on site, namely; the process/manufacturing operations, laboratories, utilities and sanitary. Effluent arising from the proposed development will undergo treatment in the onsite WWTP (to be expanded as part of this development) which provides full biological secondary treatment prior to discharge to the IDA / Irish Water long sea outfall to Cork Harbour. Further detail on the management of waste water arising from the proposed development is included in Chapter 10 (Water and Wastewater).

2.4.8 Process Utility Supply

Special high purity utility systems will be provided which will be used in all locations that could potentially come in contact with product. “Clean” utilities generation and storage equipment will be located on the groundfloor of the proposed production building. Process gas storage equipment will be located external to the new production building and in the existing CUB Building. The following “clean” utility service supplies will be generated:

Water for Injection (WFI)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-8

WFI will be required for make-up of process inputs i.e. media and buffer solutions and cleaning operations. This high purity water will be prepared by feeding softened water to vapour compression units. The WFI will be stored and distributed to all locations requiring water, including the CIP systems as well as the buffer and media solution prep areas.

Softened Water

Softened water will be used to feed the WFI production stills. It is anticipated filtration, softenting and chlorine removal will be part of the process.

Clean Steam

Clean steam will be employed for the sterilisation of process equipment. It will be produced from the distillation of WFI water in the clean steam generator.

Process Air

Clean compressed air will be prepared by compression and subsequent filtration of air. It will be distributed throughout the facility for use with the processing equipment.

Clean Gasses (Nitrogen, Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide Gases) and

Liquid Nitrogen

Nitrogen, Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide gases will be used to control the environment within the production bioreactors. The gases will be supplied from the existing liquefied gas storage vessels on site, with new vaporisers designed to supply the BioCork2 facility. In addition to the gaseous nitrogen, liquid nitrogen will also be supplied from a new storage vessel to preserve the temperature of the cell bank room.

Please refer to Section 2.6 for details on “black” utilities such as plant steam and chilled water supplies.

2.5 Description of the Proposed Buildings

The areas which require new build or expansion as per outlined in Figure 2.4 include:

- New BioCork2 Production Building with capacity to produce approximately 72 batches/yr (depending on product) containing:

- 4 No. 15,400L production bioreactor trains complete with associated upstream process equipment

- Media Preparation and hold areas

- 1 No. downstream processing train

- Buffer preparation and hold areas

- Clean utilities generation and distribution

The building has been enabled for future expansion through the addition of up to four additional 15,400L production bioreactors, as well as the addition of supporting seed trains, media and buffer systems and chromatography capacity.

- Warehouse expansion including

- Raw Materials (High bay storage)

- Finished Goods (-40 DegC Freezers)

- Weigh/dispense and Sampling storage

- Waste Management Area, Hazardous Materials storage

- Laboratory/Admin Building expansion

- Central utilities additional equipment

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-9

- Site Infrastructure expansion (including car parks, roads, WWTP expansion)

Figure 2.4 Existing and Proposed Buildings

2.5.1 Production Building

The proposed BioCork2 production building consists of 11,054 m2 over 2 main floors and associated mezzanine levels, 3D representations are included in Figures 2.5 and 2.6. The building is mainly designed as a single storey production facility with the core process area located on the ground floor for ease of operations and maintenance. The Media and Buffer Preparation is located on first floor level to facilitate ease of charging large vessels and discharge into hold vessels on the ground floor.

- Level 1: Media and Buffer Preparation with HVAC plant room

- Level 0: Cell Culture, Purification, Utilities and support

- The single storey part of the facility houses the clean utilities

The production building is designed on a single production corridor approach. All materials, personnel, waste and samples travel in/out of each suite via this new spine corridor. The production facility will be accessed from the south, via the new spine corridor which is a continuation of the current existing spine corridor. The site is arranged as a continuation of the central spine concept that connects all buildings via a 5m wide central corridor.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-10

Figure 2.5 View of the Proposed BioCork2 Production Building (3D Model - viewed from north)

Figure 2.6 View of BioCork2 Production Building, Warehouse Extension - Waste Management Area and High Bay (3D Model - viewed from south / south west)

2.5.2 Warehouse Extensions

The existing warehouse which currently supports the existing manufacturing facility was originally completed in 2006/7 and since completion some additional freezer rooms and a dispensing areas has been added. The additional warehouse storage and logistics required to support the proposed BioCork2 development will include the following operations:

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-11

- Chemical storage area

- Increased waste handling area

- Increase material handling / transaction area

- Additional racking space and loading dock

- Additional laboratory / consumable storage area

- Additional 2-8 degree cold storage required

- Pallet and / or tote wash / wipe down area

- 2 dispensing suits

- Ambient warehouse racking (approximately 1200 pallets)

- Finished goods freezer area

- HVAC Plant areas to support above Based on the above requirements, the following three separate extensions together consisting of over 4,890m2 gross floor area, are proposed. Each extension as illustrated in Figure 2.7 being used for a distinct function, namely;

1. New waste management and dispensing area

2. New high bay warehouse

3. New finished goods freezer area

Figure 2.7 Overview of the Warehouse Extension Areas

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-12

Upgrades will also extend to the existing warehouse facilities, these will include:

- The relocation of the existing autoclave

- Refurbish existing office area

- Increase existing vendor managed inventory (VMI) storage

- Repurpose sections of the existing floor area to support the following activities - material receipt, batch preparation and finished goods shipping area.

New waste management and dispensing area

- An extension located to the north of the existing warehouse will consist of two new dispensary suites comprising a part single storey, part two storey steel framed structure c. 58m long x 19m wide x 12m high located to the north-west of the existing warehouse. A mezzanine for mechanical plant will be located over the dispensing suite area.

- The extension to the north will also consist of a new hazardous material store, 4 pallets high and a central waste sort area. The new waste sort area structure briefly comprises a single storey, steel framed structure c. 24m long x 23m wide x 11m high located to the north-west of the existing warehouse. The waste area can be accessed directly from the north (spine corridor) and from the existing warehouse area. A separate hazardous waste area will be provided with space for two autoclaves.

New high bay warehouse

- An extension to the south east of the existing warehouse will accommodate a new high bay warehouse (HBWH) building with an internal clear height of approximately 14.5m to accommodate 8 rack high storage for raw materials, with a total building height of 18.2m which is approximately 5.9m higher than the current warehouse.

New finished goods freezer area

- The proposed finished goods -40 degree freezer area is located adjacent to the existing freezer area on the west side and is approximately 1m higher than the existing freezer building.

Warehouse related operations which will be accommodated elsewhere in the BioCork2 Facility include:

- General Storage including Engineering

- Column Preparation & Storage

- Resin storage

- Cell Bank Storage Room

- Compressed gas storage

- CIP materials hook up

3D representations of the above extensions are included in Figures 2.4 and Figure 2.6. The design of the BioCork2 Warehouse facilities will be coordinated with BioCork1 Warehouse with regards to functions such as receipts/despatch, waste staging, lockers and offices.

2.5.3 Laboratory Administration Building Extension

The location of the Laboratory/Admin Extension south west of the existing Lab/Admin Building is in keeping with the original site vision and master plan whereby an area to the south of the existing Lab/Admin Building was allocated for future expansion. The proposed new extension as outlined in Figure 2.8 consumes part of this land bank but is designed and located in such a manner not to impede future expansion to the south / south east.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-13

Figure 2.8 Proposed Lab/Admin Extension

Figure 2.9 View of Lab/Admin Extension (3D Model viewed from south)

The proposed Laboratory Administration building extension consists of c. 3,101m2 over 4 main floors comprising a braced steel-framed building approximately 35m long by 25m wide by 21m high.

Level 1 is predominately an open plan office administration area. Laboratories will be located on level 2 and level 3 and will include the following functions

- General Chemistry I

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-14

- General Chemistry II

- Bio Assay

- Separations

- Sample Storage

- Sample Management

- Cell Bank

- Sample Retains

- Vendor Management Inventory (VMI)

Plant will be located on level 4. The existing and new buildings will be linked at each floor level. In addition, as illustrated in Figure 2.10, it is proposed to extend the canteen by approximately 150m2

to the east and north of the existing canteen to allow for additional seating capacity.

Figure 2.10 Proposed Canteen Extension (3d model viewed from north / northeast)

2.5.4 WWTP Expansion

Details on the WWTP expansion are provided within Chapter 10 Water and Wastewater.

2.5.5 Utilities Central Utilities Building (CUB)

The existing CUB building and utility yard will house additional equipment as per described in Section 2.6.

2.6 Utilities

Capacity within the existing “Black” Central Utilities Building (CUB) and utility yard will be expanded to support the BioCork2 facility, the following systems will be increased:

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-15

2.6.1 Plant Steam

The existing plant steam system comprises of two steam boilers each sized for 12,000 kg/hr of steam. There is no requirement for additional boilers, however, a new steam supply will connect into the common header and be routed to the new production building.

2.6.2 Process and Potable Water

The existing site process water tank is located within the utilities yard. The tank is fed from the underground mains water supply. The site potable water supply is connected to the mains water feed to the tank.

There is no requirement for a new process water tank, however, a new process water feed is required to the new production building. This will be mainly used in the production of WFI. A new potable water feed is also required to the new production building.

There are also additional process and potable water supplies required for the new Lab/Admin extension. These new feeds are anticipated to be provided from existing connections located within the existing lab/admin building.

2.6.3 Cooling Tower Water

The existing cooling water system consist of two cooling towers and associated distribution pumps, piping, fans, filtration and chemical treatment system. It is proposed to add one new cooling tower and pump to the system to include for the proposed new manufacturing requirements. In addition smaller cooling systems will be included in the yard west of the new high bay warehouse to support the new cold storage expansion associated with the new high bay warehouse area.

2.6.4 Chilled Water

The existing chilled water is generated through the use of two centrifugal chillers. It is proposed to add one new centrifugal chiller and pump set within the CUB.

Heating Hot Water (HWS)

HWS is currently generated through the use of a plant steam/water heat exchangers. It is anticipated that this set up can absorb the new loads generated by the proposed BioCork2 requirements.

2.6.5 Compressed Air

A new centralised compressed air system will be implemented, upgrading the existing system which will result in three compressors and five dessicant dryers followed by filtration and pressure reduction which is then split into separate Instrument and Process air systems.

2.6.6 Emergency Generators

There is a requirement for a new emergency diesel generator to be located within the utilities yard north of the cooling towers to supplement the existing two standby emergency diesel generators so as to provide emergency power in the event of a failure of the electricity main supply. An additional connection is required to tie in to the existing diesel storage tank. Under normal circumstance, the generators will be run for short periods estimated at a maximum of one to two hours per week, for test and maintenance purposes only.

2.6.7 Water Treatment – Chemical Dosing (Closed Systems)

A number of water systems require chemical dosing to prevent corrosion and minimise bacterial build up. These include:

- Low Temperature Hot Water Boiler System

- HVAC Chiller Water Loop

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-16

No modifications are required to the existing on site dosing system.

2.6.8 Electricity

There is an existing 3 MW Wind Turbine on the site. The current maximum electrical demand is approximately 1.6 MW. The proposed BioCork2 expansion works will utilise the excess energy that is currently being produced by the wind turbine (refer to Section 2.8 for further detail).

The existing medium voltage (MV) power infrastructure will be utilised with the existing spare MV switches used for the new BioCork2 manufacturing facility.

The existing Low Voltage (LV) power infrastructure will be expanded with a new LV distribution system similar to the existing infrastructure provided for the manufacturing facility. The expansion of the warehouse will be powered from the new manufacturing facility LV infrastructure. The Laboratory and Admin Building extension will be powered from the existing site LV infrastructure.

2.6.9 Natural Gas

The site has an existing natural gas main. No new natural gas mains are required.

2.6.10 Fire Hydrant & Sprinkler Mains

The existing underground fire main will be extended around the new building footprints. The ring main will be fed from the recently relocated firewater storage tank and associated pump house located at the south west of the proposed expansion. The firewater pump will not be run during normal operation other than for testing purposes (ca. 30 minutes per week). Diesel will be used as a fuel for the firewater pump.

The underground fire main will connect to the new building and extensions at various points to provide a supply for the internal sprinkler systems through a number of branch entry pipes.

All details relating to hydrants and fire fighting requirements will be detailed and agreed with the Fire Officer during the preparation of the fire certification for the proposed BioCork2 expansion.

2.6.11 Lighting and CCTV

Lighting and CCTV services will be an extension of the BioCork1 facilities. External lighting will be designed to give a minimum average of 20 lux in order to give sufficient ambient lighting to the building perimeter, pedestrian walkways, access roads, car parks and for CCTV security cameras. External lighting will comprise a mix of building mounted floodlights, column mounted floodlights and bollards. External lighting along external pedestrian entrances will be supplied complete with integral daylight / presence detection controls.

An energy efficient lighting installation will be designed for all buildings and extensions. External lighting will be designed to provide safe access and egress from the buildings, carpark and to facilitate access and maintenance of external plant and equipment. The design will incorporate the requirement for dark sky compliance.

All additional lighting systems will be designed to minimise nuisance through light spillage. Shielded, downward directed lighting will be used, with no upward facing or omnidirectional lighting used and all non-essential lighting will be switched off during the hours of darkness. This will minimise potential lighting disturbance to the faunal species that may occur at the site or nearby.

Electronic security systems are installed protecting the areas around the perimeter of the site, with CCTV cameras at specific points around the site.

2.7 Site Infrastructure

The proposed development will include landscaping, an internal road network with lighting, footpaths, concrete yards, car parking, security fencing, site signage and associated underground services described in more detail below. In addition, a construction compound will be formed as per described in Section 2.9 which on completion will be removed and reinstated with landscaping.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-17

2.7.1 Bulk Earthworks and Current Site Development Works Programme (Planning Reference 16/7150)

In March 2017, Cork County Council granted planning permission to Janssen to undertake a programme of Site Development Works at the Barnahely site (planning reference 16/7150). The scope of the Site Development Works involves site excavation and landscaping works including the excavation of approximately 72,000m3 of material from the existing embankment to the west of the existing CUB yard and the creation of a level greenfield area of approximately 1.2 hectares in this location, together with the relocation of a number of fixed and temporary structures in this area of the site.

The purpose of the Site Development Works was to create a level platform of approximately 1.2 hectares of greenfield space within the central area of the site, adjacent to the existing manufacturing facility, which would initially relieve some operational restrictions in the area. The creation of the level platform is in line with the development masterplan for the overall site and, when complete, will also provide a level site of suitable scale for the development of the new Production Building now being proposed.

The scope of the Site Development Works programme is shown graphically in Figure 2.11. The material to be excavated during the bulk excavation will be utilised to create a new landscaped berm along the north western boundary of the site.

The programme of Site Development Works recently commenced (May 2017) and are scheduled to be substantially complete by October 2017. The completion of this work will thus enable the commencement of the proposed expansion of the Biomedicines Facility, pending Planning Permission, in Q4 2017.

Figure 2.11 Current Site Development Works Programme

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-18

2.7.2 Site Access & Access Roads Incl. Footpaths

The main access roadways will be 7.3m wide with an insitu concrete kerb. There will be a new perimeter roadway around the proposed Production Building. The existing roadways to the warehouse loading yard, canteen, and back of the existing administration building will also be realigned.

Footpaths will be provided to allow the safe movement of pedestrians. Isolated buildings and plant areas will be connected to the main building by designated footpaths or footways. Footpaths will be generally 1.2m or 2.4m wide constructed of concrete. There will be a footpath around the main building perimeter.

2.7.3 Car Parks

There is a requirement to provide and maintain car park spaces for staff, mobility impaired, emergency and visitor parking strategically located to serve the BioCork2 development. The number of car park spaces will be 325 including 17 disabled driver spaces, infrastructure for 40 electric car charging points, 33 motorcycle spaces and 72 cycle spaces which will be allocated in accordance with the standard requirements set out in Cork County Development Plan 2014.

The surfacing of the surface car park aisles and bays will be constructed from asphalt concrete.

2.7.4 Storm Water Drainage

The site will require an active drainage system with gullies and a piped gravity drainage network. The design will allow for cambered roads and hardstanding areas that fall towards adjacent gully inlets.

Please refer to Chapter 10 (Water and Wastewater) for details on surface water management associated with the proposed expansion and tie-ins to the existing on site storm water drainage system.

2.7.5 Foul and Process Effluent Drainage

All foul and process effluent drainage systems from the expansion will be designed to operate by gravity to connect to the BioCork1 drainage works which are treated in the on site WWTP and discharge to the adjacent IDA / Irish Water sewer network to the south of the site.

Please refer to Chapter 10 (Water and Wastewater) for details on foul and process water management associated with the proposed expansion.

2.8 Sustainability

The design of the expansion has been developed to adopt a design that is highly energy efficient. The existing site 3MW wind turbine will contribute onsite renewable energy in order to offset high process energy requirements. The current maximum electrical demand is approximately 1.6 MW.

The new expansion works planned under the BioCork2 expansion will utilise the excess energy that is currently being produced by the wind turbine and this will also be used as part of the criteria to achieve LEED certification.

An Energy Review was completed for the proposed project with the following outcomes:

- The intent of the project is to achieve LEED (US Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified status as required by the Policy for the Sustainable Design and Construction of Johnson & Johnson Facilities.

- An Energy savings Register was completed as part of the BOD with a list of Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) with payback less than 10 years to be further considered as part of the Detailed Design.

Energy efficient measures will include:

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-19

- High performance building envelope

- High efficient HVAC plant and lighting design

A rainwater harvesting system will be implemented to reduce potable water demand for domestic water consumption by > 50% with a 100% usage for sewage conveyance.

2.9 Construction Works

Subject to planning permission, the BioCork2 on-site construction is scheduled for 24 months, from Q4, 2017 to Q4, 2019. The peak construction month will be September 2018.

An average of 450 construction workers is predicted during the construction phase. Overall peak construction staff will be 782 staff in September 2018. The proposed core construction on-site working hours are from 7.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. Monday to Friday, and from 7.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. on Saturdays, unless otherwise agreed with Cork County Council.

The following section outlines the important aspects of the construction phase of the proposed BioCork2 development.

2.9.1 Pre-Construction Planning Phase

As part of the pre-construction planning phase (and pre commencement compliance) the following key topics will be reviewed and arrangements for the management of these will be documented as part of an overall Construction Management Plan (CMP). These will include the following key topics:

- Construction Logistics including construction traffic management planning

- Construction Safety Arrangements

- Construction Environmental Management Planning

- Construction and Demolition Waste Management Planning

- Construction Execution Strategy and Plan

- Construction Completion & Turnover Plan

A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been prepared as part of the planning application. The CEMP sets out the responsibilities, environmental standards and requirements for the duration of the construction phase of the project. The document includes the necessary environmental controls and mitigation measure to prevent/mitigate any potential impact on the surrounding environment. The document will be updated prior to commencement of the construction phase.

2.9.2 Site Development Works & Construction Compound

The sequence will start with the establishment of a site compound, car parking, laydown areas, site security and access roads. A construction car park will be set up on the west side of the site adjacent to the wind turbine.

Pedestrian access routes will be segregated from vehicular traffic. Vehicles accessing the site will do so only under Construction Site Security authorisation.

Contractors’ offices/mess rooms, Construction Security/Site Induction Centre, Construction Management Team (CMT) Office Block and Toilet Block will all be located in the new construction compound area.

Provision will be put in place for a designated wheel wash facility, contained concrete wash out areas and a diesel fill area, details of which will be provided with the CEMP submitted with the planning application. A contained waste area and materials storage area will be located adjacent to the Production building.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-20

Lay-down space will be allocated to contractors by the CMT. As lay-down space is of a premium value, allocated slots will be maintained daily to ensure obstructions are eliminated. Traffic will be controlled in and out of lay-down areas with the aid of “spotters” and materials will also be lifted in and out of the lay-down areas with the aid of plant such as teleporters and mobile cranes controlled by qualified “banks-men”. Pedestrian access/egress routes will be clearly defined for lay-down areas.

Lay-down areas will be developed adjacent to the new construction compound and at areas around the new production building footprint, Warehouse extension and Lab/Admin Extension.

All earthworks materials excavated on-site during construction will be retained and reused on-site. No excavated earthworks materials will be removed off-site. Further details are provided within the landscaping master plan within Chapter 5 (Landscape and Visual and (Chapter 7 Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology).

2.9.3 Security & Controlled Access to Site

The site will be fully fenced and hoarded to prevent unauthorised access. A swipe card / biometric access will be put in place. The access controlled system will have associated software to facilitate the appropriate head count functions required for a project of this scale and type.

Construction security will control movements for all construction traffic onto and off of the construction site. Delivery personnel will be advised of the site basic rules at point of entry by security. The site PPE rules will apply to all delivery personnel. Security will check and confirm adherence to all site rules prior to sanctioning movement onto the site by any delivery company/personnel. Construction security will remain in contact with the CMT at all times.

Construction security will operate a “rounds” system to ensure that the site is secured at all times. A daily report will be issued to the Construction Manager. All personnel working on the site will undergo a project Site Safety Induction. Visitors will only be allowed to access the site when accompanied by an authorised person

Access to Production Building

Personnel will follow a dedicated access/egress route from the construction compound at all times. Dedicated pedestrian routes will be set out as part of the Site Logistics Plan. Pedestrian routes will be set out in the following areas:

- Route to and from the Production Building

- Route to and from CUB

- New construction compound,

- New construction car-park,

- Around the perimeter of the new building footprints, giving access/egress to the new building and access/egress to the materials lay-down and toilet facilities.

All pedestrian routes will be constructed of suitable material and the surface will be maintained to prevent trip hazards. Barriers will be utilised to create segregation with traffic. These barriers will be maintained on an on-going basis.

2.9.4 Construction Traffic and Car Parking

The core construction working hours’ start and finish times will be outside the morning and evening peak hours, to ensure that site personnel will not arrive during the morning peak hour and not depart during the evening peak hour.

An average of 450 construction workers is predicted during the construction phase, overall peak construction staff will be 782 staff in September 2018, including 592 trade/manpower workers and 190 supervision and management staff. This will occur during the peak Mechanical, E&I and HVAC contracts’ period.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-21

All construction site access will be via the existing IDA site access on the N28, located immediately east of Shanbally as illustrated in Figure 2.12. All construction parking and compounds will be provided within the site confines. There will be no construction site access via Janssen Sciences existing R613 operational access. As currently, there will be no operational site access via the proposed construction site access at the existing N28 access. The existing IDA N28 site access is currently used as an emergency access and for site preparation works only.

Figure 2.12 Site Access Arrangements

A specialist road washing and cleaning vehicle will be used regularly to maintain public roads. All necessary construction signage and other measures required by CCC will be provided.

A detailed Construction Traffic Management Plan will be submitted to CCC, for their approval, prior to the commencement of construction.

Pedestrian routes will be segregated from vehicular traffic at all times. This will be part of the Construction Logistics Plan and will be monitored on an on-going basis. Safety Barriers and signage will be utilised to create the segregation and proper lighting levels will be maintained. The majority of construction traffic flows and deliveries will be during off peak hours of public traffic.

2.9.5 Construction Utilities

Electrical power for all construction activities and lighting requirements will be fed from a combination of various low voltage (LV) hook ups around the existing building to temporary distribution boards at each site location, the main one of these being the hook up to a spare medium voltage (MV) switch in the existing CUB MV switch room. This will feed a new transformer/distribution board housed in the construction compound.

Water supply for construction activities will be fed from existing water main on IDA road on the south side of the site via a metered temporary connection.

Foul and storm water runoff from the construction site will be tied into the existing foul and storm water systems on site.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 2-22

2.9.6 Extended Working Hours

During the course of the project, opportunities may arise for extended working times beyond core hours that would result in positive impacts on aspects such as (i) reducing construction related traffic during busy commuter times (ii) reducing the overall construction period and associated temporary construction impacts in the locality. As part of the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for the project, such opportunities will be evaluated by the Construction Management Team, on a case by case basis, such that extended working hours may be employed where a clear environmental benefit will accrue, without creating any other adverse impacts.

2.10 Decommissioning

In compliance with Condition 10 of the site’s IE Licence (P0778-01) a fully detailed and costed plan for the decommissioning or closure of the site or part thereof has been prepared and submitted to the EPA. The Decommissioning Management Plan (DMP) focuses on the planned or anticipated liabilities associated with closure and the required financial provision required for these liabilities. The objective of the plan is to bring the site to a stage where it no longer poses any risk of environmental pollution, i.e. clean closure. Due to the nature of activities on site, there are no difficulties envisaged in achieving this objective. As part of IE Licencing compliance, the DMP will be updated to include for the proposed BioCork2 development.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:09


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 3-1

3 Alternatives Considered

3.1 Introduction

Guidance provided by the EPA on the preparation of an EIS now referred to as EIAR describes the importance attached to the consideration of alternatives in the overall EIA process and in particular the revised EIA Directive 2014/52/EU requires an EIAR to contain:

“A description of the reasonable alternatives (for example in terms of project design, technology, location, size and scale) studied by the developer, which are relevant to the proposed project and its specific characteristics, and an indication of the main reasons for selecting the chosen option, including a comparison of the environmental effects.”

An outline of the main alternatives examined during the course of the project design development is presented in this chapter, including explanation of what environmental factors were considered and how these considerations influenced the selection of the preferred option.

It is a fundamental requirement of the EIA process that viable alternatives to the key project decisions have been evaluated in the context of environmental impact.

Development of the proposals have involved the following key project decisions:

- Why build this facility?

- Selection of the preferred site/location for the expansion development

- Selection of the preferred manufacturing process and technology

- Selection of the preferred arrangement of the proposed buildings

This chapter describes the alternatives that were considered under each of these headings and the reasons for the selection of the preferred options.

3.2 Why Build this Facility?

As previously mentioned in Section 1.2, Janssen has identified a need for additional manufacturing capacity. The need is generated by a market demand to meet forecasted sales volumes worldwide for biopharmaceutical medicines to treat patients with immune related diseases and new and innovative cancer treatments.

Janssen intends to invest in the creation of additional bulk manufacturing facilities for a range of biopharmaceutical derived medical products for patients worldwide, together with associated business support functions.

Janssen intends to manufacture a variety of additional therapeutic proteins that are either approved for marketing by various region or country regulatory bodies or are involved in late stage clinical studies. As per the current process on site, these additional proteins will be produced to the bulk or formulated state and filled for shipping.

3.3 Selection of the Preferred Site/Location for the Development

To ensure logistical efficiency and sustainability, it is necessary to co-locate the additional manufacturing capacity adjacent to an existing biopharmaceutical supply chain facility.

A number of international country locations were considered by Janssen for this project. The site at Ringaskiddy was ultimately chosen based on a range of business and sustainability factors.

The original masterplan for the long term development of the Ringaskidy site, as set out in the EIS supporting the first development in 2005, provided a clear roadmap for the phased and sustainable development of the site over a long period of time.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 3-2

The availability of advanced infrastructure at the site, the physical capacity of the 40 hectare site to accommodate a new manufacturing operation, together with the established human resource capability, meant that the Barnahely site was the ideal location for this important project.

Janssen currently has one biomedicines supply chain facility in Ireland;

- Janssen Science Ireland UC biopharmaceutical campus in Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork. Janssen established its operation in Barnahely in 2005 (then Centocor Biologics) on a 40.1 hectare site with an investment of €400 million. The existing manufacturing facility in Ringaskiddy produces biomedicines for both the treatment of immune related diseases and new and innovative cancer treatments. Three commercial products are currently manufactured here, along with a range of other products currently in development and undergoing clinical trials.

The existing Janssen Sciences site is approximately 40.1 hectares, of which approximately 20 hectares remained undeveloped but was master planned for a doubling of the existing biopharmaceutical manufacturing on site.

The selection of the preferred location for this project involved careful consideration of a broad range of factors, all of which were deemed critical to the success and viability of the project. Key amongst these considerations were factors with potential environmental consequences, in particular;

1. The availability of a site with existing supporting business functions capable of accommodating the proposed BioCork2 development and future manufacturing operations;

2. An environmental setting consistent with and compatible with the nature of manufacturing proposed, in terms of zoning policy and adjacent land uses; and

3. A site with established or available utility connections capable of supporting the proposed biopharmaceutical manufacturing processes, including; power, natural gas, water, wastewater, surface water and communications.

3.4 Selection of Preferred Manufacturing Process

The proposed development will involve the construction of a new production building (BioCork2) and associated buildings and infrastructure for the manufacture of pharmaceutical products.

Traditionally the manufacture of pharmaceutical products is carried out either through a chemical or biological process. The BioCork2 facility proposed to be developed by Janssen Sciences will be similar to the BioCork1 facility based on a biological (or biotechnology) process. It is important to understand that the manufacture of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs) by means of a biological process differs significantly from traditional bulk synthesis / chemical API manufacture. Biological processes are characterised by the mild aqueous conditions of the production and purification stages. This is in contrast to the small molecule chemical API process where extremes of temperature (hot and cold) and potentially aggressive chemicals are involved in the chemical reaction steps.

As such, biotechnology represents a clean and safe option for the manufacture of human medicines by virtue of the following which also apply to the existing BioCork1 facility on site:

- Low emergency or fire risk due to small quantities of chemicals.

- Low hazardous waste generation (no hazardous chemicals involved in the manufacturing process other than minor quantities for chromatography storage and cleaning purposes).

- Low atmospheric emissions (little or no Volatile Organic Compound emissions due to the absence of solvents or other hazardous chemicals in manufacturing process).

- Inherently low environmental risk because of water-based technologies.

- The proposed manufacturing facility (in addition to the existing) will be classified as Class 1 for the contained use of Genetically Modified Micro-organisms (GMM), as regulated by the EPA

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 3-3

whereby Class 1 GMMs pose no or negligible risk to human, animal, plant health or the environment.

Furthermore, because pharmaceutical manufacture using biological processes is based on complex techniques of biotechnology, there is a lot of variety in the type of technology and manufacturing processes used around the world. Janssen Sciences intend to replicate the technologies and processes already being used at the existing BioCork facility and other European Janssen/J&J Bio sites currently manufacturing Janssen/J&J products. The knowledge and skills that Janssen and their people built up over the years in the design, operation and management of facilities around this technology will ensure that any potential environmental risks associated with the process will be minimised, in comparison with a situation where a new technology or manufacturing process is being introduced.

3.5 Selection of Preferred Arrangement of the Proposed Buildings

The existing BioCork1 development dictated the preferred arrangement of the proposed BioCork2 buildings. Currently the existing manufacturing facility includes four main buildings all linked by a longitudinal spine corridor, the characteristics of BioCork1 include:

1. Optimal usage of the site - distances between existing buildings allows the most compact arrangement of separate buildings on the site. Effectively the buildings could not be any closer without merging into one mass.

2. The arrangement of the four buildings works as a composition where the heights of the buildings form a spiral around the central courtyard. This balances the composition of the individual buildings while allowing a coherent composition of the complete facility.

3. The utility yard is located to the west of the CUB building so as to minimise northern and eastern views.

4. The Administration & Laboratory Building is located to the south allowing the facility to optimise the use of natural light and solar gain.

5. The model for the car park and future potential car parks is to wrap around part of the facility thereby breaking up the car park into a more sensitive shape which can be designed in harmony with the landscaping and contours of the site.

BioCork2 is seen as a continuation of this master planning philosophy adopted for BioCork1. Notwithstanding this, a number of alternative options were assessed regarding the proposed arrangement of the BioCork2 buildings and infrastructure, see Figures 3.1. Note within Figure 3.1 any reference to Subra implies BioCork2 Production Building.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 3-4

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Figure 3.1 Alternative Options Assessed

Following a review of the different options Figure 3.2 was chosen as the preferred option for BioCork2.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 3-5

Figure 3.2 Selected Preferred Option

The proposed building blocks of the selected option are designed to sit within the existing industrial landscape creating a visual break but at the same time reinforcing the architectural language that exists in the area. The design follows the component approach whereby the functions to be carried out in each of the buildings and their inter-relationships with each other and the existing facility were the main driver for the form of the buildings.

The following factors were considered in arriving at a preferred layout for the new production building and associated BioCork2 buildings and utilities;

- Consistency with the Master Plan strategy and philosophy set out for the site planning documentation and EIS supporting the BioCork1 permitted development (see Figures 3.1 and 3.2) in terms of synergies with existing buildings and sustainable design.

- Continuation of the campus ‘feel’ of the development and the creation of a consistent link between BioCork1 and BioCork2.

- Continuation of the east/west longitudinal 5m wide spine corridor as the most efficient means of personnel and materials link between the BioCork1 facilities and the proposed BioCork2 manufacturing operations.

- Continuation of the concept of utilities in the centre of the site with efficient short connections to all existing and future buildings.

- Location of the BioCork2 production building on the western side of the spine and existing production building, on an east-west axis to avail of external visual screening by virtue of earthen embankments to the north so as to minimise its visual impact when viewed from prominent locations in proximity to the site and from distance.

- Location of the Lab/Admin expansion on the south western side of the existing Admin buildings so as to integrate with the existing building facilities, allow for future expansion and again as per the existing building optimise the use of natural light and solar gain.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 3-6

- Location of the warehouse expansion on the south of the existing warehouse utilising an efficient relationship to existing site services and warehousing facilities.

- Continuation of car parking facilities to the north of the site as the most efficient means of personnel accessing the buildings.

A significant consideration in the design of the BioCork2 manufacturing facility, and in particular the production building itself, has been the determination of the overall height of building required to accommodate the designated manufacturing functions.

Conventional best practice in the design of biopharmaceutical manufacturing facilities dictates a structure comprising 2 primary operating levels which provides optimum manufacturing conditions in terms of:

- minimising product and liquid transfer distances

- optimal segregation of processes

- maximum energy efficiency, and

- optimal environmental performance / waste handling.

The proposed manufacturing expansion to be developed by Janssen will be based on this conventional and industry best-practice approach, as opposed to any alternative or less efficient arrangement. The proposed production building will comprise 2 operating levels with core process area located on the ground floor for ease of operations and maintenance. The media and buffer preparation is located on the first floor to facilitate ease of charging large vessels and discharge into hold vessels on the ground floor.

- Level 1: Media and buffer preparation with HVAC plant room (9m floor-to-roof)

- Level 0: Cell culture, purification, utilities and support (9m floor-to-floor)

- The single storey part of the facility that houses the clean utilities is mainly 9m floor-to-roof.

The floor-to-floor heights are dictated by the requirements to accommodate the scale of vessels and equipment required to manufacture the suite of biopharmaceutical products envisaged. The overall production building height therefore necessary to achieve the optimal functional and environmental objectives defined above.

The manufacturing facility will be accessed from the south, via the new spine corridor which is a continuation of the current existing spine corridor.

In summary, the selection of the preferred arrangement represents an optimal, efficient, and sustainable process and facility layout that is adaptable in terms of facilitating multiproduct manufacturing, operational friendly and easily maintained.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-1

4 Population and Human Health

4.1 Introduction

This chapter describes the likely impacts on the human environment including the potential to give rise to effects on human health6 in the vicinity of the proposed development as a result of the development in terms of impacts on local residences and businesses, the wider community, zoning and land use, health and safety, and local amenities and tourism. The impacts of other human related environmental aspects associated with the proposed development are discussed in the relevant chapters of this EIAR. These aspects will include air emissions, traffic, noise, effluent, water and wastes generated on site during both the construction and operational phase of the development and their interrelationships with human health. These topics are dealt with individually in the relevant sections of the EIAR.

- Chapter 6 –Traffic and Transportation

- Chapter 9 – Noise and Vibration

- Chapter 10 – Water and Wastewater

- Chapter 11 – Air Quality and Climate

- Chapter 12 – Waste Management

The assessments are based on a comprehensive body of references that provide appraisal criteria and indicators used for assessment (in line with the international Best Available Techniques (BAT)) of the potential of biophysical effects used in environmental assessment and licensing. These criteria include the emissions standards and related Emission Limit Values (ELVs) that set the compliance requirements that subsequently determine if anticipated environmental and associated health effects are likely to be acceptable or not.

4.1.1 Appropriate Guidance Documents

This chapter was prepared noting the assessment requirements in the EPA guidance documents described in EIAR Section 1.6.1 ‘EIAR Preparation’.

This chapter is focused on potential impacts which have not been assessed elsewhere in the EIAR. The EPA identifies the following issues which may be examined under assessment of impact on Population and Human Health include;

- Economic Activity – will the development stimulate additional development and/or reduce economic activity, and if either, what type, how much and where?

- Social Considerations – will the development change the intensity of patterns and types of activity and land use.

- Land-use – will there be severance, loss of rights or way or amenities, conflicts, or other changes likely ultimately to alter the character and land use surroundings?

- Tourism – will the development affect the tourism profile of the area?

- Health – have the vectors through which human health impacts could be caused been assessed, including adequate consideration of inter relationships between those assessments?

The EPA advice notes recommend that the EIS now referred to as EIAR indicates the location of sensitive neighbouring occupied premises likely to be directly affected and other premises, which although may be located elsewhere, may be the subject of secondary impacts such as alterations to traffic flows or increased urban development, with particular reference to the following;

- Homes;

6 The World Health Organisation (WHO) defines health as “a complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity ”.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-2

- Hospitals;

- Hotels and holiday accommodation;

- Schools and rehabilitation workshops.

In line with EPA advice notes, before assessing the impacts on the human environment, the principal receptors that may be impacted by the proposed development are identified as:

Residential Receptors

- Residential properties within 1 km of the site;

- Residential properties adjacent to the primary transport routes;

- Residential properties in the wider context;

- Land zoned for residential development.

Direct Economic Receptors

- Commercial and Industrial premises in close proximity to the site;

- Zoned commercial lands in close proximity to the site;

- Operational and construction related employment.

Indirect Economic Receptors;

- Suppliers of construction materials;

- Spin off employment and economic activity;

Social and Community Facilities

- Schools and community facilities within the vicinity of the site;

- Lands zoned for social and community facilities within 1 km of the site;

The EPA advice notes also recommend that impacts on the transient population are considered, such as drivers, tourists and walkers.

Existing Seveso sites (under EC (Control of Major Accidents Involving Dangerous Substances) Regulations S.I. 208 of 2015 (COMAH Regulations)) in the vicinity of the existing and proposed development have also been considered and referenced.

4.1.2 Sources of Baseline Information

Relevant information has been obtained from public bodies with regard to planning and development context, employment statistics, demographic statistics and community aspects. The primary bodies concerned were the Central Statistics Office (CSO) and Cork County Council (CCC).

The chief sources of development guidance for Ringaskiddy are the South-West Regional Planning Guidelines 2010-2022, the Cork County Development Plan 2014 and the Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Area Plan (LAP) 2015 which is currently under revision as the draft Ballincollig Carrigaline Municipal District LAP (published November 2016). Other sources of desktop information reviewed in the process of information gathering included censuses for 2006, 2011 and the preliminary 2016 Census results and the Quarterly National Household Register/ Live Register figures.

4.2 Characteristic of the Existing and Proposed Development

4.2.1 Existing Facility

The site for the proposed expansion is situated on the pre-existing Janssen Sciences Ireland UC site, in a brownfield site that has been zoned for industrial use. Janssen Sciences is an EPA licensed facility under IED License reference P0778-01 since January 2006.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-3

The existing facility is also a proactive participant in the Ringaskiddy Liaison Group, which includes representatives from each of the industries in Ringaskiddy, together with Port of Cork and representatives from the Ringaskiddy and District Residents Association (RDRA).

4.2.2 Proposed Development

The proposed development involves the expansion of production, warehouse, wastewater and administration facilities at the existing site. It is envisaged that the new manufacturing and associated support facilities will add approximately 250 no. employees to the current workforce when operational. It is also envisaged that an average of 450 no. construction jobs will be created over the 24-month construction period.

Further details are provided in Chapter 2 ‘Description of the Proposed Development’.

4.3 Receiving Environment

4.3.1 Development Context and Land-use Zoning

South-West Regional Planning Guidelines 2010-2022

The South-West Regional Planning Guidelines (RPGs) 2010-2022 (South West Regional Authority, 2010) sets out a socio-economic development strategy and planning framework for the South Western Region which covers Cork and Kerry. The RPG addresses key planning issues affecting the development of the region including population and settlement, economic and employment trends, industrial and commercial development and transportation. The purpose of the RPGs is to set out recommendations to the local authorities which support national investment policies and provide a regionally integrated approach to sustainable development.

The RPGs specifically reference Ringaskiddy in terms of capacity for research at The National Maritime College and its status as a “strategic location large scale, foreign direct investment and indigenous sites” containing “regional significant pharma-chem industries”. The most significant regionally significant recommendation is the development of the M28 motorway scheme to Ringaskiddy to allow servicing of major industrial developments.

Cork County Development Plan 2014

The Cork County Development Plan (CDP) 2014 recognises the importance of Ringaskiddy in terms of an underpinning employment source for the county. CDP objective EE 4-1 ‘Strategic Employment Areas’ states “Promote the development of Strategic Employment Areas suitable for large scale developments at Carrigtwohill, Kilbarry, Little Island, Ringaskiddy and Whitegate where such development is compatible with relevant environment, nature and landscape protection policies as they apply around Cork Harbour.” This objective is caveated that these areas including Ringaskiddy will be protected from inappropriate development which may negatively affect their capacity for development as a “Strategic Employment Centre”.

The criticality of Cork Port is expressed in terms of promotion of port-related activities with the development of the M28 scheme to support these objectives.

Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Area Plan (Second Edition January 2015)

The Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Area Plan (LAP) included Ringaskiddy and re-iterated its importance as a strategic employment location;

”Ringaskiddy will continue to act as a strategic employment location and indeed should see primarily industrial employment growth based on the relocation of port activity from the Docklands. In this regard the delivery of a high quality public transport network to Ringaskiddy is essential.”

In this regard, its limited potential for residential development was expressed due to the importance of the area for employment.

This LAP is being updated to reflect the inclusion of Ballincollig into a municipal district and the draft Ballincollig Carrigaline Municipal District LAP was published in November 2016 with expected

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-4

adoption in 2017. This draft LAP identifies that the Ringaskiddy area provides 353.02 ha of employment land supply out of an overall 369.88 ha in the draft Ballincollig Carrigaline Municipal District LAP. As described in the draft LAP, it contains “predominantly large scale manufacturing industrial uses that occupy large, stand alone sites with eight of the top 10 pharmaceutical companies located in the area.”

The zoning map from the draft LAP is provided in Figure 4.1 together with illustrated existing industrial sites in the environs of the existing site and the industrial zoned lands.

To the north of the site boundary are Pfizer Pharmaceuticals and BioMarin International Ltd, both pharmaceutical multinational companies. To the south of the site boundary is Novartis Pharmaceuticals, another multinational pharmaceutical company. Directly west of the site boundary is vacant IDA land.

The Port of Cork’s port facilities are located to the north of Ringaskiddy village. The Port of Cork, initially Cork Harbour Commissioners, has been developing the Ringaskiddy port facilities since the early 1980s. The Port of Cork Company has a throughput of approximately 10 million tonnes per annum of cargo and there are extensive port facilities in the Harbour. The Port of Cork operates a container and ferry port at Ringaskiddy, with current plans in planning with An Bord Pleanála for further development7 supported by the Cork CDP objectives . The deep-water berth at Ringaskiddy is of major economic importance to the region. Facilities at the deep-water berth can handle a range of cargo types, including roll-on roll-off, lift-on lift-off and dry bulk. The port also operates a weekly passenger ferry to Northern France via Brittany Ferries.

7 Planning reference PM0010, altering grant of permission under PA0035

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-5

Figure 4.1 Map of Zoned Areas with Existing Site and Other Existing Industrial Facilities Highlighted

Janssen

Pfizer

Port of Cork

Hovione

DePuy

GSK

Novartis

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-6

4.3.2 Population

The nearest population clusters to the existing facility is Shanbally Village 1.25 km to the west and Ringaskiddy 900m to the east with Town Centres shown in Figure 4.1. The populations of Ringaskiddy and Shanbally stood at 478 and 337 respectively in 2011 with a noted population decline in Ringaskiddy of 7% from 2006. There are no proposed development plans concerning additional population growth the in the draft Ballincollig Carrigaline Municipal District LAP with the population of Ringaskiddy expected to remain “relatively static”. The nearby town of Carrigaline provides the main housing supply for Ringaskiddy. The draft LAP considered it “inappropriate to make provision for new housing on a large scale in Ringaskiddy” and instead recommends residential development to the town centre zonings.

While the development plans propose further industrial and port development in the area, any such development is required to not negatively affect the existing population in Shanbally, Ringaskiddy and environs;

“Whilst the Local Area Plan does not intend to provide for any significant additional population growth, it does aim to maintain the current population of the settlement whilst also ensuring that the amenity and quality of life experienced by the residents will not be compromised by development of Ringaskiddy as a strategic employment area.” (Draft Ballincollig Carrigaline Municipal District LAP Section 3.7.12, Population and Housing – Ringaskiddy and Port of Cork) and;

“While it is the Councils intention to develop Ringaskiddy as a Strategic Employment Area within Metropolitan Cork, there is a need to protect the amenity afforded to the existing communities of Ringaskiddy Village and Shanbally… While Cork County Council will continue to promote the employment role of Ringaskiddy greater recognition will be given to the needs of the established resident community.” (Draft Ballincollig Carrigaline Municipal District LAP Section 3.7.17, Population and Housing – Ringaskiddy and Port of Cork).

Objective RY-GO-06 provides for protection of residential amenity “Protect, maintain and enhance the residential amenities of the existing communities at Ringaskiddy and Shanbally Villages.”

The nearest residential properties to the existing facility are located at Upper Shanbally, approximately 640m west of the site and Clarkes Avenue, Ringaskiddy, approximately 700m east of the site. Impacts on these locations are considered in terms of noise, traffic and air quality in the respective EIAR chapters.

4.3.3 Employment

As described in Section 4.3.1, Ringaskiddy is a nationally important employment centre with an estimated working population of 8,800. This is the second largest concentration of employment in Cork following the Cork City South Environs DED and the largest direct investment employment centre outside of the Greater Dublin Area.

4.3.4 Human Health and Safety

The existing facility is located within an area zoned for industrial activity which is dominated by pharmachem industries. Due to the nature of the existing facility’s operations, it does not require the use of significant quantities of dangerous substances and as a result is not designated as a Seveso site under EC (Control of Major Accidents Involving Dangerous Substances) Regulations S.I. 208 of 2015 (COMAH Regulations). Similarly the proposed development will not require the site to become Seveso designated. In terms of the sites operation since 2006, there have been no reported significant environmental or safety incidents from the existing facility.

In Ringakiddy, there are three Upper Tier sites; Novartis Ringaskiddy Ltd, Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals and SmithKline-Beecham (Cork) Ltd, the first two sites approximately 450m to the south and north of the existing facility. There are also two Lower Tier sites; Carbon Chemical Group and Hovione Ltd; the former being approximately 950m to the south-west of the existing facility. The locations of these sites with respect to the existing facility are shown in Figure 4.1.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-7

These sites are subject to the requirements of COMAH Regulations and the existing Janssen Sciences facility lies within the Specified Area OS Map for the Pfizer and Novartis sites in terms of potential zone of impact in an emergency scenario. It is the duty of the Seveso sites to take all necessary measures to prevent major accidents and to limit their consequences for human health and the environment.

With regards to the potential for an incident at an external Seveso facility, Janssen Sciences will update its emergency response plan SOP “Emergency Response Team Plan - DS-SOP-5424” to incorporate the proposed development.

4.3.5 Amenities and Tourism

Local Amenity

There are two primary schools in the vicinity of the proposed expansion - Ringaskiddy Lr. Harbour NS (1.1km from the site) and Shanbally NS (1.2km from the site). There is a large pre-school in Ringaskiddy 930 metres from the site. The National Maritime College of Ireland is located at Ringaskiddy (2.1 km from the site). There are no hospitals or medical facilities in Ringaskiddy or Shanbally.

From a local amenity viewpoint, the national N28 route which passes through Ringaskiddy Village is a nationally important route, carrying port and industrial traffic in addition to residential traffic. It passes eastwards through Ringaskiddy Village as far as the junction with the entrance to the ferry port and the main road to Loughbeg, and continues eastwards past the site of the proposed development as the access road to Hammond Lane, the crematorium at Rocky Island, the National Maritime College, the Naval Base on Haulbowline and Gobby beach.

The sandy/rocky shore at the eastern end of the peninsula at Ringaskiddy is known as Gobby beach. This beach is a local amenity, served by a small public car park and is well used by local residents for walking. There is also a sandy beach between DePuy and Hovione. There is a footpath to the Martello Tower from the main Ringaskiddy to Loughbeg Road. A 3km publically accessible walking route (Slí Na Slainte) exists on the Barnahely Road adjacent to the site.

Local sporting organisations include the Pfizer Pitch and Putt Club, Raffeen Creek Golf Club, Shamrocks GAA Club and Hibernian Athletic Football Club in Shanbally.

Amenity in Cork Harbour

There is extensive recreational use of Cork Harbour, mainly the Lower Harbour, for sea angling and boating. Leisure and recreational activities within the Harbour and its immediate surrounds include sailing, rowing, windsurfing, canoeing, sea angling, bird watching, whale watching, swimming and walking. Sailing is a popular recreation in Cork Harbour and there are several sailing/yacht clubs in the Harbour including Lower Aghada Tennis and Sailing Club, Cove Sailing club, Monkstown Bay Sailing Club and Royal Cork Yacht Club.

The deep-water berth at Ringaskiddy is one of Cork Harbour’s premier shore fishing locations. During the winter months, bottom fishing will produce flatfish, whiting and codling. Ray is caught during the summer month, while coalfish and conger can be caught all year round. Fishing is also carried from the shore at Gobby beach.

Typically, boats use the main shipping channel (known as Cobh Road) which runs north of Haulbowline Island and Spit Bank, and north and east of Spike Island. Leisure craft including sailing and motor boats use the West Channel between Spike Island and Ringaskiddy on occasion but there are depth restrictions due to the shallow nature of the channel and the presence of Curlane Bank to the south and Spit Bank to the north. Sailing race courses around the harbour pass in close proximity to Spike Island and there is an annual sailing race around Spike Island.

The Monkstown and Cork Harbour Rowing Club is based in Monkstown. Irish Coastal Rowing Federation Clubs which utilise Cork Harbour include Rushbrooke, Passage West, Commodore, Crosshaven, Fishermans’, Maritime College and Naval Service rowing clubs.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-8

Fota Estate, Fota House and Arboretum, Fota Wildlife Park and Fota Golf Clubs are situated on Fota Island, in the upper Harbour. Other golf clubs around the Harbour area include Fernhill, Monkstown, Cork and Harbour Point Golf Clubs.

Amenities in Passage West and Monkstown include a sea front walk which runs north to Hop Island and a playground which is located in Passage West.

Tourism

Ringaskiddy is an important transit port for tourists with scheduled car ferry services to Northern France. Brittany Ferries operates a ferry crossing between Ringaskiddy and Roscoff, France with the capacity to transport 2,400 passengers per ferry weekly. Although tourism is not the main activity within Cork Harbour, it contributes both socially and economically to the Cork Harbour area and beyond. Tourist attractions include Cork Harbour’s network of coastal walks which provide visitors the opportunity to experience the surrounding activities and scenery. In addition, the water-based activities which attract visitors are boating, angling charters and yachting. The Harbour hosts the International Deep Sea Angling Festival, and the bi-annual Cork Week which is a significant economic contributor to the local economy. Other tourist attractions in the harbour include the Harbour’s military installations such as Camden Fort Meagher on the west side of the Harbour and Carlisle Fort Davis to the east, Haulbowline Island, Spike Island and Rocky Island and the Cobh Heritage Centre.

There is a deep water berth at Cobh which has the capacity to handle very large cruise liners, several of which dock there each week during the summer season.

The Harbour’s location makes it an attractive port of call for cruises with passengers going on shore excursions to the immediate area or travel further afield to West Cork or Kerry.

Tourism spending was estimated at €125 million annually with 698 jobs8 with the ferry passengers contributing €81.5 million and 486 no. jobs and Cobh docked cruiseliner passengers contributing €40.9 million and 197 no. jobs.

4.4 Potential Impacts

The potential impacts of the proposed development are discussed in terms of the construction phase and the operational phase.

4.4.1 Impacts on Development Context and Land Use Zoning

Construction Phase

No economic activity will be displaced through the construction phase of the proposed development. There will be no severance, rights of way loss or conflicts with other sites during the construction phase.

Operational Phase

This form of development is supported by the CDP objective EE 4-1, encouraging large scale development in Strategic Employment Areas. The existing facility and proposed development are on an existing brownfield site that has been already zoned for industrial use. The operation of the proposed development will reflect the existing operations in keeping with the site masterplan and will incur no severance, rights of way loss or conflicts with other sites. The operational phase of the proposed development will have no long-term significant adverse impacts on pre-existing zoning at this site or neighbouring land-uses or zoning.

4.4.2 Impacts on Population

The potential construction and operational phase impacts on local residences and businesses associated with the proposed development will relate mainly to traffic, noise, water quality, air

8 Port of Cork Tourism http://www.portofcork.ie/index.cfm/page/tourism

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-9

emissions and visual impacts, all of which are outlined with in the corresponding chapters of this EIAR as follows:

- Chapter 5 – Landscape and Visual

- Chapter 6 – Traffic and Transportation


- Chapter 10 – Water and Wastewater

- Chapter 11 – Air Quality

The draft Ballincollig Carrigaline Municipal District LAP requires that while supporting large scale development in the area, negative impacts on amenity and quality of life should not be experienced by the existing population. The proposed development is being constructed on industrial zoned, brownfield lands and does not conflict with residential proposals or zoning.

Construction Phase

The construction phase of the development is expected to last approximately 24 months and may have some limited impacts on the residential amenity of the population living in the locality due to a temporary increase in population linked to construction activity on site.

Operational Phase

Aside from a potential minor population increase in Shanbally and Ringaskiddy due to the accompanying 250 no. operational jobs (assuming the proposed working population distribution uses Carrigaline housing stock), there will be no long-term operational impacts aside from the long-term job creation in the area and associated traffic impacts.

4.4.3 Impacts on Employment

Construction Phase

During the 24-month construction phase of the proposed facility (Quarter 4 2017 to Quarter 4 2019) an average of approximately 450 no. people will be employed at the site and their potential use, both personal and business-related, of local retail, leisure and accommodation services will potentially stimulate economic activity for local businesses. In addition to direct construction employment it is anticipated that the proposed project will lead to indirect employment via related services during the construction phase.

Operational Phase

During the operational phase of the proposed development approximately 250 no. additional employees will be employed at the site. Their potential use, both personal and business-related, of local retail, leisure and accommodation services will be a positive long term impact to the area. In addition to direct employment it is anticipated that the proposed development will lead to indirect employment via related services during the operational phase.

4.4.4 Impacts on Human Health and Safety

The impact on human health from air quality, noise and water from the operational stage are considered with respect to compliance with the respective legislative and/or guidance ascribed to each aspect. These are described in detail in the respective chapters of this EIAR.

Construction Phase

While under construction, there will be potential risks to the health and safety of construction personnel. A comprehensive Health and Safety Programme will be put in place on the site prior to commencement of construction to minimise any risks to site personnel and visitors. The requirements of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (Construction) Regulations 2013 (S.I. No. 291 of 2013) will be complied with at all times. The construction site will also be operated under a

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-10

construction environmental management plan and a construction transportation plan which will alleviate potential impacts from the construction on the local community.

Operational Phase

The main hazards at any operational site are related to the equipment and materials at that site. It is noted that the proposed expansion will not change the non- SEVESO site status and all proposed site operations will take place in accordance with the relevant safety procedures and the Safety Management System on site. The operation of the site to date has been managed without environmental incident with the potential to cause human risk therefore; there is no predicted significant negative impact in terms of health and safety.

With regards to the potential for an incident at an external Seveso facility and the required response on site, Janssen Sciences will liaise with both Pfizer and Novartis sites and update Janssen Sciences’ emergency response plan SOP ‘Emergency Response Team Plan DS-SOP-5424’ to incorporate appropriate emergency procedures for the proposed BioCork2 expansion. The Emergency Response Team Plan (ERTP) details the initial response to an environmental, health or safety related incident on site, for example a fire, chemical spillage or gas leak. Janssen Sciences is committed to implementing the emergency plans contained in ERTP for the safety of its employees, and the protection of the local area and population.

In addition, the licensing of the site and the proposed expansion under the Environmental Protection Agency Act 1992 as amended ensures that emissions from the facility do not cause a significant adverse environmental impact.

4.4.5 Impacts on Amenities and Tourism

Construction Phase

There may be greater use of local amenities and tourism facilities during the construction phase by contractors but the construction of the proposed development will not affect the tourism profile of the area.

Operational Phase

There are no predicted negative impacts on local amenities and tourism arising from the operational phase. As previously outlined, 250 no. people will be directly employed during operational phase. Their potential use, both personal and business-related, of local amenities and tourism facilities may positively benefit the business community in the area, including amenity providers.

4.4.6 Cumulative Impacts

The main cumulative impact of the proposed development on human beings will be a significant positive economic and employment effect, contributing to the local economy. The cumulative impact of traffic /noise and traffic /dust are discussed in a number of Chapters of the EIAR as follows:

- Chapter 6 –Traffic and Transportation


- Chapter 11 – Air Quality and Climate

- Chapter 15 – Interaction and Cumulative Impacts

4.5 Mitigation Measures

The suitability of the development is generally dependent on the sustainability of the industrial development in terms of its impact on infrastructure, visual amenity, and traffic. The sustainability of the development, with regard to these and other environmental impacts, has been ensured through careful and considered design and management which is discussed in the relevant sections of the EIAR. As part of this regular engagement process, Janssen Sciences will provide

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-11

regular updates to the group on the progress on the proposed project, receive updates from other participants regarding other active projects in the area that may require coordination with, and address any issues that might be raised by the Residents Association in relation to the project construction.

Many of the potential impacts on population and human health relate to other environmental aspects such as noise, air, water quality and traffic. The potential impact of these aspects in relation to the proposed development, and the related mitigation measures are discussed within the corresponding chapters of this EIAR. Of the remaining potential impacts relating to the human environment as outlined in Section 4.5 only those concerning health and safety require mitigation measures. These are outlined in the following sections.

4.5.1 Construction Phase

- During pre-construction and construction phases safety will be managed in accordance with the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (Construction) Regulations 2013 (S.I. No. 291 of 2013).A Project Supervisor Construction Stage (PSCS) will be appointed as part of the proposed project.

- Prior to the commencement of construction, a Construction Management Plan (CMP) for the construction phase will be implemented by the main contractor (SISK). The CMP will address all construction related Health and Safety issues.

- Safety will be a primary concern during the construction phase of the proposed development. A contractor safety management program will be implemented identifying potential hazards associated with the proposed work including a permit to work system.

- The design of the final proposal will be subject to safety design reviews to ensure that all requirements of the project are safe. A Project Supervisor for the Design Process (PSDS) will be appointed as part of the this process.

- Temporary contractor facilities and areas under construction will be enclosed and fenced off from the public with adequate warning signs of the risks associated with entry to these facilities. Entry to these areas will be restricted and will be kept secure when construction is not taking place.

- Measures to ensure public safety, with respect to construction traffic, will be included in a Traffic Management Plan. This is detailed in Chapter 6 ‘Traffic and Transportation’.

4.5.2 Operational Phase

The operation of the proposed development will be carried out in strict accordance with all Irish and European regulations governing safety in the work place and in particular the regulations implemented under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act, 2005.

All relevant facility employees will be fully trained in the operating procedures for equipment and processes, with particular emphasis on related health and safety issues.

4.6 Residual Impacts

The main residual impact of the proposed development on population and human health will be a significant localised positive long-term economic and employment effect, contributing to the local economy. The increased employment in the area will potentially lead to more local development and potentially further development of amenities in the local area.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 4-12


.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-1

5 Landscape and Visual

5.1 Introduction

This study presents the landscape and visual impact assessment (LVIA) of the proposed development carried out by Brady Shipman Martin (BSM). The objective of the assessment is to appraise the existing landscape character of the site and its wider setting in order to assess the likely landscape and visual impacts arising from the proposed development. Mitigation measures are also included. In addition a Landscape Masterplan (Drawing 401, Appendix A.2) and set of Photomontages (Volume 2 of the EIAR) have been prepared and accompany this report.

5.2 Assessment Methodology

For the purpose of this assessment, this report adopts the definition of landscape presented in the European Landscape Convention (ELC), and as such the term ‘landscape’ refers equally to areas of rural countryside and urban – built up –areas (typically historically referred to as ‘townscape’). The ELC definition of landscape follows:

“An area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors” (Council of Europe 2000).

The LVIA methodology can be summarised as undertaking the following key tasks:

- Desk study and site visits up to March 2017;

- Defining the baseline landscape setting, conditions and ‘receptors’ (i.e. components of the landscape that are likely to be affected by the scheme);

- Identification and evaluation of key components of the proposed development;

- Assessment of landscape and visual impacts;

- Consideration of mitigation and enhancement measures; and

- Residual impacts

The proposed development was assessed in relation to key landscape and visual aspects. Firstly, the existing landscape character was evaluated with regard to criteria such as landform, land cover and land use, key features and focal points, key views and prospects, scale of the receiving visual unit, quality of the environment and amenity, and the valued aspects integral to how the character is experienced or perceived. Secondly, the visual impact regarding the sensitivity of this character to the type and degree of change arising from the proposal was assessed. In both cases a degree of subjectivity may be involved in the consideration of the significance of any changes.

In general the proposed development is of a large scale and will involve a continuation of existing trends already on site. It has been assessed with regard to its sequential place in advance of a proposed scheme for expansion of the existing building. Significance Assessment Criteria

The impact significance criteria used in the assessment are based on the EPA Guidelines, 2002 and Draft Advice Notes, 2003 as set out in Table 5.1, with reference to additions from EPA’s 2015 draft revised guidelines and notes. The nature of landscape and visual impacts may be positive, neutral or negative/adverse as defined in Table 5.2. The duration of impacts is as described in the EPA Guidelines and as set out in Table 5.3. The terminology used to define impacts is outlined in Table 5.1

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-2

Table 5.1 Significance of Effects Terminology Guidance on the information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements, EPA. 2002.

Impact Level Definition

Imperceptible An impact capable of measurement but without noticeable consequences

Not significant * An impact which causes noticeable changes in the character of the environment but without noticeable consequences.

Slight An impact which causes noticeable changes in the character of the environment without affecting its sensitivities

Moderate An impact that alters the character of the environment in a manner that is consistent with the existing and emerging trends

Significant

An impact which, by its character, magnitude, duration or intensity alters a sensitive aspect of the environment

Very significant * An impact, which by its character, magnitude duration or intensity, significantly alters the majority of a sensitive aspect of the environment.

Profound An impact that obliterates sensitive characteristics

(Note; ‘Not significant’ and ‘Very significant’ definitions introduced in Draft EPA Revised Guidelines on the information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements, 2015).

As per the EPA Guidelines, landscape and visual impacts (or effects) can be considered to be negative/adverse, neutral or positive in effect. Impacts are considered where they may be direct, indirect and/or cumulative as appropriate. Impact duration is considered as being Momentary (effects lasting seconds to minutes), Brief (less than a day), Temporary (for up to one year), Short-term (from 1 to 7 years), Medium-term (7 to 15 years), Long-term (from 15 to 60 years) or Permanent (in excess of 60 years).

There were no limitations or constraints in carrying out the assessment.

Table 5.2 Nature of Impacts.

Nature of Impact Description

Positive A change that improves the quality of the environment

Neutral A change that does not affect the quality of the environment

Negative/adverse A change that reduces the quality of the environment.

Table 5.3 Duration of Impacts.

5.2.1 Relevant Key Legislation and Guidance

The landscape and visual impact assessment has had regard to the following legislation, policy document and guidance reference material:

- Environmental Protection Agency, 2015, Draft Revised Guidelines on the information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements.

- Environmental Protection Agency, 2015, Draft Advice Notes on current practice in the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements.

Nature of Impact Description

Momentary Lasting from seconds to minutes Brief Lasting less than a day Temporary Lasting one year or less Short-term Lasting one to seven years Medium-term Lasting seven to fifteen years Long-term Lasting fifteen to sixty years Permanent Lasting over sixty years

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-3

- Environmental Protection Agency, 2002, Guidelines on the information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements.

- Environmental Protection Agency, 2003, Advice Notes on current practice in the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements.

- Landscape Institute, and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment, 2013, Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Ed.

- Fáilte Ireland, 2011, Guidelines for treatment of tourism in an Environmental Impact Statement

- Cork County Council, 2014, Cork County Development Plan 2014

- Cork County Council, 2015. Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Area Plan, 2011. 2nd Edition.

- Cork County Council, 2016. Draft Ballincollig Carrigaline Municipal District Local Area Plan 2016.

5.3 Characteristics of the Proposed Development

The purpose of the proposed development is to expand the existing Janssen Sciences facility through the provision of substantial building and parking extensions. The facility is well established among the concentration of numerous pharmaceutical production facilities in Ringaskiddy and overall heavy industrial developments in the harbour. Since the 1980s Ringaskiddy has become the centre of pharmaceutical production in Ireland and is a textbook example of clustering. This has contributed to the substantial change that the area has undergone over the last few decades which also includes Ringaskiddy’s development as a major ferry port made possible through land reclamation.

The proposed development will be a continuation of existing trends both on site and in the wider landscape. It will consist of site development works comprising; a large production building to the west of the site, two warehouses and two storage yards to the south, a lab/admin building to the south, car park extensions to the north, and an extension to the WWTP to the east. The development will take advantage of enabling works already permitted on site (Planning Ref. No. 16/7150) which will substantially reduce its visibility within the wider landscape.


5.4.1 Wider Landscape Context

The site of the proposed development lies c.8km south east of the Cork City boundary and is separated from the city suburbs by open green belt land. It is located c.0.5km west of Ringaskiddy Village in the townland of Barnahely, c.2.5km east of Carrigaline, directly south across from the Pfizer Ringaskiddy plant on the N28. The receiving environment comprises a vast yet sheltered natural harbour with several river estuaries, principally those of the Rivers Lee, Douglas River, Owenboy and Owennacurra, and with a combination of rural farmland and intensely urban areas (Figures 5.0.1 to 5.0.3).

The harbour area includes a series of ridgelines that typically run in an east-west orientation. A primary visual ridgeline runs through Monkstown on to Passage West to the north of the site. An additional northern primary ridgeline runs to the north/ northwest across Great Island and then another primary ridgeline runs to the south stretching from Crosshaven eastwards through Frenchfurze. Two secondary ridgelines also run through the area. The first goes from Carrigaline through Barnahely and to the site of the early 19th Century Martello Tower, and the second going from Barnahely South to Curraghbinny. Due to its elevated location within the harbour, the site is visible (albeit in part and often within distant views) from a wide area. In general, these areas include Ringaskiddy, Cobh, Monkstown, Loughbeg, Curraghbinny, Coolmore, Carrigaline and Shanbally.

The harbour, particularly on the western side, supports major industrial development (with large concentrations of pharmaceutical development), while on higher ground telecommunication masts,

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-4

water storage towers and wind turbines punctuate the skyline. To the east, the Whitegate Oil Refinery and the Aghada Power Generating Plant are prominent features on the shoreline and skyline. Residential development also forms a primary land use, with the main settlements of Carrigaline, Cobh, Monkstown, Passage West and Crosshaven, together with a number of villages, scattered along/near the shoreline.

Once a small fishing village, Ringaskiddy has seen major industrial development over recent decades and has been transformed into a modern deep-water ferry port. It now stands as one of the largest employment hubs in the area with a strong and diverse economic base, contributing significantly at regional and national scale and is set for further development for the relocation and development of the Port of Cork facilities. It is connected to Cork city by the busy thoroughfare of the N28. Since 2004 Ringaskiddy has been home to the National Maritime College of Ireland located on a Naval Service site near the bridge to Haulbowline Island. The wider rural areas are intersected by major transport and telecommunications infrastructure, with many patches of urban sprawl and ribbon development.

A number of large and small islands are located close to the harbour shoreline and play a major role in the wider harbour’s industrial development, strong maritime and defence heritage, and tourism. The smaller Rocky and Haulbowline Islands are connected to the mainland by the same roadbridge. A crematorium is located on Rocky Island, while Haulbowline is home to the Naval Base and headquarters of the Irish Naval Service. Of a similar scale to Haulbowline, Spike Island was originally the location of a monastic settlement, but today is defined by its 18th Century star fort and former prison. The island is accessed by ferry and is valued as an important heritage tourist attraction for the area.

Further north, larger islands are connected to the nearby mainland by a mixture of roads, roadbridges and rail infrastructure. Fota Island contains a unique recreational, ecological and tourism value in its wildlife park, golf resort, estate house and gardens, with very enclosed views. Little Island is heavily industrial with several large business parks and industrial estates and is now naturally connected to the mainland due to the depositional sealing of the separating channel. It includes two golf courses (one closed) as well as a central focus of linear residential development and small housing schemes.

The largest of the islands, Great Island, sits between the upper and lower harbour. Approximately two thirds of the island is patchwork agricultural farmland, while to the south the remaining land is occupied by the dense urban settlement of Cobh which holds significance for a number of factors; its role as Ireland’s only dedicated cruise terminal; its historical association with maritime and emigration legacies (especially the Lusitania and Titanic passenger liners), associated heritage tourism; proximity to Spike and Haulbowline Islands; spectacular views over the western harbour, and the immense architectural landmark of St. Colman’s Cathedral. Cobh Golf Club and the disused former industrial site of the IFI plant at Marino Point are also located on the island. Together with Ringaskiddy Port, it is envisioned that Marino Point will play an important part in the redevelopment of the Cork City docklands/Port of Cork, with both sites providing for the relocation and development of industrial used and major port facilities.

The harbour is of high natural and landscape value, with a designated Special Area of Protection and an internationally important wetland site. Its intertidal mudflats support a rich variety of bird life. Scenic routes and ridgelines offer expansive harbour views, with the picturesque towns of Cobh and Monkstown forming attractive steeped backdrops to the north. The immense St. Coleman’s Cathedral is the dominant landmark within the harbour, situated on elevated ground in the town centre. It is a major focal point, visual/heritage receptor and identity aspect of Cobh and the harbour, allowing panoramic views of the entire lower harbour and islands.

5.4.2 Site Context

The site covers an area of c.40.1 hectares and has elevations ranging from c.30m to 55m in height (Malin Head Datum). It forms part of a secondary ridgeline in the area located on a peninsula extending eastwards into the harbour. The large Janssen Sciences Facility and utility structures, car park and 150m wind turbine currently occupy the site which forms part of a secondary ridgeline

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-5

in the area. Due to its location at Ringaskiddy, it contributes to the largest concentrations of pharmaceutical companies in the world. The 150m high wind turbine is located to the west of the existing plant on the highest point of the site. The plant itself and its large curvilinear car park to the east are set within a flat section of land surrounded by elevations and substantial berms created as part of the landscaping for the site. These berms, along with the dark muted colour of the building, play a major role in the screening of the site and its integration into the landscape. An old stone wall originally forming a field boundary runs through a section of the site just north of the turbine.

The main thoroughfare of the N28 runs along the entire northern boundary of the site. The Pfizer Ringaskiddy plant, Pfizer OSP 04 building, Biomarin, a 9 hole pitch-and-putt course and deep-water berthing, are located along the N28. Mature trees and hedgerows run adjacent to the N28 north of the site. 5.8ha of woodland planted by IDA Ireland on large berms along this stretch of the northern boundary has matured to provide a dense and extensive screening of the site from public views. The N28 runs along the foot of these large slopes.

The Ringaskiddy settlement consists of two small villages, Ringaskiddy and Shanbally village, within which there are a number of residential and amenity uses. Ringaskiddy is physically linked to Rocky and Haulbowline Islands by roadbridge. The village of Shanbally is located near the site to the west, and includes the Shanbally Roundabout and the Shanbally Primary School as well as groups of residential houses. There is an existing site entrance to the northwest, adjacent to the N28, which is located approximately 500m to the east of the Shanbally Roundabout. This entrance comprises 2.4m high entry walls which taper down to 1.8m, and a 6m wide entry road continues for approximately 200m into the site.

To the west, the Janssen Sciences site is immediately adjoined by lands which remain in the ownership of IDA Ireland. Ribbon housing extends south from Shanbally cross-roads adjoining the IDA land. These dwellings have little view of the Janssen Sciences site due to intervening topography and vegetation.

The existing Novartis plant is located to the south of the site. There is a proposal to develop an upgraded N28 to facilitate access to the port. The alignment of the new route passes to the south of the existing Janssen Sciences site through the intervening space between the Novartis plant and the Janssen Sciences site. There is also an existing 110kV ESB sub-station in close proximity to this portion of the site.

The eastern boundary wraps around the former Buckeye Ireland facility/ Port of Cork Logistics Centre and contains a site entrance which includes entry to the former Buckeye site. The existing 6m wide road runs for approximately 200m into the site, and is currently being extended to join with the N28 site entrance to the northwest. The boundary of the Port of Cork Logistics Centre site includes some tree screening along this road, but there is not much screening on this side of the Janssen Sciences facility.

The Barnahely graveyard is located on the R613 and directly across from the local access road leading to the Janssen Sciences and former Buckeye facilities. Existing pylons are dominant features along this eastern entry to the site. A 1.2m high stone wall runs along the R613 as well as additional landscape works to the entrances and road frontage. Further south of the graveyard is the protected structure of the ruins Castle Warren Stronghouse, which consists of a complex of medieval and post medieval buildings and includes a tower-house, bawn and the 18th Century Castlewarren House.

The 3km Ringaskiddy Slí na Sláinte route also runs along the N28 immediately north of the site and through Ringaskiddy Village. An amenity/children’s playground area is also located on this route in the main village centre on a strip of land south of the Ferry Terminal area.

The immediate area is set for much development in the coming years including the upgrade of the N28 to accommodate the expansion of Ringaskiddy Port. This will be addressed in further detail with regard to the assessment of cumulative impacts.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-6

5.5 Landscape Character, Values and Significance

The character of the landscape can be summarised as an expansive but sheltered peri-urban natural harbour with a mixture of intensely urban areas and rural fertile farmland, estuarine islands, heavy industry and renewable energy development, towns and villages, and strong recreation and tourism attributes associated with its equally strong built maritime and defence heritage and attractive harbour setting. While having established aesthetic, recreational and cultural heritage values, and with high appeal for visitors, it is also highly characterised by its role as a lived-in working landscape where ordinary every-day lives and activities are played out.

The lower harbour is additionally characterised by its dynamism, having encountered major changes and developments over the last few decades and with a number of major developments proposed/permitted that will intensify this aspect of its character and its built form. Key land uses now include industry, transport infrastructure, renewable energy, heritage/recreation/amenity, and substantial residential development. Of these, recent notable developments include:

- development of the IMERC campus

- wind energy developments on pharmaceutical sites

- development of the former prison of Spike Island as a heritage tourist attraction.

The area is currently and will continue to undergo process of change in its landscape character in the short, medium and long term with the other proposed developments in the area including:

- the permitted and as yet unbuilt Ringaskiddy port redevelopment

- the two permitted and as yet unbuilt 150m high Novartis and DePuy wind turbines;

- the permitted and as yet unbuilt Haulbowline island Rehabilitation

- the proposed Indaver Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre (in appeal)

- the proposed GE Healthcare facility (in appeal).

- the proposed N28 upgrade

In addition a tourism masterplan for Camden Fort in Crosshaven has also recently been proposed which will see the rejuvenation of the fort and its immediate surroundings.

The Cork County Draft Landscape Strategy 2007 defines the landscape character for the County. This is supported by objectives in the Cork County Development Plan 2014 and the Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Area Plan 2011 (updated 2015). The site falls within two landscape character types. The north east and larger section of the site (and where the main plant is located) is covered by the wider ‘City Harbour and Estuary’ character type (Figure 5.0.1). This is the primary landscape character type of the study area with very high value and sensitivity, and as being of national importance. With regard to the urbanised areas of the harbour and estuary, the Strategy describes how:

“The topography and landscape components in this area, primarily the River Lee as well s the vast open and natural harbour, have provided the opportunity for human settlement and the development of a city.

The city docks area is characterised by tall cranes, warehousing, grain silos and large ships, while the wider harbour area comprises a mix of industrial, residential and recreational uses including marina. Port facility and related industries dominate much of the harbour.”

The Strategy describes the rural areas around much of the greater harbour area as:

“characterised by a prevalence of infrastructure such as roads, bridges and electricity powerlines and some urban sprawl.”

The smaller south west section of the proposed site falls within the ‘Indented Estuarine Coast’ landscape character type which is similarly deemed as having very high value and sensitivity,

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-7

and as being of national importance. The Owenboy River runs through this landscape which generally comprises gently undulating topography incised by shallow river estuaries. The settlements of Shanbally, Carrigaline and Crosshaven area all located within this character type. The landscape is more peri-urban transitioning to rural in character and with a predominantly agricultural landuse with occasional swaths of coniferous plantation.

The CDP identifies these very high sensitivity landscapes as being extra vulnerable landscapes which are likely to be fragile and susceptible to change. A number of scenic routes are also designated in the area and are described in detail in Section 5.6.

The wider harbour’s rich built heritage is a key factor determining the values and sensitivities its landscape. In the context of the strong maritime and defence heritage, landscape elements include fortifications, especially the two military hilltop forts defining the harbour mouth - Fort Camden and Fort Carlisle; Martello Towers – most notably that on the summit of the Ringaskiddy ridgeline; and the impressive limestone storehouses at the Naval Base on Haulbowline Island. The area also has a valued architectural heritage, in particular in its attractive towns like Cobh and its landmark structure of St. Coleman’s Cathedral, Passage West and Monkstown. The Cathedral is a dominant focal point and physical unit in the harbour. The townscapes of Passage West and Monkstown, as well as the western half of Haulbowline, include Architectural Conservation Areas. The high quality and sensitivity of the vernacular built environment is portrayed by the concentration of Protected Structures that are evident throughout the landscape.

Overall the significant layers/receptors contributing to the broader landscape values and its sensitivity include:

- Rich built heritage, especially maritime and defence.

- Attractive and distinctive harbour landscape.

- Unique recreational aspects, including Fota Island, the attractive coastline and small shingle beaches, marine leisure (incl. boating activities), harbour/estuarine views/scenic routes, and Slí na Sláinte (‘path to health’) routes which run through Monkstown, Little Island and Ringaskiddy (adjacent to site).

- ecological aspects, including the protected habitats of the tidal mudflats, shingle beaches, salt marshes, reedbeds and wet grassland, and the attractive fringes of the broadleaf woodland in many areas around the estuary.

- geological interest of Rock Farm Quarry on Little Island which also hosts a number of rare plants and a diverse limestone flora.

Together, these diverse and valued attributes have resulted in an important tourism industry, contributing to the wider economy for the area (see Section 5.8 for further details).

The strategic significance of Ringaskiddy at a regional and national scale is also substantially determined from the economic value of the industrial landscape which has come to be a defining aspect of the built form.

The CDP and LAP outline in detail the landscape planning context of the proposed development, including designations and policies directly and indirectly relating to the landscape of the wider harbour (Appendix A.1). A detailed description of the individual scenic routes in the area is presented in the following section and outlined in Figure 5.0.2.

5.6 Designated Scenic Routes

Scenic Route S51 in CCDP:

(R630 Regional Road & Local Road from Ballynacorra via East Ferry to Whitegate and Roche's Point - Views of the Estuary & Harbour, Roche's Point & the rural coastal environment)

This route runs along the eastern coast line of Cork Harbour. It is a little over 5km from the site at its closest point. Any view of the site from this route will be substantially reduced by intervening

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-8

distance and topography and also include a view of the intervening water in the harbour. Visibility of the proposed development will be imperceptible to slight along this route.


(R624 Regional Road, between Cobh and Belvelly- Views of the Upper Harbour and coastal environment)

This route is almost 2km north of the site at its closest point. It runs around the western coast of Great Island to the town of Cobh. Much of the designated route has no views of the site due to intervening topography and direction of views, however at Cobh, there are some views which provide expansive views over Cork harbour, Haulbowline and Ringaskiddy and these are represented in the Photomontages (Views 17 and 19). There is also a representative viewpoint at Rushbrook – View 15 – which lies on the route but which will have restricted views of the proposed development due to the existing and permitted berms as part of the enabling works.


(R610 Regional Road, Local Road & N28 National Primary Route between Passage West and Ringaskiddy- Views of the Harbour)

This road runs immediately along the northern boundary of the site below the existing and permitted berms and follows the coastline of Cork harbour to Passage West via Raffeen and Monkstown with views over the harbour and surrounding landscape. There are several viewpoints chosen from along this route to be illustrated in the Photomontages (Views 2, 4, 5, 8, 9).

Scenic Routes S58 and S59 in CCDP:

(R612 Regional Road & Local Roads between Crosshaven and Myrtleville, Church Bay, Camden, Weavers Point and Fountainstown Views of the sea & coastal landscape)

The S58 and S59 adjoin at Crosshaven beyond the Crosshaven Marina and Royal Yacht Club approximately 3.6km from the site. The route has generally restricted views to of the extended landscape due to the intervening vegetation and Curraghbinny ridgeline. Most views are in the direction of travel to the east or west and will not be towards the site. There is a short section of this route from Crosshaven to Camden Fort which includes more open views of the harbour. The route runs along the southern bank of the Owenboy River passed the Crosshaven Marina to Camden Fort and also extends down south to Fountainstown. Upon approach to Camden Fort, the road opens out at the bus turning circle and there will be views to the north. However intervening distance and nature of the proposed development will result in slight/ negligible to imperceptible visibility along this route.

5.7 Other Designations

Due to its location and natural configuration, Cork Harbour has been a strategic defensive port for centuries with a number of significant military fortifications. Intervisibility, as distinct from general visibility, is of particular relevance between military defence structures in performing an effective defence function.

Within the lower harbour area, there are five such military structures. These include the Carlisle (Fort Davis) and Camden Forts at the mouth of the harbour, Fort Mitchell (Westmoreland) on Spike Island, Haulbowline Island including the naval base and Martello tower, and the Ringaskiddy Martello tower, which adjoins the site.

These military structures are all elevated in order to fulfil their function. As such, they have commanding views over large areas of the harbour. Such views incorporate most of the more recent developments within the harbour area, including industrial, energy production and storage, energy distribution and port related activities.

The Ringaskiddy Martello Tower to the south of the site is a protected structure (RPS 00575) and recorded monument (RMP CO087-053). The details and significance of the structure is dealt with

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-9

further in the EIAR in relation to built heritage. The policy in the CCDP deals only with protection of the structure itself, rather than its setting, views, or the character of the landscape around it.

Haulbowline Martello Tower (RPS 00578; RMP CO087-059002) is located on high ground within the Irish Navy base approximately 1km to the north of the site and as such is inaccessible.

Fort Mitchell (Westmoreland Fort, RPS 01272, RMP CO087-065003) is approximately 3km to the east on Spike Island. With its central location with the harbour, it has commanding views in all directions.

Fort Davis (Carlisle Fort, RMP CO087-058), is approximately 5km to the southeast of the site on the eastern side of Cork Harbour with elevated views north over the lower harbour including Ringaskiddy and Fort Mitchell on Spike Island.

Fort Camden (RPS 01010, RMP CO099-024) is approximately 4.2km to the south of the site at Crosshaven and have elevated views over the lower harbour including Ringaskiddy and Spike Island with Haulbowline Island, Cobh and Monkstown in the visual backdrop.

Beyond the lower harbour, on the north side of Great Island, there are three additional Martello towers at Monning (Marino Point), Belvelly and Rossleague. These performed a separate defence function on the northern side of Great Island and have intervisibility between each other. The elevated topography of Great Island is such that they do not have any visual connection with the defence structures of the lower harbour. The potential for impact on intervisibility between military structures is therefore only relevant to the five structures of the Lower Harbour.

In addition to the military structures discussed above, there are also other structures that are part of the architectural heritage of the wider harbour area. All such structures contribute to the rich architectural, cultural and landscape heritage of the harbour.

The most visually significant and important structure is Cobh Cathedral which sits on elevated ground at Cobh and overlooks the entire lower harbour and as such is the most prominent landmark within the harbourIt presents as a focal point from all around the harbour and is used for navigation purposes from the water.

5.8 Tourism, Recreation and Amenity

Cork harbour is designated as an area of ‘National Tourism Significance’ by Fáilte Ireland in their publication Determination of Waters of National Tourism Significance and Associated Water Quality Status, 2009 and is an important recreational recourse for the region. A feasibility report was commissioned by Cork County Council and completed in 2012 on the potential for a greenway from Passage West to Carrigaline including a branch to Ringaskiddy providing a continuous dedicated walking and cycle route from Rochestown to Crosshaven. Cork harbour is designated as an area of ‘National Tourism Significance’ by Fáilte Ireland in their publication Determination of Waters of National Tourism Significance and Associated Water Quality Status (2009). It is an important recreational resource for the region with water based activities such as sailing, fishing etc. It is also an important entry point into the region via the ferries that use Ringaskiddy port. Cruise liners visiting Cobh are an important industry in the region with continuing investment in berthing facilities and increased numbers of visiting cruise ships at Cobh.

Other recreation and amenity facilities located nearby and which have views of the site, include:

- The historical visitor locations such as Cobh Cathedral, Fort Mitchell on Spike Island and Fort Camden at Crosshaven. The latter two sites have been undergoing significant development as part of a wider tourism development initiative in the lower harbour.

- Monkstown marina and coastal walks including the Passage West to Monkstown Walk, the Carrigaline/Crosshaven/Camden walk, Cobh harbour front, and coastal walks on the eastern side of the harbour at Rostellan, Aghada, Whitegate, White Bay and Roche’s Point.

- Currabinny Woods 1.9km to the south of the site.

- Overgrown pathway to the Martello Tower from eh Loughbeg Road.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-10

- A significant remediation project at Haulbowline Island is planned for the East Tip transforming the site into a public recreation amenity.

- As part of the Port of Cork’s redevelopment of Ringaskiddy, a boat launching and amenity area is planned at Paddy’s Point close to the Haulbowline bridge crossing and UCC Beaufort building.

- A number of golf holes on Monkstown Golf Course have elevated and expansive views across the lower harbour.

- Gobby Strand near Haulbowline. There is a small public car park, at the north-eastern corner of the site that serves the strand. Historically, there was a pathway leading from Gobby Strand to Martello Tower, but it is no longer evident.

5.9 Landscape Planning Context

A number of specific planning objectives within the Cork County Development Plan and Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Area Plan that are of direct relevance to the site and deemed important for this study. These are outlined in detail in Appendix A.1 to this report.

5.10 Visual Context

As an initial baseline exercise a Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence (ZTVI) Map (Figure 5.0.4) was generated based upon a berm model height of up to 61m OD as representative height, with a viewer’s eye level height of 1.5m for the site. The ZTVI correlates to Raster Digital Terrain Data and the representative height to establish, theoretically, where the proposal would be visible given a bare earth scenario (i.e. no vegetation, buildings or minor variations in topography). It does not include for any proposed landscape/planting mitigation or existing vegetation/woodland.

Site surveys concluded that the most notable views of the application site are located to the north/ north west in and around Strawhall/Raffeen and Monkstown across the harbour. Apart from these, views of the site are mostly from lands to the south, and are intermittent due to the presence of intervening vegetation, built form, and the undulating topography, as well as existing landscape mounding/planting on site. Potential impacts on this visual context are outlined in Section 5.11.2.

For this study, twenty one representative public viewpoints (Figure 5.0.5) were selected within the wider landscape as follows and inform the selected Photomontages as Presented in Volume 2 of the EIAR.

- Viewpoint 1 – View from Monkstown/Raffeen (L6470), looking south east over Monkstown Creek

- Viewpoint 2 – View from Monkstown Car Park on R610/Strand Road, looking south

- Viewpoint 3 – View from Castlefarm, Monkstown, looking south.

- Viewpoint 4 – View from Monkstown/ Raffeen, (R610) looking south over Monkstown Creek.

- Viewpoint 5 – View from Shanbally Village, looking east

- Viewpoint 6 – View from proposed N28 road, looking north

- Viewpoint 7 – View from R613 at Warrens Cross, looking north west

- Viewpoint 8 – View from Ringaskiddy (west), looking west

- Viewpoint 9 – View from Ringaskiddy (east), looking west

- Viewpoint 10 – View from Ringaskiddy Martello Tower, looking west

- Viewpoint 11 – View from Curraghbinny, looking north/north west

- Viewpoint 12 – View from Loughbeg, looking north/north west

- Viewpoint 13 – View from R612/Crosshaven-Carrigaline Walkway, looking north east

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-11

- Viewpoint 14 – View from Carrigaline (east), looking north east

- Viewpoint 15 – View from Rushbrook, looking south

- Viewpoint 16 – View from Cobh (Whitepoint), looking south west

- Viewpoint 17 – View from Cobh (above train station on R624), looking south west.

- Viewpoint 18 – View from Cobh (St. Coleman’s Cathedral), looking south west

- Viewpoint 19 – View from Cobh (Kennedy’s Quay) looking south west.

- Viewpoint 20 – View from Haulbowline Bridge, looking west

- Viewpoint 21 – View from Spike Island looking west

Each Photomontage depicts three different scenarios as follows:

- View as existing

- View as proposed, including the berms and planting of the permitted enabling works (5 years post maturation of landscaping)

- View with cumulative proposals (this considers other proposed and permitted developments in the area not yet built but, together with the proposal in question, have potential to result in heightened landscape and visual impacts when collectively considered).


5.11.1 Landscape Character Impacts

The main potential impacts primarily relate to the continuation of existing trends in this peri-urban landscape comprising extensions to the built fabric of the site, particularly on the skyline and from certain localised viewpoints. During construction these elements will heighten the impact of the site on the landscape. There is also potential intermittent visibility of machinery and cranes during this stage, typical of large scale construction work and restricted to a short-term duration. Impacts from the construction of the car park extension and ground level works will likely be negligible/not significant beyond the site, as these will be generally screened by the existing and planned perimeter berms, and existing planting.

The landscape mitigation measures are seen as integral parts of this proposal and the proposed landscaping will ensure a long term contribution to the landscape fabric in this area. See Landscape Masterplan 401 for the Landscape proposals. The permitted enabling works will also provide substantial integration of the proposal into the landscape and minimised impacts on landscape character – particularly in relation to the defining elements such as the existing skyline and ridgelines, scenic qualities and strong built heritage. The proposal therefore does not affect the recognisable and special attributes of the harbour’s landscape identity.

In this regard, and considering the proposed continuation of existing built trends, it is concluded that the proposed development will not result in any change to the landscape character of the area.

5.11.2 Visual Impacts

As elaborated in Section 5.9 above, the visual impacts of the proposed development are considered within twenty one views across three ranges of view. For the purposes of this study, these are identified as Long Range (2km+), Medium Range (500m-2km), and Short Range (0-500m), as deemed appropriate and workable for this study. The assessment of impacts at operational stage is also guided by the visual scenarios as prepared in the accompanying Photomontages of key representative viewpoints, within which planting maturity at c.5-7 years is included. Planting on the permitted berms as part of the enabling works, will, once matured, ensure substantial screening of the site to the north and west where views are more open and sensitive within the wider landscape.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-12

It is concluded that visibility of the proposed development, including within views from scenic routes, will be minimal in the wider landscape, with slight to negligible visual impacts where visible within long and medium range views, primarily due to the continuation of existing trends and screening. Short range views are limited to momentary visibility from public roadways within the immediate lands; from a short section of the R613 between Novartis and Castlewarren, through hedgerow gaps along the L6474 and also potentially from the proposed N28 upgrade route if permitted. Initially visual impacts, particularly during construction stage, will be moderate to slight from these short range views reducing to between slight to negligible as planting matures and the proposal becomes familiar as part of the existing site trends.


The construction process will have localised impacts on site and any localised visual appreciation of this area, mainly around the southern side. Existing and permitted berms will again significantly reduce the locations by which these impacts will be experienced. There will be a localised moderate negative effect upon the character and visual amenity for a short-term time frame during the construction of the building extensions and before planting is introduced. These will be from a short section of the R613 between Novartis and Castlewarren, through hedgerow gaps along the L6474 and also from the proposed N28 upgrade route. Potential visibility of cranes will be intermittent and moderate neutral within short to medium range views most notably from the south/ south west looking northwards towards the site. Standard measures for construction (as outlined in Section 5.11) will ensure any significant negative impacts are avoided during this stage.

Within long range views, these impacts will reduce to slight neutral/ imperceptible on the wider landscape character and visual context due to well established intervening hedgerows, topographic undulations, existing and planned berms, and the intervening distance between the site and several key viewpoints, especially across the harbour.

There will be no hedgerow removal as part of the construction works of the proposed development. In addition the existing old stone wall within the site is to be retained.

Likely impacts on residential amenity will be generally slight to moderate negative during construction due to the intervening distance between the proposed development and dwellings. The nearest properties are located in Ringaskiddy and Shanbally villages. While the site boundary is in relative proximity to the sites, the footprint of the proposed works occupies only a smaller portion of the wider Janssen Sciences site and as such is set at a distance of over 800m to the nearest properties in Shanbally to the west, and at least c.650m to the nearest properties in Ringaskiddy to the east which have restricted views of the site due to the former Buckeye facility/Port of Cork Logistics Centre. Construction impacts on residential amenity at Ringaskiddy will range from be slight to imperceptible while at Shanbally such impacts will be restricted due to the substantial screening from the berms as part of the permitted enabling works. Construction impacts on residential amenity will be slight negative to neglibible from Loughbeg and Curraghbinny.


General Landscape and Visual

The main considerations arising from the operation phase are the addition of further linear structures on the skyline, the substantial expansion of the buildings from southern viewpoints affecting local views, and the cumulative relationship of the proposal with other existing and proposed developments in the area (as outlined ahead). The most notable impacts will be during the initial period of the operational phase before new plant screening matures and from viewpoints towards the southern elevations. Views of the buildings from the east and north will be substantially reduced due to the existing berms as well as the new planned berms of as part of the permitted enabling works. This will be further reduced once the woodland planting on the new berms becomes established and begins to mature within 3-5 years. Any linear addition to the skyline will be substantially mitigated by the resulting natural and softer appearance to the berms.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-13

Of the views assessed, only a small number will be affected by the proposal, generally involving slight to moderate levels of notable change within long, medium and short range views. Impacts from the expansion to the south and east will mostly be restricted to views from short range southern viewpoints. Those locally experienced will be slight negative and from along a section of the R613 between Novartis and Castlewarren, through sporadic hedgerow gaps on the L6474, and potentially from the proposed N28 upgrade. Impacts from southern viewpoints at Curraghbinny and Loughbeg will be generally moderate. Any moderate negative impacts that may arise from other locations around the harbour will eventually reduce to slight negative/neutral as new planting and tree screening matures and the buildings become familiar as part of existing localised trends.

Overall, long to medium range views will range from moderate to slight negative/neutral, with the proposal being a continuation of existing trends in the harbour. Overall impacts from the proposal will be not significant and generally negligible, especially within views across the harbour from the north.

Settlements

Impacts on settlements will generally be slight neutral to imperceptible due to intervening existing topography and vegetation, intervening distance between the site and nearest settlements and dwellings, and permitted and proposed landscaping on site.

Some views from Monkstown/Raffeen will have imperceptible visibility of the buildings as a result of the permitted planted berms. Similarly, views from Shanbally will be screened by the planted berms. Views from Ringaskiddy village centre will be mostly experienced from the N28 and involve slight negative to neutral impacts as a result of the extensions being a continuation of the existing main building on the skyline. There will be some partial views of the proposal from some areas within Ferryview estate at Ringaskiddy. Residential views from the south at Loughbeg have some moderate negative impacts while further south at Curraghbinny impacts will be slight negative due to intervening distance and textured landscape appearance.

Heritage, Recreation and Tourism

Impacts from key heritage and tourist sites such as Cobh Cathedral, Haulbowline, Spike Island and the Ringaskiddy Martello Tower will involve slight neutral to negligible impacts with visibility reduced due to existing landscaping (see cumulative impacts for more on the Martello Tower).

Impacts on the key aesthetic tourism assets including the landscape setting, scenic amenity and routes, recreational walks (including Slí na Sláinte), water based activities, and general enjoyment of the harbour will be negligible to imperceptible.

The extensive existing landscape development around the current buildings was imperative in their sensitive integration in this high value landscape. In spite of its location on a secondary ridgeline, the existing facility, through innovative building design, landscaping and landscape engineering (including the naturalised berm system) blends exceptionally well into the landscape. The continuation of these landscape interventions for the proposed expansion of the facility will be a major factor in maintaining this integration and ensuring the proposal does not compromise the integrity of valued aspects of the harbour landscape.

5.11.5 ‘Do-nothing’ Scenario

In the event of this development not occurring, the site will continue to remain as the Janssen Sciences Facility with its existing buildings and structures, car park, berms and planting as well as the planned new berms to the north west of the site. In the wider context, the overall character of the area will remain as an estuarine/harbour landscape with a combined mixture of rural/agricultural and urban areas and with a high level of industry, residential development and important heritage features.


Additional effects on the landscape character and visual environment caused by the proposed development when considered in conjunction with other relevant proposed or permitted

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-14

developments are addressed in this section. The assessment of cumulative impacts is also guided by the visual scenarios as prepared in the accompanying Photomontages of key representative viewpoints. There are a number of proposed developments in the area and these are listed below. The impacts of the proposed Janssen Sciences development are therefore collectively assessed in the context of its interaction of these other large scale developments:

- Port of Cork expansion (granted)

- Indaver - Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre (in planning as an SID with ABP)

- N28 upgrade (design stage)

- Novartis wind turbine (granted)

- DePuy wind turbine (granted)

- GE Healthcare (enabling works granted, building works in appeal)

- Haulbowline island rehabilitation (granted)

A more detailed description of each development and considered cumulative views are outlined below before overall cumulative landscape and visual impacts of the combined proposals are addressed. Cumulative impacts are further depicted in the Photomontages with regard to the key representational views.

Port of Cork

As outlined in the Cork County Development Plan 2014, the Council is committed to the relocation of port facility to Ringaskiddy and Marino Point, where this can be achieved in a manner that is compatible with environmental, landscape and nature conservation designations that pertain to the harbour area, and is in compliance with Article 6 of the Habitats Directive.

Since 2015 permission has been granted for the Ringaskiddy Port Redevelopment project which was submitted to An Bord Pleanála as a Strategic Infrastructure Application (PL04.PA00035). The project will allow larger vessels to come to Cork and it is envisioned that Phase 1 (which includes a 200m long berth and new container yard operational) will be operational in 2018, with main works having commenced Oct/Nov 2016. The proposals have been in the public domain since the Port’s 2010 Strategic Development Plan.

Four key areas for development were submitted in the planning application, however three areas are now being progressed by the Port of Cork. These include a new container terminal with an initial 360m berth at Ringaskiddy East, internal road improvements and improvements to the external road entrance into the existing Deepwater Berth and the construction of a new amenity area, including a new public pier and slipway at Paddy’s Point.

The primary visual impact of interest from the proposal will be from the tall cranes at the new container terminal at Ringaskiddy East. The main views which contain both the Janssen Sciences proposal and the new terminal are predominantly from the northern viewpoints at Whitepoint, Cobh, Monkstown, Rushbrook and Haulbowline/ Haulbowline Bridge, Spike Island and the Martello Tower site. Other more minor views from Curraghbinny, Whitegate, Fort Carlisle, Fort Camden, and East Ferry were also noted.

Indaver - Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre

Planning permission is currently being sought by Indaver from An Bord Pleanála for the proposed Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre, which is to be located in lands immediately south of the L2545 and the National Maritime College site. The lands fall on flat terrain at the base of Ringaskiddy Ridge and below the Martello Tower. The proposal, which was submitted to the Bord as a Strategic Infrastructure Development (PL04.PA0045), includes the main waste-to-energy facility of the Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre, the upgrade of the L2545 local road along the frontage of the site, coastal protection works at Gobby Strand, and connection to the national electricity grid. Previous applications were made in 2004 and 2008.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-15

The upper elevations and stack of the main building determine the primary visual impacts of the proposal. A number of views contain both the Indaver and Janssen Sciences proposals. These are predominantly from the northern viewpoints at Whitepoint, Cobh, Monkstown, Rushbrook and Haulbowline/ Haulbowline Bridge, Spike Island and the Martello Tower site. Other views from Curraghbinny, Fort Carlisle, and East Ferrywere also noted.

N28 Upgrade

A Route Protection Corridor is currently in place in the area and in immediate proximity to the Janssen Sciences site for the proposed realignment of the N28. The project, which is of strategic importance, is being progressed by Cork County Council and the National Road’s Authority and is at present in its design stage. The N28 national primary road connects Ringaskiddy with the Southern Ring Road (N40) c.10km to the north via the Bloom interchange at Rochestown. It terminates at the ferry port entrance on Ringaskiddy Main Street, opposite the junction with the Loughbeg Road (L6517).

The proposed upgrade includes a realignment whereby a strip of undeveloped between the Novartis and Janssen Sciences facility, immediately south of and parallel to the local access road to Janssen Sciences, is to be dissected by the new thoroughfare. As a result, in the context of the cumulative proposals considered, it occupies the closest position to the Janssen Sciences site. In addition a Service Area will be included on the northern side of the L2545 at Ringaskiddy en route to Haulbowline which together with the route upgrade will be a contributor to landscape and visual change.

Key views in which both proposals will be visible are predominately at a localised level and from viewpoints along a section of the R613 close to Castlewarren Stronghouse, from sporadic hedgerow gaps along the local road L6474, and from the Martello Tower. Here there will be a notable intensification of existing trends.

Novartis Wind Turbine

In 2012 planning permission was granted by An Bord Pleanála for four c.150m high wind turbines for a number of the existing pharmaceutical plants in Ringaskiddy. Three of these have been built to date at Janssen Sciences at Barnahely, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) at Curraghbinny, and DePuy at Loughbeg and have been operational since 2014. The fourth wind turbine at the Novartis site (at Barnahely/Raheens) has yet to be installed (PL04.240330). The turbine is to be located to the north of the site towards the L6474.

Due to its height, visibility of the structure, as is the case with the existing turbines, is relatively high in and around the harbour. Cumulatively, views which contain both the proposed developments of the Novartis turbine and the Janssen Sciences proposal are predominantly from a local scale within Barnahely, as well as from a wider landscape perspective at Curraghbinny, Cobh, Whitepoint, Rushbrook, Monkstown, Castlefarm, Carrigaline, Carrigaline/Crosshaven coastal walk, Spike Island and the Martello Tower site.

The Novartis turbine will be the second closest of all considered proposed developments to the Janssen Sciences site, however this proximity is only notably experienced from Monkstown viewpoints; and from where views reveal the existing Janssen Sciences turbine already in situ in proximity to the Janssen Sciences proposal.

DePuy Wind Turbine

An application has been granted by Cork County Council (PA Ref 156967) for a second c.150m wind turbine to be erected on the site of DePuy Synthes (Ireland) healthcare facility. The site is located on the Loughbeg/Ringaskiddy peninsula and on the southern side of the Ringaskiddy ridgeline which has an existing 150m high wind turbine, operational since 2014. The location of the proposed turbine is slightly to the south of the DePuy facility on a headland extending south into the harbour.

As with the proposed Novartis and existing turbines, visibility of the structure is relatively high in and around the harbour. Cumulatively, views which contain both the proposed developments of the DePuy turbine and the Janssen Sciences proposal are predominantly from Curraghbinny, Cobh,

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-16

Whitepoint, Castlefarm, Carrigaline/ Crosshaven coastal walk, Spike Island and the Martello Tower site. Views across Monkstown Creek from Raffeen will be largely screened by planned berms as part of the permitted enabling works with the top of the turbine visible in part.

GE Healthcare Facility

Planning permission is currently being sought from Cork County Council (16/6365) by GE Healthcare Life Sciences BioPark Limited for a large BioPark and all ancillary site development works to be located in lands immediately south of the R613 in Barnahely. Enabling works have already been granted (PA Ref 16/05658) while the building works are currently in appeal stage with An Bord Pleanála (PL04 .248154). The proposal will be the third closest development to the Janssen Sciences site and is to include a number of 12 2 storey buildings and a 6 storey storage tower, all linked by 2 1-2 storey spine buildings, as well as a range of ancillary structures. Primary access will be from the R613.

The upper elevations and especially the 6 storey storage tower determine the primary landscape and visual impacts of the proposal. However a slight dip in elevation prevents extensive views of the building and associated cumulative impacts with the proposed Janssen Sciences works. The main wider views with potential visibility of both proposals are primarily from Curraghbinny, Curraghbinny Road, Carrigaline, Castlefarm, Spike Island and the Martello Tower site. A local view of potential impact is from the R613 where the tower is likely to be visible above the tree line separating the site from the R613. While the lower elevations will likely be well screened in this respect, the tower may be visible with the proposed southern and eastern Janssen Sciences extensions within a sequential panned visual experience from the roadway. Due to intervening vegetation and the viewpoints from an important thoroughfare, the view will be glimpsed and momentary. It is worth noting that some residential and public views of the Janssen Sciences proposal from Curraghbinny Road, immediately south of Barnahely townland at Loughbeg, will have clear views of the proposed Janssen Sciences extension. Some residential properties will have cumulative views of both proposals.

Haulbowline Island Rehabilitation

Permission has been granted by Cork County Council (PA Ref 16/6219) for an application by the Minister of Agriculture, Food and the Marine for the extraction of c.134,000m3 of materials from the southern portion of the Ringaskiddy ridgeline on lands immediately south of the Martello Tower. The materials are to comprise of topsoil and subsoil from an area of c.9.3ha within an overall site area of 12.1ha with works to include the screening and crushing of some excavated material, as well as the remediation, reprofiling and landscaping of site with retained material post extraction.

The purpose of the works is to serve the Haulbowline Island Rehabilitation scheme, and as a result the proposal includes for the transport of c. 114,000m3 of material off site to East Tip, Haulbowline Island. The development will also comprise a new vehicular site entrance at the location of an existing agricultural entrance to the L6517, internal site access road, and associated drainage features.

The primary landscape and visual impacts will be from the extensive physical alteration to the ridge-side and exposure of soil during construction and for a time afterwards while seeding is establishing as part of the landscaping measures. Impacts will be substantially reduced once planting and seeding matures. Cumulative views with the Janssen Sciences proposal are largely restricted due to the positioning of the positioning of the works area to the southern side of the Martello Tower, with key views of the Janssen Sciences works being predominantly from the north and north west viewpoints. Potential cumulative views from the south and south west are from Curraghbinny, Curraghbinny Road, Fort Camden, and Whitegate, however visibility is substantially reduced due to intervening distance across the harbour. Glimpsed sequential cumulative impact may be experienced from the local access road to the DePuy Synthes site.

Overall Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impacts

The proposed extensions form only a minor part of a wide, varied and highly textured landscape with an intense built/ industrial fabric and a multitude of important physical units, focal points and landscape heritage features. The permitted enabling works serve as a substantial landscape and

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-17

visual mitigation measure in advance of proposed development. This ensures that any development is designed to blend into and respond to the existing landscape character. In this respect, both individual and cumulative impacts will only be of concern during construction and for a short-term period.

During construction, potential cumulative impacts with the other projects will generally be slight negative from long and medium range locations. These will be primarily from the northern and north western viewpoints from where the majority of the developments will be visible in tandem, i.e. at Cobh, Whitepoint, Rushbrook. Proposed new berms to the north west of the site will ensure substantial to entire screening of the proposed extension from Monkstown/Raffeen. Other long to medium range locations that may experience cumulative impacts are from Curraghbinny, Fort Carlisle/ Whitegate, Fort Camden, East Ferry, Aghmarta, Castlefarm,Loughbeg from the Martello Tower on Ringaskiddy Ridge. For the most part these will likely experience a slight neutral to imperceptible cumulative impact from the Janssen Sciences proposal in the context of the other proposed developments during construction, apart from more southerly viewpoints at Loughbeg and Curraghbinny where cumulative impacts will potentially be moderate negative/neutral.

After construction and once planting has established and matured, including on the berms as part of the permitted enabling works, the site will be very well integrated into the landscape and cumulative impacts will be negligible to imperceptible from most long to medium range locations apart from select southerly viewpoints. In the long term the berms and planting will provide additional screening and softening of existing and potential future negative cumulative impacts from the concentration of development outside the Janssen Sciences site. The key example of this is the visual clustering of the existing blade tips of the GSK turbines and Biomarin plant, the lower elevations of the existing Janssen Sciences turbine, and the proposed DePuy turbine (partially visible behind the site, as in Figure 5.1.1, EIAR Volume 2) as experienced from the Monkstown/Raffeen area.

Potentially localised/short range cumulative impacts will mainly be experienced from a section of the R613 between Novartis and Castlewarren. This will likely be moderate negative during construction but reduce to slight to imperceptible once planting established and matures. In a worst case scenario, in the event that the construction stages of the Janssen Sciences site development works, of the N28 upgrade at this location, of the GE Healthcare facility, and of the Novartis turbine occur in tandem, then effects on landscape and amenity generated from the intensification of construction activity may reach significant negative levels along this section of the road.

Cumulative impacts posed by the Janssen Sciences proposal on the landscape and visual setting of the protected structure of Castlewarren Stronghouse will be moderate negative with regard to existing and new views opened up as a result of the N28 upgrade through the lands. There will likely be moderate to slight negative sequential cumulative impact from all nearby proposals (GE facility, N28 upgrade) on the setting of the structure.

Sequential cumulative impact will be experienced within a panned panorama from the viewpoint of the Martello Tower on Ringaskiddy Ridge from where the majority of cumulative proposals will be visible. Cumulative impact contributed from the Janssen Sciences proposal will initially be slight neutral on the historic and aesthetic appreciation of the landscape during construction and early operation, reducing to negligible as planting establishes and matures.

The contribution of the Janssen Sciences proposal to the cumulative impact of proposed and permitted developments will be slight neutral from Spike Island.

Cumulative impacts on residential amenity are deemed as generally slight due to the intervening distance and screening between the Janssen Sciences site, other proposals discussed, and dwellings. However views from certain properties at Loughbeg and Curraghbinny will experience moderate negative to moderate/slight negative cumulative impact respectively mainly from the Janssen Sciences proposal, GE Healthcare facility, and Novartis and DePuy turbines.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-18


The site development works already permitted as as part of the enabling works have been designed as a means by which to prepare for and screen the proposed development of this study, including the expansion of the main facility to the west and south. As a result the proposal already has in place substantial mitigation measures for ensuring sensitive integration into the wider landscape.

However the following additional landscape mitigation measures can be applied:

- Materials and finished on new buildings and extensions shall display consistency with existing trends on site which have proven to be highly effective in the visual integration into the landscape.

- Additional tree screening will be introduced on the local access road to the site (to assist with localised screening with regard to views from the R613 and in light of localised cumulative impacts mainly in conjunction with the proposed N28 upgrade, GE Healthcare facility and Novartis turbine).

- Site machinery shall operate within the proposed construction compounds

- Storage areas will be located so as to avoid impacting further on existing trees and hedgerows or visually on roads and existing buildings.

- Existing field boundaries and hedgerows will be retained where possible to assist with the visual screening and integration of the proposal into the surrounding landscape in accordance with BS 5837:2012 - Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction.

- The construction compound will be fully re-instated at the end of the construction contract.

- Access to the site will utilise existing routes where possible.

See the prepared Landscape Masterplan 401 (Appendix A.2) for specific mitigation measures with regard to on site planting and landscaping.


Due to the visual nature and scale of the proposed development, it is inevitable that some residual visual impacts will remain. However because of the berms constructed in as part of the permitted enabling works, proposed screen planting, and the continuation of existing materials and design, landscape and visual impacts will generally be not significant. Overall residual impacts will range from slight negative/neutral to imperceptible within the wider landscape.

The proposal will not represent a new intrusion on the landscape character, but rather an extension of the existing form of the Janssen Sciences site which is already sympathetic to its receiving environment. The landscape can therefore very comfortably accommodate the proposed development. Overtime, the perception of the impact often lessens as the new development becomes more familiar and part of the overall ‘normal’ views.

In conclusion, there will be no significant residual change to the broader landscape character of the area. The most substantial changes to views will be at local level from the R613 and L6474 where the proposal is most visible and in closest proximity to viewpoints and from mainly residential views at Loughbeg where the greatest expanse of the development is most evident. This will reduce to slight negative as new planting matures within approximately 5 years and the buildings become familiar as part of existing similar structures.

The development does not contravene landscape and visual CPD objectives and the character of landscape, including protected views and scenic routes will remain unaffected by the proposal. In this regard, the integrity of the significant scenic, historical, recreational and ecological aspects which contribute to the high value, unique quality and enjoyment of the wider harbour landscape will not be compromised as a result of the proposed development.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10

!

City Harbour and Estuary

Indented Estuarine Coast

Broad Fertile Lowland Valleys

Broad Bay Coast

Rolling Patchwork Farmland

Broad Fertile Lowland ValleysSite

O

0 3 61.5km

Legend! Janssen Site

Landscape Character typesCity Harbour and EstuaryBroad Bay CoastIndented Estuarine CoastBroad Fertile Lowland ValleysBroad Fertile Lowland VallleyRolling Patchwork Farmland

Site

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

SiteCobh

Cork

CloyneMonkstown

Middleton

BallygarvanCarrigaline

Carrigtohill

JANSSEN SCIENCES (IRELAND)BIOCORK 2RINGASKIDDY, CORK

SITE CONTEXT AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER TYPES (CCDP 2014)

Penrose Wharf Business Centre,Penrose Wharf,

Cork, IrelandTel: +353 (0)21 242 5620

[email protected]

Figure 5.0.1Scale; 1:100,000 Chkd. By; DBProject Nr.; 6366 Rev; 00

Date; 09/06/2017Status; Planning Drn By; DB

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10

!

Carrigaline to Crosshaven Greenway

Ringaskiddy Sli

Monkstown Sli

S51

S58

S54

S53

S50

S52

S59

S57

S55

S58S59

S51

S59

Site

O

0 3 61.5km


Slí na Sláinte Walking RoutesCycle GreenwayDesignated Scenic Routes CCDP 2014High Value Landscape CCDP 2014

Site

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

SiteCobh

Cork

CloyneMonkstown

Middleton


Carrigtohill


LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL DESIGNATIONS(CCDP 2014)


Cork, IrelandTel: +353 (0)21 242 5620

[email protected]



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10

$8

$8

$8

$8

$8

$8

$8

$8

$8

$8

kj

kj

kj

kj

kj

kj

kj

!

Cobh

Ferryport

Camden Fort

Cork Harbour

Spike Island

Loughbeg strand

Cruise terminal

Monkstown marina

Crosshaven marina

Curraghbinny Woods

N28

Haulbowline

GE Loughbeg

Indaver RRRC

DePuy Wind Turbine


Port of Cork Extension


Ringaskiddy Sli

Monks

town S

liSite

O

0 1.5 30.75km


kj Other planned/permitted projects

$8 Tourism, recreation and amenitySlí na Sláinte Walking RoutesCycle Greenway

Site

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

SiteCobh

Cork

CloyneMonkstown

Middleton


Carrigtohill


TOURISM/RECREATION/AMENITY AND OTHER SIGNIFICANT PLANNED/PERMITTED DEVELOPMENTS


Cork, IrelandTel: +353 (0)21 242 5620

[email protected]



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10

!

Cobh

Trabolgan

Ferryport

Aghada pier

Camden Fort

Cork Harbour

Spike Island

Marloag woods

Rostellan woods

Loughbeg strand

Cruise terminalMonkstown marina

East ferry marina

Crosshaven marina

Curraghbinny Woods

N28

Haulbowline

GE Loughbeg

Indaver RRRC

DePuy Wind Turbine


Port of Cork Extension


Monkstown Sli

Site

O

0 3 61.5km


Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence (ZTVI)Not VisibleVisible

kj Other planned/permitted projects

$8 Tourism, recreation and amenitySlí na Sláinte Walking RoutesCycle Greenway

Site

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

SiteCobh

Cork

CloyneMonkstown

Middleton


Carrigtohill


ZONE OF THEORETICAL VISUAL INFLUENCE (ZTVI)


Cork, IrelandTel: +353 (0)21 242 5620

[email protected]



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10

!Site

View 12 - Loughbeg

View 05 - Shanbally

View 15 - Rushbrooke

View 11 - Curraghbinny

View 21 - Spike Island

View 01 - Monkstown/RafeenView 04 - Monkstown/Rafeen

View 06 - Proposed N28 Road

View 02 - Monkstown Car Park

View 08 - Ringaskiddy (west)

View 20 - Haulbowline Bridge

View 14 - Carrigaline (east)

View 09 - Ringaskiddy (east)

View 19 - Cobh (Kennedy Quay)

View 16 - Cobh (White's Point)

View 07 - R613 at Warrens Cross

View 03 - Monkstown (Castle Farm)

View 17 - Cobh (above train station)

View 10 - Ringaskiddy Martello Tower

View 18 - Cobh (St Colemans Cathedral)

View 13 - R612 Crosshaven/Carrigaline Walkway

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS UserCommunity

O

0 1.5 30.75km


Viewshed reference points

Site

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

SiteCobh

Cork

CloyneMonkstown

Middleton


Carrigtohill


PHOTOMONTAGE VIEWPOINTS


Cork, IrelandTel: +353 (0)21 242 5620

[email protected]



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 5-24


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-1

6 Traffic and Transportation

6.1 Introduction

This Traffic and Transportation Chapter has been prepared by Malachy Walsh and Partners, on the instructions of PM Group, on behalf of Janssen Sciences, for their proposed BioCork2 development at Janssen Sciences’ existing site facility at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, County Cork. This Traffic and Transportation Chapter is for submission to Cork County Council (CCC) as part of the planning application for the proposed development.

Arising from pre-planning consultation with CCC, a Scoping Note for the preparation of Traffic Impact Assessments in the Ringaskiddy Area was provided by CCC’s Traffic and Transport Division. While the technical content of this chapter fully addresses the requirements of the Scoping Note, a separate Transport Assessment Report has also been prepared, and is included as Volume 3 of this EIAR. The Transport Assessment Report presents the content of this chapter in a format that follows the format of an indexed checklist contained in the Scoping Note.


This Traffic and Transportation Chapter has been prepared in the context of the following:

- Pre-planning consultation and scoping with Cork County Council (CCC); Scoping Note for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Assessments in the Ringaskiddy Area

- The Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) Traffic and Transport Assessment Guidelines May 2014;

- The Road Safety Authority’s (RSA) collisions database and TII’s 2012-2014 Network Ranking Collision Rate Analysis;

- TII’s Road Safety Inspection Guidelines AM-STY-06043 December 2014;

- Cork County Council’s Cork County Development Plan 2014;

- Cork County Council’s Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Area Plan Second Edition January 2015;

- Cork County Council’s and TII’s proposed M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Motorway Scheme and EIS May 2017;

- The Port of Cork’s proposed redevelopment of their operations at Ringaskiddy and the associated Systra Port of Cork Strategic Traffic Model;

- Other existing permitted and proposed developments on the receiving local road network, including the GE Healthcare Life Sciences BioPark (Cork County Council planning file reference number: 16/06365);

- The TII Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB);

- The Department of Transport (DoT) Smarter Travel A Sustainable Transport Future A New Policy for Ireland 2009-2020;

- The DoT National Cycle Policy Framework 2009-2020; and

- The TII Project Appraisal Guidelines Unit 5.5 Link-Based Traffic Growth Forecasting

Existing traffic volumes on the proposed development existing receiving road network have been established on the basis of on-site traffic counts carried out by and for Malachy Walsh and Partners, and traffic data from TII.

The definitions of the significance of impacts and the durations of impacts have been identified on the basis of the EPA EIS Guidelines, as provided in Tables 6.1 and 6.2, respectively.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-2

Table 6.1: EPA EIA Guidelines Significance of Impacts

Significance Definition

Imperceptible Impact An impact capable of measurement but without noticeable consequences.

Not Significant An impact that causes noticeable changes in the character of the environment but without noticeable consequences.

Slight Impact An impact which causes noticeable changes in the character of the environment without affecting its sensitivities.

Moderate Impact An impact that alters the character of the environment in a manner that is consistent with existing and emerging trends.

Significant Impact An impact which, by its character, magnitude, duration or intensity alters a sensitive aspect of the environment.

Very Significant An impact that by its character, magnitude, duration or intensity significantly alters the majority of a sensitive aspect of the environment.

Profound Impact An impact which obliterates sensitive characteristics.

Table 6.2: EPA EIA Guidelines Duration of Impacts

Duration Definition

Momentary Impact lasting from seconds to minutes.

Brief Impact lasting less than a day.

Temporary Impact lasting less than a year.

Short-Term Impact lasting one to seven years.

Medium-Term Impact lasting seven to fifteen years.

Long-Term Impact lasting fifteen to sixty years.

Permanent Impact Lasting Over Sixty Years.

6.2.1 Forecasting Methods

The existing N28 Shannonpark Roundabout and N28 Shanbally Roundabout junctions have been analysed using the computer software programme ARCADY. The existing R613/N28, R613/Janssen Access Road and N28/Janssen Access junctions have been analysed using the computer software programme PICADY. The ARCADY and PICADY analysis has been carried out at 15 minutes intervals.

ARCADY (Assessment of Roundabout Capacity And DelaY) is a computer programme for calculating estimates of the capacity of roundabout junctions. The geometric details of the junction are supplied to the programme together with details of traffic flows and turning movements. The programme analyses the junction in relation to the various traffic flows and calculates the capacity of each approach. The programme also calculates the average queue length on each approach and the average delay per vehicle. The average queue length may be displayed in graphical form.

PICADY (Priority Intersection CApacity and DelaY) is a computer programme for calculating estimates of the capacity of major /minor road junctions, where the minor road is controlled by a stop or yield sign. The geometric details of the junction are supplied to the programme, together with details of traffic flows and turning movements. The programme analyses the junction in relation to the various traffic flows and calculates the capacity of each approach. The programme also calculates the average queue length on each approach and the average delay per vehicle. The average queue length may be displayed in graphical form. ARCADY and PICADY are issued by the UK company, TRL.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-3

ARCADY and PICADY are identified by TII as key traffic modelling software in TII’s Traffic and Transport Assessment Guidelines.


The Janssen Sciences proposed BioCork2 development comprises an expansion of the existing Biomedicines Manufacturing Facility and includes a new manufacturing building and the expansion of the existing warehouse building, laboratory and administration building, with associated supporting site facilities. The site development works for the proposal were subject to a previous planning application (Cork County Council planning file reference number: 16/07150) and will be completed during 2017.

Subject to planning permission, the BioCork2 on-site construction is scheduled for 24 months, from November 2017 to October 2019. The peak construction month will be September 2018 with 782 peak construction staff.

The existing Janssen Sciences facility includes a total of 635 staff, including 555 employee personnel and 80 contract personnel. The proposed BioCork2 development would facilitate 250 additional staff over five years, including 200 employees and 50 contract staff, with 80% of additional staff working shift hours.

The Janssen Sciences peak operational traffic generation hours are 06:30 to 07:30 a.m. and 18:30 to 19:30 p.m.

6.4 Existing Environment

6.4.1 Existing Road Network

The Janssen Sciences facility is located at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, County Cork, as shown on Figure 6.1, on the south side of the N28 National Primary Road and west side of the R613 Regional Road.

The N28 extends from the N40 Cork Southern Ring Road at Bloomfield Interchange, in the north, to the Port of Cork Ringakiddy Terminal, at Ringaskiddy, in the south. The N40 Southern Ring Road provides a direct link to the M8, N8, N25, N27 and N22 National Primary Roads and the N71 National Secondary Road.

The N40/N28 Bloomfield Interchange includes free-flow directional interchange ramps between the N28 and N40 in all directions for all traffic movements.

The N28 is a single carriageway road with a typical carriageway width of 7.5 metres, and dedicated central ghost islands and right-turn lanes at existing development accesses, including at Janssen Sciences.

Janssen Sciences’ existing site has an existing access junction on the south side of the N28, immediately east of Shanbally. The existing Janssen N28 access is currently used as an emergency access only. Approximately 150 metres north west of its Janssen Sciences’ access junction, the N28 forms the Shanbally Roundabout junction with the L2492 County Road, at Shanbally village. Both junctions are located within the Shanbally village 50 km/hour urban speed limit zone on the N28. The existing Janssen N28 access junction includes a dedicated right-turn lane on the N28.

South east of Shanbally village, the N28 has a 60 km/hour speed limit zone to Ringaskiddy, with a continuous footway along its south side and street lighting.

The N28 forms a stop controlled priority junction with the R613, with dedicated turning lanes, on the north east side of Janssen Sciences. The R613 extends from its junction with the N28 to the N71, at Ballinhassig, via Carrigaline.

A priority controlled access junction to Janssen Sciences is provided on the R613, approximately 350 metres south of the N28/R613 junction. The existing R613/Janssen Access Road junction includes a dedicated right-turn lane on the R613 and a partial diverge left-turn splay. At this

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-4

Location, the R613 is a single carriageway road with a typical carriageway width of 7.0 metres. The R613 has street lighting and a footway on its east side, from its N28 junction to south of its Janssen Sciences access junction.

The Janssen Access Road is an urban road with a 7.0 metres wide carriageway, grass verges on both sides, and a footway and street lighting on its north side. Parking is prohibited on both sides. The Janssen security building and associated security barrier, on the Janssen Access Road, are located approximately 200 metres from the R613 junction. Speed ramps are provided locally on the Janssen Access Road on the approaches to security.

Security entry to Janssen Sciences, at the security building and associated security barrier on the Janssen Access Road located approximately 200 metres from the R613 junction, for staff, is based on a staff vehicle number plate recognition system. All staff vehicles are registered electronically at Janssen Sciences. This number plate recognition system has a vehicle entry rate of up to approximately 20 vehicles / minute. Entry rates are higher during peak staff entry when the barrier remains elevated, in response to continuous number plate recognition. No significant vehicle waiting times or vehicle queues occur at security entry during highest staff demand.

Approximately 1.5 kms west of the Janssen Access Road junction, the R613 has a priority controlled Stop junction on its north side with the L2492 Local Road, at Coolmore Lodges. The L2492 extends north to the N28 at Shanbally, to form Shanbally Roundabout junction, within the Shanbally village 50 km/hour urban speed limit zone on the N28. East of Shanbally village, the N28 has a 60 km/hour speed limit zone to Ringaskiddy, with a continuous footway along its south side and street lighting. The R613 has a typical road carriageway width of 6.0 metres in the vicinity of its L2492 junction.

The R613 west of its L2496 Curraheen Road junction, located south west of the existing Janssen site, on the Carrigaline side, is signed as unsuitable for heavy vehicles. West of its L2492 junction, the R613 is a rural route with no footways or street lighting. The unimproved section of the R613 extends from Coolmore Lodges to the east edge of Carrigaline, where footways and street lighting are provided.

A single centreline road marking is typically provided along the unimproved section of the R613. Rural advance warning signs are provided along this section including priority controlled ‘side road’ and ‘series of sharp bends’ ahead. The alignment is on a series of horizontal curves, with short straight sections. The typical carriageway width is approximately 5.8 metres within the unimproved section of the R613, with local reduced widths to approximately 5.2 metres and 4.8 metres. Minimal refuge verges are provided along the route between the end of the footway to the east of Coolmore Lodges and The Estuary on the east side of Carrigaline Town.

A 50 kph speed limit applies along the R613 from Coolmore Lodges to Carrigaline Town. Repeater 50 kph speed limit signs are posted along the route.

Northwest of Shanbally village, the N28 forms the Shannonpark Roundabout junction with the R611 Regional Road. The R611 is part of the main Cork city to Carrigaline road.

Shanbally National School is located on the west side of the L2492, immediately south of the N28 Shanbally Roundabout. The Shanbally National School hours are 9.00 a.m. to 2.30 p.m. Infants finish at 1.30 p.m. and all other pupils finish at 2.30 p.m. There is an off-street car park immediately adjacent to the school, on the west side of the L2492, immediately south of the N28 Shanbally Roundabout.

6.4.2 Existing Transport Services

The N28 is located on the Bus Éireann Cork/Monkstown/Ringaskiddy/Haulbouline Route 223 public transport bus service. There are 23 daily services to Ringaskiddy and 14 daily services from Ringaskiddy, on weekdays. The existing stop locations on the Bus Éireann Route 223 include at Shanbally, Pfizer and Ringaskiddy on the N28.

Bus Éireann bus passenger capacities vary from, typically, 44 seats to 66 seats, with additional passenger standing capacity. Total capacity is up to approximately 82 passengers.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-5

Figure 6.1: Site Location Map

6.4.3 Existing Traffic

November 2016 on-site traffic counts, agreed by Malachy Walsh and Partners with Cork County Council’s Traffic and Transportation Section, were carried out on the local road network for the GE Healthcare Life Sciences BioPark (Cork County Council planning file reference number: 16/06365). The November 2016 junction traffic volumes are shown on the figures provided in Appendix B.1.

A November 2016 staff travel survey was carried out at Janssen Sciences for the Janssen Sciences Mobility Management Plan (Updated).

The November 2016 on-site traffic surveys included the following:

- Continuous 48 hours automatic link traffic counts in each direction, at one hour intervals, on the N28 immediately east of Shanbally Roundabout; and

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-6

- Morning and evening classified junction traffic turning counts and queue lengths, from 06:30 a.m. to 09:30 a.m. and from 16:30 p.m. to 19:30 p.m., at 15 minutes intervals, at the following junctions:

- N28/R611 Shannonpark Roundabout;

- \\N28 Shanbally/L2492 Roundabout;

- N28/R613 priority T-junction; and

- R613/Carrigaline Inner Relief Road/R612 traffic signals junction.

The survey outputs also included detailed profiles of vehicle queue lengths on each approach to the junctions surveyed, for the three hours morning and three hours evening periods.

Vehicle journey time surveys were carried out on the N28, between Carr’s Hill and the Janssen Access Road, in both the eastbound and westbound directions, by Malachy Walsh and Partners, during the morning and evening peak traffic hours, on the 7th December 2016.

The total November 2016 junction volumes for the periods 06:30 to 09:30 a.m. and 16:30 to 19:30 p.m. are profiled in Figures 6.2 and 6.3, at 15 minutes intervals, respectively.

The Janssen Sciences peak operational traffic generation hours are 06:30 to 07:30 a.m. and 18:30 to 19:30 p.m. The November 2016 traffic volumes for the periods 06:30 to 07:30 a.m. and 18:30 to 19:30 p.m. are summarised in Figures 6.4 and 6.5, respectively. The 2016 junction traffic turning volumes are shown on the figures provided in Appendix B.1, for each 15 minutes interval.

Figure 6.2: November 2016 AM Total Junction Traffic Volumes Profile

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-7

Figure 6.3: November 2016 PM Total Junction Traffic Volumes Profile

Figure 6.4: November 2016 06:30 to 07:30 AM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-8

Figure 6.5: November 2016 18:30 to 19:30 PM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles)

The 2016 traffic surveys’ recorded morning peak traffic hour and evening peak traffic hour, at each junction, are detailed in Table 6.3.

A summary of the 2016 morning and evening peak hour link traffic volumes is also provided in Table 6.3. The equivalent traffic data from the Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) automatic traffic counter, located on the N28 at Carr’s Hill (north of Shannonpark Roundabout), is provided in Table 6.4.

Table 6.3: 2016 Two-Way Peak Hour Link Traffic Volumes

Location Road Link

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Time Total

Vehicles Time

Total Vehicles

Shannonpark Roundabout

N28 North 7.00 to

8.00 a.m.

2,399

4.45 to

5.45 p.m.

2,182

R611 1,170 940

N28 East 1,879 1,259

Shanbally Roundabout

N28 West 7.00 to

8.00 a.m.

1,670

4.30 to

5.30 p.m.

1,374

L2492 165 285

N28 East 1,382 1,028

N28/R613 N28 West 8.00 to

9.00 a.m.

844 4.30 to

5.30 p.m.

776

R613 219 256

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-9

Location Road Link

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Time Total

Vehicles Time

Total Vehicles

N28 East 768 707

R613/Janssen Sciences Access Road

R613 East

8.00 to

9.00 a.m.

525

4.30 to

5.30 p.m.

442

Access Road 148 194

R613 West 417 291

R613/Carrigaline Inner Relief Road/R612

Inner Relief Road 8.00 to

9.00 a.m.

452

4.30 to

5.30 p.m.

957

R613 West 270 584

R612 623 1,582

R613 East 339 819

Table 6.4: TII November 2016 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes

National Road

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AADT

(% HGV) Time Total

Vehicles Time

Total

Vehicles

N28 at Carr’s Hill 7.00 to

8.00 a.m. 2,528

4.00 to 5.00 p.m. & 5.00 to 6.00 p.m.

2,202/2,102 24,761

(2.9%)

N28 Carr’s Hill, N40 Cork Southern Ring Road and N40/N28 Bloomfield Interchange

The TII automatic traffic counter data for the N28 Carr’s Hill and N40 cork Southern Ring Road, including either side of the N40/N28 Bloomfield Interchange, are provided in Tables 6.5 and 6.6, respectively. The TII data includes AADT volumes and morning and afternoon/evening hourly volumes for the periods 5.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.

Table 6.5: TII N28 2016 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes

N28 Location

(TII counter)

November AM Peak November PM Peak 2016

AADT

(% HGV) Time Total

Vehicles Time

Total

Vehicles

N28 between Bloomfield Interchange and Shannonpark Roundabout (TII Counter 1281)

5.00 a.m. to 6.00 a.m.

218 3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.

1,870

24,607 (2.9%)

6.00 a.m. to 7.00 a.m.

1,179 4.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.

2,202

7.00 a.m. to 8.00 a.m.

2,528 5.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.

2,102

8.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.

1,913 6.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.

2,081

9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.

1,795 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.

1,510

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-10

Table 6.6: TII N40 2016 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes

N40 Location (TII

Counter)


AADT

(% HGV) Time

Total

Vehicles Time

Total

Vehicles

N40 between Bloomfield Interchange and Mahon Interchange (TII Counter 1258)

5.00 a.m. to 6.00 a.m.

685 3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.

5,232

69,595 (3.9%)

6.00 a.m. to 7.00 a.m.

2,464 4.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.

6,337

7.00 a.m. to 8.00 a.m.

6,272 5.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.

6,717

8.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.

5,940 6.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.

5,580

9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.

5,032 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.

3,996

N40 between Kinsale Road Interchange and Douglas Interchange (TII Counter 1253)

5.00 a.m. to 6.00 a.m.

737 3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.

6,328

81,090 (2.8%)

6.00 a.m. to 7.00 a.m.

2,596 4.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.

7,520

7.00 a.m. to 8.00 a.m.

6,826 5.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.

7,405

8.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.

7,461 6.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.

6,517

9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.

5,979 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.

5,161

Full Year 2016 Annual Average Daily Traffic Volumes (AADT) have been estimated on the basis of the 48-hours continuous count on the N28 east of Shanbally and the TII automatic counter, and are provided in Table 6.7. The Janssen Access Road AADT has been estimated on the basis of existing staff and visitor numbers and the existing (November 2016) staff travel mode shares for the Janssen Sciences Mobility Management Plan (Updated).

The TII AADT divided by the TII six hours' data, for the same date and hours as the BioCork2 six hours’ traffic counts, provided an AADT factor. The AADT factor was then applied to the six hours traffic counts for BioCork2 to determine AADT volumes for the BioCork2 traffic count locations.

Table 6.7: Estimated 2016 AADT Volumes

Location Road Link AADT Vehicles


N28 North 24,761

R611 11,415

N28 East 12,772


N28 West 12,389

L2492 1,832

N28 East 9,809

N28/R613

N28 West 6,593

R613 1,933

N28 East 6,003

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-11

Location Road Link AADT Vehicles


R613 East 5,222

Access Road 1,166

R613 West 3,823


Inner Relief Road 5,735

R613 West 3,476

R612 8,974

R613 East 4,713

N28 at Carr’s Hill N28 North 24,761

The 29th and 30th November 2016 24-hour traffic volumes on the N28 east of Shanbally are profiled in Figures 6.6 and 6.7, respectively.

Figure 6.6: 29th

November 2016 N28 (East of Shanbally) 24-Hour Traffic Volumes Profile

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-12

Figure 6.7: 30th

November 2016 N28 (East of Shanbally) 24-Hour Traffic Volumes Profile

The November 2016 half-hourly total junction traffic volumes, for the morning and evening periods, are provided in Table 6.8. This is a tabular summary of the foregoing 15 minute volume profiles provided in Figures 6.2 and 6.3, and further detailed in Appendix B.1.

Table 6.8: November 2016 Half-Hourly Total Junction Traffic Volumes

Junction AM PM

Hour Vehicles Hour Vehicles

Shannonpark

Roundabout

6.30 – 7.00 AM 928 4.30 – 5.00 PM 1393

7.00 – 7.30 AM 1543 5.00 – 5.30 PM 1325

7.30 – 8.00 AM 1462 5.30 – 6.00 PM 1380

8.00 – 8.30 AM 1410 6.00 – 6.30 PM 1324

8.30 – 9.00 AM 1326 6.30 – 7.00 PM 1287

9.00 – 9.30 AM 1278 7.00 – 7.30 PM 1079

Shanbally

Roundabout

6.30 – 7.00 AM 509 4.30 – 5.00 PM 724

7.00 – 7.30 AM 903 5.00 – 5.30 PM 643

7.30 – 8.00 AM 833 5.30 – 6.00 PM 637

8.00 – 8.30 AM 841 6.00 – 6.30 PM 577

8.30 – 9.00 AM 843 6.30 – 7.00 PM 496

9.00 – 9.30 AM 431 7.00 – 7.30 PM 405

N28/R613

6.30 – 7.00 AM 335 4.30 – 5.00 PM 512

7.00 – 7.30 AM 468 5.00 – 5.30 PM 449

7.30 – 8.00 AM 535 5.30 – 6.00 PM 379

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-13

Junction AM PM

Hour Vehicles Hour Vehicles

8.00 – 8.30 AM 579 6.00 – 6.30 PM 409

8.30 – 9.00 AM 569 6.30 – 7.00 PM 391

9.00 – 9.30 AM 342 7.00 – 7.30 PM 315

R613/Carrigaline

Inner Relief

Road/R612

6.30 – 7.00 AM 273 4.30 – 5.00 PM 983

7.00 – 7.30 AM 569 5.00 – 5.30 PM 988

7.30 – 8.00 AM 943 5.30 – 6.00 PM 978

8.00 – 8.30 AM 979 6.00 – 6.30 PM 843

8.30 – 9.00 AM 1090 6.30 – 7.00 PM 794

9.00 – 9.30 AM 802 7.00 – 7.30 PM 693

The November 2016 half-hourly total junction traffic volumes confirm that, during the morning period, the half-hourly period up to 7.00 a.m. is significantly lower than the half-hourly periods during the core peak morning period from 7.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.

During the evening period, the half-hour period after 7.00 p.m. is significantly lower than the core peak evening period from 4.30 to 6.30 p.m., while the half-hour period from 6.30 to 7.00 p.m. is lower than the core period half-hourly volumes.

The November 2016 two-way link traffic volumes on the N28, at Shanbally and north of Shannonpark, at half-hourly intervals, are summarised in Table 6.9.

Table 6.9: November 2016 N28 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes

Time Period N28 Location Vehicles

From To

6.30 a.m. 7.00 a.m. Shanbally 417

North of Shannonpark 833

7.00 a.m. 8.00 a.m. Shanbally 1,382

North of Shannonpark 2,399

8.00 a.m. 9.00 a.m. Shanbally 1,333


9.00 a.m. 9.30 a.m. Shanbally 344


9.30 a.m. 10.00 a.m. Shanbally 321


2.00 p.m. 3.00 p.m. Shanbally 448


3.00 p.m. 4.00 p.m. Shanbally 608


4.00 p.m. 4.30 p.m. Shanbally 709

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-14

Time Period N28 Location Vehicles

From To


4.30 p.m. 5.00 p.m. Shanbally 537


5.00 p.m. 6.00 p.m. Shanbally 993


6.00 p.m. 7.00 p.m. Shanbally 872


7.00 p.m. 7.30 p.m. Shanbally 314


The November 2016 morning traffic volumes on the N28 to the Ringaskiddy area, at Shanbally and north of Shannonpark, at half-hourly intervals, are summarised in Table 6.10.

Table 6.10: November 2016 N28 Link Traffic Volumes to Ringaskiddy Area

Morning Time Period N28 Location Direction Vehicles

From To

6.30 a.m. 7.00 a.m. Shanbally Eastbound 363

North of Shannonpark Southbound 458

7.00 a.m. 8.00 a.m. Shanbally Eastbound 1,163

North of Shannonpark Southbound 1,387

8.00 a.m. 9.00 a.m. Shanbally Eastbound 1,172

North of Shannonpark Southbound 1,256





The November 2016 afternoon and evening traffic volumes on the N28 from the Ringaskiddy area, at Shanbally and north of Shannonpark, at half-hourly intervals, are summarised in Table 6.11.

Table 6.11: November 2016 N28 Link Traffic Volumes from Ringaskiddy Area

Afternoon/ Evening Time Period N28 Location Vehicles

From To

2.00 p.m. 3.00 p.m. Shanbally Westbound 266

North of Shannonpark Northbound 785


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-15

Afternoon/ Evening Time Period N28 Location Vehicles

From To







North of Shannonpark Northbound 1,066


North of Shannonpark Northbound 1,090



The November 2016 total junction traffic volumes on the N28, at Shannonpark Roundabout and Shanbally Roundabout, at half-hourly intervals, are summarised in Table 6.12.

Table 6.12: November 2016 N28 Total Junction Traffic Volumes (Vehicles)

Time Period N28 Roundabout Junction Vehicles

From To

6.30 a.m. 7.00 a.m. Shannonpark 928

Shanbally 509

7.00 a.m. 8.00 a.m. Shannonpark 3,005

Shanbally 1,736

8.00 a.m. 9.00 a.m. Shannonpark 2,736

Shanbally 1,684

9.00 a.m. to 9.30 a.m. 9.30 a.m. Shannonpark 1,278

Shanbally 431

9.30 a.m. 10.00 a.m. Shannonpark 949

Shanbally 402

2.00 p.m. 3.00 p.m. Shannonpark 1,976

Shanbally 601


Shanbally 815


Shanbally 956

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-16

Time Period N28 Roundabout Junction Vehicles

From To


Shanbally 724


Shanbally 1,280


Shanbally 1,073


Shanbally 405

The maximum (max) lane queue lengths on the junction approaches, for the periods 06:30 to 09:30 a.m. and 16:30 to 19:30 p.m. are summarised in Tables 6.13 and 6.14, respectively, together with the maximum queue lengths for the peak traffic hours at each junction.

Queues of 20 plus vehicles, in excess of 100 metres, become difficult to survey using the survey junction recording system. Research of other relevant and recent EIA/TIA conducted in the Ringaskiddy area indicate no quantified junction queues are provided for Shanbally Roundabout and Shannonpark Roundabout, including the M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project EIS May 2017, to facilitate data comparison.

Table 6.13: November 2016 AM Junction Traffic Queue Lengths

Junction Approach

Max Lane Queue Length (Vehicles)

6.30 to

7.30 AM

7.30 to

8.30 AM

8.30 to

9.30 AM

AM Peak

Traffic Hour


N28 Southbound 7 12 8 7

N28 Westbound 9 11 10 11

R611 12 6 9 12


N28 Eastbound 3 20+ 20+ 8


L2492 3 4 2 4

N28/R613

N28 Eastbound 2 3 3 3


R613 4 10 9 10


R613 Westbound 12 19 20+ 20+

R613 Eastbound 12 20+ 20+ 20+

Inner Relief Road

Southbound 16 16 20+ 20+

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:10


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-17

Junction Approach


6.30 to

7.30 AM

7.30 to

8.30 AM

8.30 to

9.30 AM

AM Peak

Traffic Hour

R612 5 6 20+ 16

Table 6.14: November 2016 PM Junction Traffic Queue Lengths

Junction Approach


4.30 to

5.30 PM

5.30 to

6.30 PM

6.30 to

7.30 PM

PM Peak

Traffic Hour


N28 Southbound 8 8 8 8

N28 Westbound 20+ 20+ 20+ 20+

R611 7 8 15 7



N28 Westbound 20+ 20+ 8 20+

L2492 14 7 7 14

N28/R613



R613 4 4 4 4


R613 Westbound 18 18 14 18

R613 Eastbound 14 9 12 14

Inner Relief Road

Southbound 20+ 20+ 18 20+

R612 20+ 12 6 20+

The queue lengths confirm that highest queue lengths at Shannonpark Roundabout are on the N28 westbound during the evening.

Highest queue lengths at Shanbally Roundabout are on the N28 eastbound during the morning and on the N28 westbound during the evening. This is consistent with high levels of employment traffic travelling to and from the Ringaskiddy area each day, from residential areas located outside the Ringaskiddy area.

2016 Journey Time Surveys

Vehicle journey time surveys were carried out on the N28 between Carr’s Hill and the Janssen Access Road junction on the R613, in both the eastbound and westbound directions, by Malachy Walsh and Partners, during the morning and evening peak traffic hours, on the 7th December 2016.

The recorded eastbound and westbound morning and evening peak traffic hours' journey times are provided in Tables 6.15, 6.16, 6.17 and 6.18, respectively. Free flow journey times are also provided. A journey times' route locations map is provided in Figure 6.8.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-18

Table 6.15: N28 Eastbound AM Peak Journey Times

Location

Freeflow 07:00 to 08:00 AM Peak

Distance

km

Total Time

Seconds

Total Time

Seconds

Average

Speed/

Kph

Segment

Delays

Seconds

Peak Hr.

Queue

Vehicles

Carr's Hill/ L6471 Hilltown 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A

Shannonpark Roundabout 1.2 72 90 48 18 7

R610 Rafeen 2.6 156 170 63 -4 N/A

Shanbally Roundabout 4 240 272 49 18 8

Pfizer Roundabout 4.9 294 331 55 5 1

N28/ R613 Junction 6.1 366 402 61 -1 3

R613/Janssen Sciences Access Road 6.5 394 440 38 10 N/A

Total Delays: 46

The total recorded morning peak traffic hour vehicle journey time eastbound on the N28, from Carr’s Hill to the Janssen Sciences Access Road 440 seconds. This includes 46 seconds of delays at junctions.

Table 6.16: N28 Westbound AM Peak Journey Times

Location

Freeflow 07:00 to 08:00 AM Peak

Distance

km

Total Time

Seconds

Total Time

Seconds

Average

Speed/

Kph

Segment

Delays

Seconds

Peak Hr.

Queue

Vehicles

R613/Janssen Sciences Access Road 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A

N28/R613 Junction 0.4 30 51 28 21 10


Shanbally Roundabout 2.4 150 207 41 25 4

R610 Rafeen 3.8 234 286 64 -5 N/A

Shannonpark Roundabout - Static Queue

N/A N/A 446 N/A N/A N/A


Carr's Hill/ L6471 Hilltown 6.5 390 566 57 3 N/A

Total Delays: 176

The total recorded morning peak traffic hour vehicle journey time westbound on the N28, from the Janssen Sciences Access Road to Carr’s Hill, is 566 seconds. This includes 176 seconds of delays at junctions.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-19

Table 6.17: N28 Eastbound PM Peak Journey Times

Location

Freeflow 16:30 to 17:00 PM Peak

Distance

km

Time

Seconds

Total Time

Seconds

Average

Speed/

Kph

Segment

Delays

Seconds

Peak Hr.

Queue

Vehicles

Carr's Hill/ L6471 Hilltown 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A


R610 Rafeen 2.6 156 197 48 21 N/A

Shanbally Roundabout 4 240 300 49 19 3


N28/ R613 Junction 6.1 366 435 62 -2 3

R613/Janssen Sciences Access Road 6.5 394 465 38 2 N/A

Total Delays: 71

The total recorded evening peak traffic hour vehicle journey time eastbound on the N28, from Carr’s Hill to the Janssen Sciences Access Road is 465 seconds. This includes 71 seconds of delays at junctions.

Table 6.18: N28 Westbound PM Peak Journey Times

Location

Freeflow 16:30 to 17:00 PM Peak

Distance

km

Time

Seconds

Total Time

Seconds

Average

Speed/

Kph

Segment

Delays

Seconds

Peak Hr.

Queue

Vehicles

R613/Janssen Access Road 0 0 0 N/A N/A 0

N28/ R613 Junction 0.4 30 30 48 0 4

Pfizer Roundabout 1.5 96 91 65 -5 0

Shanbally Roundabout 2.4 150 187 34 42 20+

R610 Rafeen 3.8 234 246 85 -25 N/A

Shannonpark Roundabout - Static Queue

N/A N/A 587 N/A N/A N/A

Shannonpark Roundabout 5.3 324 637 14 301 20+

Carr's Hill/ L6471 Hilltown 6.5 390 711 54 8 N/A

Total Delays: 321

The total recorded evening peak traffic hour vehicle journey time westbound on the N28, from the Janssen Sciences Access Road to Carr’s Hill, is 711 seconds. This includes 321 seconds of delays at junctions.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-20

Figure 6.8: Journey Times Route Locations Map

BioCork2 Base Year Journey Times’ Validation

A comparison of the BioCork2 Base Year journey times with Cork County Council’s M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project EIS Base Year journey times, detailed in Cork County Council’s M28 EIS dated May 2017, is provided in Table 6.19.

Table 6.19: Comparison of BioCork2 Base Year Journey Times with Cork County Council’s M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project EIS Base Year Journey Times (Reference: Cork County Council M28 EIS May 2017 Tables 5.10, 5.11, 5.12 and 5.13)

EIS Route Length

(km)

Peak

Hour Direction

Duration

(minutes)

Average

Speed (kph)

BioCork2

North of

Shannonpark/

R613 Janssen

Access

6.5

AM Eastbound 7.3 53

Westbound 9.4 41

PM Eastbound 7.8 50

Westbound 11.9 33

M28 Shannonpark/

Ringaskiddy 5.7

AM Eastbound 7.6 45

Westbound 6.1 56

PM Eastbound 5.9 58

Westbound 6.7 51

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-21

The journey times’ comparison confirms that the BioCork2 Base Year journey times are of similar order as Cork County Council’s M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project EIS Base Year journey times.

The TII N28 traffic counter data was also reviewed in the context of the Wednesday 7th December 2016 date of the BioCork2 journey times' survey, as detailed in Table 6.20.

Table 6.20: BioCork2 Base Year Journey Times’ Date (Wednesday 7th

December 2016) - TII Data:

Date Peak Hour TII N28 Counter (1281)

Traffic Volumes

Wednesday 7th December

2016

AM 2,423

PM 2,189

2016 Workdays AM 2,289

PM 2,159

7th

December 2016/ 2016

Workdays

AM 106%

PM 101%

The TII traffic counter data confirms that the Wednesday 7th December 2016 date of the BioCork2 journey times' survey morning and evening peak traffic volumes exceed the average of all 2016 workdays recorded by TII.

Accordingly, the BioCork2 Base Year journey times are representative.

Existing N28 Junction Queuing and Delays

Traffic queuing and delays were observed during the 2016 on-site traffic counts, carried out by Malachy Walsh and Partners, at the existing Shannonpark Roundabout and Shanbally Roundabout on the N28, during the morning and evening commuter peak traffic periods.

Ringaskiddy includes numerous employers with relatively high numbers of staff that travel to and from their employment from residential locations outside Ringaskiddy, mostly via the existing N28, Shannonpark Roundabout and Shanbally Roundabout. Carrigaline includes numerous residents that travel to and from employment located outside Carrigaline, mostly via the N28 and Shannonpark Roundabout.

Both Shannonpark Roundabout and Shanbally Roundabout on the N28 were observed by Malachy Walsh and Partners to be operating at, or in excess of, practical capacity during the 2016 morning and evening peak traffic periods.

The N40/N28 Bloomfield Interchange includes free-flow directional interchange ramps between the N28 and N40 in all directions for all traffic movements.

Many employers in Ringaskiddy, including Janssen Sciences, operate multiple and off-peak shift and flexitime work start and finish times for staff to reduce staff travel during peak traffic periods. Janssen also operate a Mobility Management Plan with measures and incentives to further reduce car travel during peak traffic periods.

Validation

TRL issued traffic modelling Software tools ARCADY, OSCADY and PICADY are identified by TII in their Project Appraisal Guidelines. ARCADY and PICADY are identified by TII as key traffic modelling software in TII’s Traffic and Transport Assessment Guidelines. Analysis based on capacity operations is inherent in the software.

ARCADY assumes gap acceptance based on inter-visibilities and approach lane optimisation.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-22

The on-site surveys provide instant maximum queue lengths for each 15 minutes time period. The queue length modelled outputs, inherent in the software, for each 15 minute period during the morning and evening peak traffic periods, provided in the submitted EIS, are mean maximum vehicle queues during each 15 minutes.

Using maximum peak queue values and journey time data does not validate an ARCADY model. Validation of all models is susceptible to variation from recorded peak data. Indeed the recorded peak hour flows for 2016 at Shanbally Roundabout indicate a deviation in excess of 400 vehicles compared with the Systra 2023 Port of Cork Model for the AM peak model.

The ARCADY software tool is an industry standard approach of predicting the impact of a proposal with a like with like comparison. ARCADY is based on three decades of research and development by TRL and is used for predicting capacities, queues, delays (both queuing and geometric) and accident risk at roundabouts.

Roundabouts are modelled using the well-established TRL/Kimber capacity relationships (the ARCADY Model), which take into account key roundabout geometries such as entry width, approach width, flare length, conflict angle, inscribed circle diameter and entry radius. This empirical framework intrinsically links roundabout geometry to driver behaviour and in turn to predicted capacities, queues and delays.

The industry standard approach to modelling using ARCADY is to input the geometric data to the model followed by the predicted demand flows, with and without a proposal in place. The performance of junctions for given geometric inputs and flow is validated from the outset during the software development process. Calibration/validation is carried out by checks on the geometric inputs and verification of the demand data. Geometric checks were performed to validate the input geometry.

The geometry of the Shanbally Roundabout and Shannonpark Roundabouts has been reviewed and verified. Unlike strategic modelling tools such as SATURN, the capacity of the junction is a function of the geometry. Strategic models allow for ‘tweaking’ capacity estimates.

Altering geometry could be applied to an ARCADY model to attempt to reflect conditions assumed on the ground. However, there are a number of issues with this approach, including the following:

- Deliberate input of inaccurate geometry to constrain capacity assumes that the ARCADY tool and TRL research is flawed;

- Deliberate input of inaccurate geometry to reflect other constraints cannot be validated;

- The further repercussions of inputting incorrect geometry for modelling forecast demand data would be unknown; and

- Significant queuing and delay surveys would be required to determine data that corresponds to the output data from ARCADY (Max Mean Queuing for a time period/ Average Delay per vehicle for a time period).

TRL Article 13, from their Knowledge Base, includes the following advice:

“Measuring queues seems to be the obvious way of checking a model, because queue lengths are one of the main outputs from the programs. In fact some traffic engineers, and their customers, insist on such checks being carried out. If so, they should understand the implications of what they are doing. Apart from the practical difficulties of measuring mean queues over successive time intervals there are also mathematical problems to consider. During peak periods (when the flow/capacity ratios are high) there is a large daily variation in queue lengths even if the average flow for each time segment does not vary from day to day. To take a typical example, a mean queue of 26 pcu would be derived from queues which varied between 5 pcu and 50 pcu from day to day. In fact, on 1 day in 20 the queue would be outside even this large envelope of possible values. So you can see that many days of queue measurements would have to be taken to obtain a reliable estimate of mean queues. The junction model predictions are based on an infinite number of days! It is surprising how many

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-23

people think that one day is enough - yet they wouldn’t dream of predicting the result of the next General Election after canvassing one person chosen at random”

Therefore, correlation between ARCADY outputs and observed data is very unlikely. As noted above, TRL issued traffic modelling Software tools ARCADY, OSCADY and PICADY are identified by TII in their Project Appraisal Guidelines. ARCADY and PICADY are identified by TII as key traffic modelling software in TII’s Traffic and Transport Assessment Guidelines.

The exercise of a check was, however, carried out for the AM peak for Shanbally Roundabout using observed data. This is detailed hereunder.

Shanbally Roundabout 2016

Full details of the ARCADY junction capacity analysis are provided in Appendix B.3. A comparison of the results of the Shanbally roundabout 2016 analysis are summarised in Table 6.21. The outputs provided are within the highest 15 minute periods of the modelled time period. As outlined above, not all correlating data can be presented for both observed and ARCADY models.

Table 6.21: Summary of 2016 N28/L2492 Shanbally Roundabout Junction Capacity Analysis (Recorded Observed Base Year Model and Arcady Base Year Model)

Junction Peak Hour

Highest

Ratio of

Flow to

Capacity

(RFC)

Mean

Maximum

Queue

Length

Maximum

Observed

(Highest 15

minute

period)

(vehicles)

Highest Approach

Delay per Vehicle

(minutes)

Arcady Model 06:30 to 07:30 0.99 20.5 N/A 0.39

Observed 06:30 to 07:30 N/A N/A 3 N/A

Observed 08:00 to 09:00 N/A N/A 20+ N/A

The predicted delays in the 2016 year model of Shanbally Roundabout exceed those in the predicted Port of Cork 2023 Model, without or with the proposed expansion. This variation indicates the greater importance of the demand data compared with producing or ‘tweaking’ a current year ARCADY model.

This identifies the value of modelling for defining the relative impact of a proposal using the mean maximum values and delays over a given time period. The modelled 15 minutes highest mean maximum queue length is not the same parameter as the observed maximum queue length during the 15 minutes.

6.4.4 Road Safety Assessment

Existing Road Safety Record

Collisions data for the existing local road network, including the R613, N28 and R611 has been attained from the Road Safety Authority (RSA) website and Data.Gov.ie. The available data is for 2005 to 2013. Details of the RSA collisions database outputs are provided in Appendix B.4, together with an outputs summary table.

The extent of the existing local road network, for the collisions data, includes:

- The R613 Regional Road from the N28 at Ringaskiddy to the R611 Regional Road, Carrigaline. An 80 kph speed limit applies from north of the L6518 to Carrigaline. A 60 kph speed limit applies from the N28 to north of the L6518;

- The N28 from the R613 at Ringaskiddy to Hilltown/Moneygurney, north of Shannonpark Roundabout, via Shanbally Roundabout and Shannonpark Roundabout. 60 kph and 100 kph speed limits apply along the route; and

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-24

- The R611 from Shannonpark Roundabout to Carrig Na Curra, Carrigaline. A 50 kph speed limit applies at Carrig Na Curra, with a 60 kph speed limit between the 50 kph zone and Shannonpark Roundabout.

R613 Collisions Data

The R613 collisions data is summarised in Table 6.22. The R613 data indicates a collision rate of 15.4 collisions per 100,000,000 vkms (vehicle kilometres).

The collision rate = (Number of Collisions*100,000,000)/(365.25*Traffic Flow*Road Length).

Table 6.22: Summary of Local R613 Collisions Data

Number of Collisions 12

Number of Years 9

Traffic Flow Estimated AADT 2005-2013 3,300

Road Length (kms) 7.2

Collision Rate/100,000,000 vkms 15.4

No fatal or serious injuries were determined from the data, during the period 2005 to 2013 (nine years). The following is a breakdown of these injury collisions:

- One rear end, straight;

- Four single vehicle collisions

- Three head-on; and

- Two pedestrian.

- Two collisions had undefined circumstances.

TII data indicates that, between 2008 and 2010, Rural 2 Lane Roads throughout Ireland had a collision rate of 11.418 collisions per 100 million vehicle kilometres. In this context, the rate on the R613 in the study area is ‘Above’ average (35%), but below ‘Twice Above’ average collision rate. The AADT on this route is, however, low and the majority of the collisions occurred within the urban area.

N28 Collisions Data

The N28 collisions data is summarised in Table 6.23. The N28 data indicates a collision rate of 5.5 collisions per 100,000,000 vkms (vehicle kilometres).

Table 6.23: Summary of Local N28 Collisions Data


Number of Years 9

Traffic flow Estimated AADT 2005-2013 21,000



Two fatal and three serious injuries were determined from data, during the period 2005 to 2013 (nine years). The following is a breakdown of the injury collisions:

- Six rear end, straight;

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-25

- Four single vehicle collisions

- Three head-on;

- Two angle right turn;

- Two pedestrian;

- One rear-end, right turn; and

- One angle, both straight.

- Six collisions had undefined circumstances.

The TII 2012-2014 Network Ranking Collision Rate Analysis indicates that the Collision Rate on the N28, East of the R610 at Rafeen is ‘Twice Below Expected Rate’. The collision rate at the N28/ R610 Rafeen junction is ‘Twice Above Expected Rate’.

The collision rate on the N28 immediately east of Shannonpark Roundabout is ‘Above Expected Rate’. The N28 north of Shannonpark Roundabout is ‘Twice Below Expected Rate’. North of the defined Study area, on the N28, adjacent to the ‘Board of Works’ Road, the N28 is ‘Below Expected Rate’. This is represented graphically in Figure 6.9, below, for convenience, in TII’s collision rate analysis network ranking.

Accordingly, the calculated collision rate for the N28 single two lane road in the Study area, of 5.5 collisions per 100,000,000 vkms, is considered to be low.

Figure 6.9: Journey Times Route Locations Map (Reference: TII Collision Rate Analysis Network Ranking)

R611 Collisions Data

The R611 collisions data is summarised in Table 6.24. The R611 data indicates a collision rate of 5.6 collisions per 100,000,000 vkms (vehicle kilometres).

Table 6.24: Summary of Local R611 Collisions Data


Number of Years 9

Traffic Flow Estimated AADT 2005-2013 15,500



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-26

No fatal or serious injuries were determined from data, during the period 2005 to 2013 (nine years). The following is a breakdown of these injury collisions:

- One rear end, straight;

- One single vehicle collision; and

- One pedestrian.

Road Safety Inspection

In response to Cork County Council’s scoping during pre-planning submission discussions, a Road Safety Inspection of the R613, N28 and R611 routes, locally within the Ringaskiddy area, was carried out by Malachy Walsh and Partners. The Road Safety Inspection was carried out in the context of TII’s Road Safety Inspection Guidelines AM-STY-06043 December 2014, by Malachy Walsh and Partners’ road safety inspection team. Malachy Walsh and Partners’ road safety inspection team has previously carried out numerous Road Safety Inspections for TII and numerous Road Safety Audits, as a TII approved team.

The Road Safety Inspection was carried out on the 31st May 2017. The weather was dry during the Road Safety Inspection, and there was no rain to record instances of ponding and deficient drainage.

Record video was taken during the site inspection. A desktop review of Collision Data was assessed in advance of the site inspection.

A description on the existing R613, N28 and R611 local road network, in the Ringakiddy area, is provided in Section 6.4.1.

R613

A schedule of the main and reoccurring road safety problems and observations on the R613, from its N28 junction in the east, to its R611 junction in Carrigaline in the west, is provided in Table 6.25.

Table 6.25: R613 Road Safety Problems/Observations

Problem Description/Risk Note/

Recommendation

Narrow restricted road carriageway

width, from immediately east of the

L2492 to Carrigaline, with local further

restrictions, including on horizontal

bends.

Passing close to oncoming vehicles.

Risk of vehicles crossing centreline.

Possible head-on collisions. No refuge

for vulnerable users. Risk of impact with

motorised vehicles for pedestrians and

cyclists.

This is a historical route

with limited roadway

space, or space for

recommended

desirable/minimum

clear zones. Widening

the road reservation

would require third

party lands. No hard shoulder widths.

No area for regaining control of vehicle

having left the carriageway, risk of

complete loss of control or overcorrection

and crossing the centreline. Possible

head-on collisions. Also no refuge for

vulnerable users. Risk of impact with

motorised vehicles for pedestrians and

cyclists.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-27


Recommendation

No refuge for vulnerable users from

immediately east of the L2492 to

Carrigaline.

Risk of impact with motorised vehicles for

pedestrians and cyclists.

Series of multiple horizontal bends,

from immediately east of the L2492 to

Carrigaline.

Risk of vehicles crossing centerline,

head-on type collisions and collisions

with vulnerable users. Bends restrict

visibility to and from accesses and

junctions, and forward visibility along

R613. Risk of rear-end type and side-on

collisions.

Restricted visibilities at multiple

residential accesses, including a

number with mirrors and concealed

accesses, between L2492 and

Carrigaline.

Risk of side-on impact accessing the

R613 with approaching vehicles on R613.

Multiple property boundary walls and

pillars are located adjacent to the

road carriageway, between L2492

and Carrigaline.

Unforgiving roadside features. Risk of

increased injuries for occupants of errant

vehicles.

Poor uneven surface between L2492

and Carrigaline.

Risk of swerving, sudden braking, loss of

control and potential head-on collisions

and collisions with vulnerable users.

Upgrade the road

pavement.

No/lack of relective road studs. This

may be due to lack of carriageway

width.

Increased risk of run-off-road type

incidents due to lack of guidance at night.

Poor surface locally at Janssen

Sciences Access Road junction.

Risk of swerving, sudden braking, loss of

control and potential head-on collisions

and collisions with vulnerable users.

Lack of containment along south side

at Estuary.

Risk of increased injuries for occupants

of errant vehicles.

Provide appropriate

containment.

Associated road

widening and

realignment would

require third party

lands.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-28


Recommendation

Faded road centreline and warning

road markings between L2492 and

Carrigaline.

Risk of late braking, loss of control,

crossing centreline and head-on

collisions.

Renew markings.

Edge of road carriageway hard

shoulder markings within Carrigaline

urban area.

Risk of increased vehicle speeds and

increased injuries, in 50 kph urban area,

due to rural road markings.

Provide an urban road

layout.

Vehicles parked in defined parking on

south side of carriageway at the

Janssen Sciences Access junction.

Parked vehicles require westbound

cyclists to use narrow junction through

lane, adjacent to right-turn lane, putting

them at increased risk being struck by

westbound vehicles.

Provide appropriate junction lane widths.

Note: There is an

adjacent existing high

capacity off-road car

park provided.

Light standard poles adjacent to

carriageway, within grass verge

located between carriageway and

footway on south side and grass

verge on north side, west and east of

L6518 junction, within 80 khp zone.

Unforgiving roadside features. Risk of

increased injuries for occupants of errant

vehicles.

Relocate poles.

Footway locally along north side ends

immediately east of L2492 junction,

with restricted visibility to nearside

eastbound traffic. Pedestrains using the carriageway are at

risk of vehicle impact.

Widening the road

reservation to provide

footways would require

third party lands. No / lack of footways within 50 kph

zone in vicinity of residential

developments.

N28

A schedule of the main and reoccurring road safety problems and observations on the N28, from Carr’s Hill in the north west, to its R613 junction at Ringaskiddy in the south east, is provided in Table 6.26.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-29

Table 6.26: N28 Road Safety Problems/Observations

Problem Description/Risk Note/Recommendation

No hard shoulder widths and no refuge for

vulnerable users at Carr’s Hill.

No area for regaining control

of vehicle having left the

carriageway, risk of complete

loss of control or

overcorrection and crossing

the centreline. Possible head-

on collisions. Also no refuge

for vulnerable users. Risk of

impact with motorised vehicles

for pedestrians and cyclists.

This is a historical route with

limited roadway space, or

space for desirable clear

zones. Widening the road

reservation would require third

party lands.

No refuge for vulnerable users, including

cyclists, at dedicated right-turn lane at

L6477 Hilltown junction.

Increased risk for cyclists of

impact with motorised

vehicles.

Provide appropriate refuge for

cyclists, via a minimal width

hard shoulder through the

junction.

Traffic queues and platoons on approaches

to Shannonpark Roundabout within 100

kph posted speed limit.

Increased risk of rear-end

shunt type collisions and

injuries for vehicle occupants.

Proposed M28 Cork to

Ringaskiddy Project. Upgrade

Shannonpark Roundabout.

Poor uneven surface between Carr’s Hill

and Shannonpark Roundabout.

Risk of swerving, sudden

braking, loss of control and

potential collisions.

Upgrade the road pavement.

Traffic slowing, platooning and queuing at

northbound merge at end of climbing lane

at Carr’s Hill.

Increased risk of rear-end

shunt and side-swipe type

collisions and injuries for

vehicle occupants.

Provide improved/increased warning signage.

(Proposed M28 Cork to

Ringaskiddy Project would

reduce traffic volumes).

Vehicles access hard shoulder for near

side left approach lane westbound to


Risk of conflict with westbound

vehicles, cyclists at L2490

junction.

Extend the defined near side

(left) westbound approach.

Restricted visibility to right on westbound

approach to Shannonpark Roundabout due

to vegetation within eastern splitter island.

Increased risk of rear-end type

collisions on approach and

side-on impacts on entry to

circulatory carriageway.

Remove or reduce and

maintain the vegetation to

provide appropriate visibility.

Wide central median and dedicated

junction turning lanes eliminate hard

shoulder widths and refuge for cyclists,

between R610 and Shanbally.

Increased risk for cyclists of

impact with motorised

vehicles.

Provide appropriate refuge for

cyclists.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-30


Isolated unmaintained overgrown shared

cyclist/pedestrian off-carriageway facility at

Shannonpark Roundabout and Pfizer

Roundabout.

Risk of collisions for vulnerable

users at entry/exit locations.

Also risk of reduced status for

vulnerable users

Provide appropriate facilities

for vulnerable users.

Footway along north side ends west of

Shanbally at 50 kph gateway, where

eastbound cyclists are diverted onto

footway.

No continuity for pedestrians

and cyclists.



Debris in junction area at Shanbally

Roundabout.

Potential skidding area,

particularly for cyclists and

motorcyclists.

Remove debris and maintain.

Protruding uneven surface along reinstated

eastbound traffic lane, west and east of

Pfizer Roundabout.

Risk of swerving, sudden


potential collisions.

Reinstate surface to

appropriate standard.

60 kph markings covered by reinstatement

surfacing, west and east of Pfizer

Roundabout. Lack of guidance. Risk of late


rear-end type collisions.

Renew markings.

Arrow markings covered by reinstatement

surfacing at R613 junction.

R611

A schedule of the main and reoccurring road safety problems and observations on the R611, from Shannonpark Roundabout in the north, to its L2464 roundabout junction in Carrigaline in the south, is provided in Table 6.27.

Table 6.27: R611 Road Safety Problems/Observations


Restricted visibility to right on approach to

Shannonpark Roundabout due to signage

and vegetation within southern splitter

island.

Increased risk of rear-end type

collisions on approach and

side-on impacts on entry to

circulatory carriageway.

Remove or relocate signage,

and remove or reduce and

maintain vegetation, to provide

appropriate visibility.

Isolated unmaintained overgrown shared

cyclist/pedestrian off-carriageway facility at

Shannonpark Roundabout and Pfizer

Roundabout.

Risk of collisions for vulnerable

users at entry/exit locations.

Also risk of reduced status for

vulnerable users



For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-31


Edge of road carriageway hard shoulder

markings within Carrigaline urban area.

Risk of increased vehicle

speeds and increased injuries,

in urban area, due to rural

road markings.

Provide an urban road layout.

6.4.5 Existing Janssen Sciences Operational Mobility Management Plan

Janssen Sciences operates the following existing operational mobility management measures:

- Flexitime working for the majority of day personnel to facilitate staff travel outside the morning and evening peak commuter traffic peaks;

- All shift start times and finish times outside the overall Cork morning and evening peak commuter traffic peaks;

- The availability to all employees of Revenue’s approved bike to work scheme;

- The provision of staff changing facilities, lockers and shower facilities;

- The provision of designated, convenient, car parking for staff car pooling;

- The provision of sheltered cycle parking;

- The support of the Janssen Sciences Cycling Club, which is affiliated with Cycling Ireland;

- A staff car pooling website and direct staff communications, to encourage increased staff car pooling and lift sharing;

- Regular information to all staff regarding mobility management, including existing facilities, measures and incentives;

- A dedicated Mobility Manager;

- Liaison with Cork County Council to encourage the provision of improved facilities for cyclists along the existing N28 route, particularly with the proposed new M28 route in place;

- Liaison with Cork County Council and Bus Éireann to encourage the provision of the proposed Green Route to Ringaskiddy and increased public transport services;

- Shift swaps for staff, to facilitate car pooling/lift shares; and

- Free electric charging point for electric/hybrid cars.


6.5.1 ‘Do Nothing’ Impacts

Subject to planning permission, the BioCork2 on-site construction is scheduled for 24 months, from November 2017 to October 2019. The peak construction month is September 2018.

Proposed Road Network

Cork County Council, in association with TII, propose to provide a new and upgraded N28 route, from the N40 Cork Southern Ring Road at Bloomfield Interchange, to Ringaskiddy.

The alignment of the proposed M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Motorway Scheme extends immediately south of Shanbally village and the existing Janssen Sciences site. The proposed M28 includes a proposed Barnahely Interchange with the R613 and a proposed Shanbally Interchange. The proposed M28 is a 2+2 lanes high capacity route.

Cork County Council currently envisage that the proposed M28 Scheme will be in place in 2023. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the scheme has been submitted by Cork County

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-32

Council to An Bord Pleanála, for the Motorway Order. Cork County Council estimate that construction of the scheme will take at least two years.

The Cork City and County Councils’ strategic road infrastructure objectives also include the upgrading of Dunkettle Interchange, in association with TII, at the intersection of the N40/M8/N8/N25 National Roads. Planning permission for the Dunkettle Interchange Upgrade has been granted by An Bord Pleanála, and Cork County Council envisage that it will be in place in 2023.

Cork County Council propose to provide an upgraded traffic signals junction at the existing N28/R613 junction, prior to the provision of the proposed M28 Scheme.

Future Sustainable Transport

Cork County Council’s Cork County Development Plan 2014 and Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Area Plan 2015 Edition identify the possible future extension, to Ringaskiddy, of the Green Route to Carrigaline.

The DoT National Cycle Policy targets 10% of all trips to work by bicycle, by 2020. The DoT Smarter Travel policies identify sustainable travel and transport goals for 2020. These include a reduction in the total share of car based work trips, from 65% to 45% nationally, and an increase of 55% nationally in the proportion of walking, cycling and public transport work trips.

Future Traffic Volumes

TII’s National Traffic Growth Forecasts, in their Project Appraisal Guidelines Unit 5.5 2011, envisage annual growth factors for light vehicle traffic of 1.022, during the period to 2025, for Cork City/County (County Cork), based on their high growth scenario. The equivalent high growth factor for heavy vehicle traffic is 1.019.

The Port of Cork Company proposed Ringaskiddy Port Redevelopment includes the provision of a new container terminal, the extension of the deepwater berth and the expansion and upgrading of Port facilities, which would also accommodate the relocation of existing Port facilities from Tivoli and Cork City Quays, to Ringaskiddy.

The proposed Ringaskiddy Port Redevelopment EIS indicates that the Port of Cork would reduce freight movements generated by the Port at Ringaskiddy to Do Minimum levels during the morning and evening peak periods, and would not proceed with additional roll-on/roll-off operations until the N28 Upgrade is in place. The EIS indicates that the residual traffic impact would be insignificant.

Other proposed developments include Indaver and GE Healthcare.

TII predicted high growth, to 2023, equates to an increase in traffic volumes of 16.5%. The TII high growth exceeds the aggregated total other expected permitted developments, in the Ringaskiddy area, to 2023. Accordingly, the TII high growth to 2023 includes other expected permitted developments.

The Systra Port of Cork Strategic Traffic Model envisages that overall 2023 peak hour traffic levels would be 17.2% higher than November 2016, in the Ringaskiddy area. This is of the order of the TII high growth scenario increase of 16.5% by 2023.

The proposed GE BioPark operational development is expected to increase morning (daily) peak hour traffic by 2.8% at Shannonpark Roundabout, and by 5.7% at Shanbally Roundabout.

The foregoing predicted November 2016 to 2023 traffic growth increases, for the Ringaskiddy area, are summarised in Table 6.28.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-33

Table 6.28: Predicted 2016 to 2023 Ringaskiddy Area Traffic Growth

Scenario Systra Port Model TII High Growth TII High Growth +

Highest GE

November 2016 to 2023

Without M28 Scheme 17.2% 16.5% 22.2%

2023 without the proposed M28 Scheme is the highest future baseline traffic scenario, for the existing road network. In order to consider robust future baseline, it is envisaged that the 2023 baseline, without the M28, would be on the basis of the TII high growth scenario plus the GE highest predicted peak hour increase. It is envisaged that the 2018 baseline would be on the basis of the TII high growth scenario.

The predicted 2018 and 2023 baseline (without BioCork2) N28 two-way link traffic volumes, at half-hourly intervals, are provided in Table 6.29.

Table 6.29: Predicted N28 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Time Period N28 Location 2018 Baseline (2016+TII

High Growth)

2023 Baseline (2016+TII High

Growth+GE)

06:30 - 07.00 Shanbally 436 510

North of Shannonpark 870 1,018

07:00 - 08:00 Shanbally 1,444 1,690

North of Shannonpark 2,507 2,933

08:00 - 09:00 Shanbally 1,393 1,630


09:00 - 09:30 Shanbally 359 420


09.30 - 10.00 Shanbally 335 392

North of Shannonpark 799 935

14:00 - 15:00 Shanbally 468 548


15:00 - 16:00 Shanbally 635 743


16:00 - 16:30 Shanbally 741 867


16:30 - 17:00 Shanbally 561 656


17:00 - 18:00 Shanbally 1,038 1,215


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-34

Time Period N28 Location 2018 Baseline (2016+TII

High Growth)

2023 Baseline (2016+TII High

Growth+GE)

18:00 - 19:00 Shanbally 911 1,066


19:00 - 19:30 Shanbally 328 384

North of Shannonpark 978 1,144

The predicted 2018 and 2023 baseline (without BioCork2) morning traffic volumes on the N28 to the Ringaskiddy area, at Shanbally and north of Shannonpark, at half-hourly intervals, are provided in Table 6.30.

Table 6.30: Predicted N28 Link Traffic Volumes to Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Morning Time

Period

N28 Location

Direction

2018 Baseline (2016+TII

High Growth)

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)

06:30 - 07.00 Shanbally Eastbound 379 443

North of Shannonpark Southbound 479 560

07:00 - 08:00 Shanbally Eastbound 1,215 1,422

North of Shannonpark Southbound 1,449 1,695



09:00 - 09:30 Shanbally Eastbound 269 315


09.30 - 10.00 Shanbally Eastbound 335 392


The predicted 2018 and 2023 baseline (without BioCork2) afternoon and evening traffic volumes on the N28 from the Ringaskiddy area, at Shanbally and north of Shannonpark, at half-hourly intervals, are provided in Table 6.31.

Table 6.31: Predicted N28 Link Traffic Volumes from Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Afternoon/

Evening Time

Period

N28 Location 2018 Baseline (2016+TII

High Growth)

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)

14:00 - 15:00 Shanbally Westbound 278 325

North of Shannonpark Northbound 820 961


North of Shannonpark Northbound 1,006 1,177

16:00 - 16:30 Shanbally Westbound 686 1,154


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-35

Afternoon/

Evening Time

Period

N28 Location 2018 Baseline (2016+TII

High Growth)

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)



17:00 - 18:00 Shanbally Westbound 937 1,096






The predicted 2018 and 2023 baseline (without BioCork2) total junction traffic volumes on the N28, at Shannonpark Roundabout and Shanbally Roundabout, at half-hourly intervals, are provided in Table 6.32.

Table 6.32: Predicted N28 Total Junction Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Time Period N28 Roundabout

Junction


High Growth)


High Growth+GE)

06:30 - 07.00 Shannonpark 970 1,135

Shanbally 532 622

07:00 - 08:00 Shannonpark 3,140 3,674

Shanbally 1,814 2,122

08:00 - 09:00 Shannonpark 2,859 3,345


09:00 - 09:30 Shannonpark 1,336 1,563

Shanbally 451 528

09.30 - 10.00 Shannonpark 992 1,161

Shanbally 421 493

14:00 - 15:00 Shannonpark 2,065 2,416

Shanbally 628 735

15:00 - 16:00 Shannonpark 2,488 2,911

Shanbally 852 997

16:00 - 16:30 Shannonpark 1,475 1,726

Shanbally 999 1,169

16:30 - 17:00 Shannonpark 1,456 1,704

Shanbally 757 886

17:00 - 18:00 Shannonpark 2,827 3,308


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-36


Junction


High Growth)


High Growth+GE)

18:00 - 19:00 Shannonpark 2,729 3,193


19:00 - 19:30 Shannonpark 1,128 1,320

Shanbally 423 495

The predicted 2018 and 2023 baseline (without BioCork2) R613 two-way link traffic volumes, at half-hourly intervals, are provided in Table 6.33.

Table 6.33: R613 Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Time Period Location

2018 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth)

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)

06:30 - 07.00 East of Janssen Sciences Access Road 219 256

West of Janssen Sciences Access Road 77 90

07:00 - 08:00 East of Janssen Sciences Access Road 411 481






09.30 - 10.00 East of Janssen Sciences Access Road 125 146
















For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-37


The predicted traffic data for the N28 Carr’s Hill and N40 Cork Southern Ring Road, including either side of the N40/N28 Bloomfield Interchange, are provided in Tables 6.34, 6.35. 6.36 and 6.37 for 2018 and 2023, respectively, on the basis on the Base Year TII data plus TII high growth. The TII data includes AADT volumes and morning and afternoon/evening hourly volumes for the periods 5.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.

Table 6.34: Predicted N28 2018 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes With TII High Growth

N28 Location

(TII counter)


AADT

(% HGV) Time

Total

Vehicles Time

Total

Vehicles


5.00 a.m. to 6.00 a.m.

228 3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.

1,954

25,709 (2.9%)

6.00 a.m. to 7.00 a.m.

1232 4.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.

2,301

7.00 a.m. to 8.00 a.m.

2,642 5.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.

2,197

8.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.

1,999 6.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.

2,175

9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.

1,876 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.

1,578


N40 Location

(TII Counter)


AADT

(% HGV) Time

Total

Vehicles Time

Total

Vehicles


5.00 a.m. to 6.00 a.m.

716 3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.

5,467

72,709 (3.9%)

6.00 a.m. to 7.00 a.m.

2,575 4.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.

6,622

7.00 a.m. to 8.00 a.m.

6,554 5.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.

7,019

8.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.

6,207 6.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.

5,831

9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.

5,258 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.

4,176


5.00 a.m. to 6.00 a.m.

770 3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.

6,613

84,724 (2.8%)

6.00 a.m. to 7.00 a.m.

2,712 4.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.

7,858

7.00 a.m. to 8.00 a.m.

7,133 5.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.

7,738

8.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.

7,797 6.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.

6,810

9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.

6,248 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.

5,393

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-38


N28 Location

(TII counter)


AADT

(% HGV) Time

Total

Vehicles Time

Total

Vehicles


5.00 a.m. to 6.00 a.m.

254 3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.

2,179

28,650 (2.8%)

6.00 a.m. to 7.00 a.m.

1,374 4.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.

2,565

7.00 a.m. to 8.00 a.m.

2,945 5.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.

2,449

8.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.

2,229 6.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.

2,424

9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.

2,091 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.

1,759

Table 6.37: Predicted N40 2023 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes with TII High Growth

N40 Location

(TII Counter)


AADT

(% HGV) Time

Total

Vehicles Time

Total

Vehicles


5.00 a.m. to 6.00 a.m.

798 3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.

6,095

81,013 (3.8%)

6.00 a.m. to 7.00 a.m.

2,871 4.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.

7,383

7.00 a.m. to 8.00 a.m.

7,307 5.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.

7,825

8.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.

6,920 6.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.

6,501

9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.

5,862 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.

4,655


5.00 a.m. to 6.00 a.m.

859 3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.

7,372

94,415 (2.7%)

6.00 a.m. to 7.00 a.m.

3,024 4.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.

8,761

7.00 a.m. to 8.00 a.m.

7,952 5.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.

8,627

8.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.

8,692 6.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.

7,592

9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.

6,966 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.

6,013

The predicted 2018 and 2023 baseline (without BioCork2) Annual Average Daily Traffic Volumes (AADT), estimated on the basis of the 48-hours continuous count on the N28 east of Shanbally and the TII automatic counter, are provided in Table 6.38. The predicted Janssen Access Road AADT’s have been estimated on the basis of existing staff and visitor numbers and the existing (November 2016) staff travel mode shares for the Janssen Sciences Mobility Management Plan (Updated), without the subject proposed BioCork2 development.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-39

Table 6.38: Estimated AADT Volumes without BioCork2

Location Road Link

AADT Vehicles


High Growth)


High Growth+GE)


N28 North 25,862 30,259

R611 11,923 13,950

N28 East 13,340 15,608


N28 West 12,940 15,140

L2492 1,914 2,239

N28 East 10,245 11,987

N28/R613

N28 West 6,886 8,057

R613 2,019 2,362

N28 East 6,270 7,336


R613 East 5,454 6,381

Access Road 1,166 1,166

R613 West 3,993 4,672


Inner Relief Road 5,990 7,008

R613 West 3,631 4,248

R612 9,373 10,966

R613 East 4,923 5,760

N28 at Carr’s Hill N28 North 25,862 30,259

The Janssen Sciences peak operational traffic generation hours are 06:30 to 07:30 a.m. and 18:30 to 19:30 p.m. The predicted 2023 junction traffic volumes for the periods 06:30 to 07:30 a.m. and 18:30 to 19:30 p.m., without BioCork2, are provided in Figures 6.10 and 6.11, respectively.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-40

Figure 6.10: Predicted 2023 06:30 to 07:30 AM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

Figure 6.11: Predicted 2023 18:30 to 19:30 PM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) Without BioCork2

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-41

Junction Capacity Analysis

The existing N28 Shannonpark Roundabout and N28 Shanbally Roundabout junctions have been analysed using the computer software programme ARCADY, and the existing R613/N28, R613/Janssen Access Road and N28/Janssen Sciences Access junctions have been analysed using the computer software programme PICADY, for the predicted 2018 and 2023 morning and evening peak period traffic volumes, without BioCork2. The existing N28/Janssen Sciences Access junction is currently an emergency access only.

The ARCADY and PICADY analysis has been carried out at 15 minutes intervals, for three hours during the morning peak period (06:30 to 09:30 a.m.) and three hours during the evening peak period (16:30 to 19:30 p.m.).

Full details of the ARCADY and PICADY junction capacity analysis are provided in Appendix B.3. The input details include junction geometry, junction entry/approach volumes, turning proportions and vehicle type proportions, including heavy vehicles. The predicted 2018 and 2023 results are summarised in Tables 6.39 and Table 6.40, respectively.

Table 6.39: Summary of 2018 (November 2016+TII High Growth) Junction Capacity Analysis Without BioCork2

Junction

Time Period @

15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Ratio

of Flow to

Capacity (RFC)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Mean

Maximum

Queue Length

(vehicles) @ 15

Minutes

Intervals

15 Minutes

Interval Highest

RFC Approach

Delay per

Vehicle

(minutes)

Junction

Delay per

Vehicle

(minutes)

for Total

Time Period

N28/R611 Shannonpark Roundabout

06:30-07:30 0.829 4.6 0.18 0.11

07:30-08:30 0.797 3.8 0.16

08:30-09:30 0.763 3.1 0.15

16:30-17:30 0.635 1.7 0.10

0.08 17:30-18:30 0.663 1.9 0.09

18:30-19:30 0.634 1.7 0.08

N28/L2492 Shanbally Roundabout

06:30-07:30 1.045 (1) 36.6 (1) 1.13 (1) 1.20

07:30-08:30 1.097 63.7 0.93

08:30-09:30 1.058 (2) 83.9 (2) 3.10 (2)

16:30-17:30 0.990 20.1 0.98 0.30

17:30-18:30 0.890 6.5 0.34

18:30-19:30 0.568 1.3 0.12

Note (1): 07:15 to 07:30.

Note (2): 08:30 to 08:45.

ARCADY identifies a Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC) of 0.900 as the practical capacity of a roundabout junction. The highest approach delay per vehicle (minutes) is the total delay in vehicle minutes per 15 minutes interval divided by 15 minutes divided by the vehicle demand per minute.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-42

The analysis indicates that the N28/R611 Shannonpark roundabout would operate within its practical capacity during the 2018 morning and evening peak periods, without the proposed BioCork2 expansion in place.

An on-site inspection of Shannonpark Roundabout, by Malachy Walsh and Partners, during the 2016 on-site traffic surveys, confirms that sight visibility was restricted by vegetation. This resulted in restricted sight visibilities for users, not in accordance with TII’s DMRB, for a national road junction. Restricted sight visibilities at roundabout junctions result in reduced operational capacity and increased queuing. It is noted that multiple staff responses to Janssen Sciences’ November 2016 staff travel survey, for their Mobility Management Plan (Updated) identified this issue (Section 6.7 refers).

The analysis indicates that the N28/L2492 Shanbally Roundabout would operate above practical capacity during the 2018 morning peak periods with highest RFC’s of up to 1.097. Highest delays per vehicle would be up to 3.10 minutes, and would occur during the 08:30 to 08:45 15 minutes interval. Delays per vehicle would be significantly lower during other intervals.

The analysis indicates that Shanbally Roundabout would operate within practical capacity during the 2018 06:30 to 06:45 and 06:45 to 07:00 morning periods.

The N28/L2492 Shanbally Roundabout would operate in excess of practical capacity during the 2018 evening period prior to 17:30 with a highest RFC of 0.990, and delays per vehicle up to 0.98 minutes. The Shanbally Roundabout would operate within practical capacity during the 2018 evening period after 17:30.

Table 6.40: Summary of 2023 (November 2016+TII High Growth+GE) Junction Capacity Analysis Without BioCork2

Junction

Time Period

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Ratio

of Flow to

Capacity

(RFC)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Mean

Maximum Queue

Length (vehicles)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

15 Minutes

Interval

Highest RFC

Approach

Delay per

Vehicle

(minutes)

Junction

Delay per

Vehicle

(minutes) for

Total Time

Period


06:30-07:30 0.997 23.1 0.63

0.28 07:30-08:30 0.961 `18.9 0.63

08:30-09:30 0.918 8.1 0.32

16:30-17:30 0.767 3.1 0.15

0.11 17:30-18:30 0.735 2.7 0.13

18:30-19:30 0.751 2.9 0.12


06:30-07:30 1.227 142.7 3.69

4.35 07:30-08:30 1.291 184.7 1.80

08:30-09:30 1.241 302.9 8.09

16:30-17:30 1.161 108.1 4.09

1.91 17:30-18:30 1.051 88.5 4.27

18:30-19:30 0.670 2.0 0.15

N28/R613 06:30-07:30 0.377 0.6 0.16 0.07

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-43

Junction

Time Period

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Ratio

of Flow to

Capacity

(RFC)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Mean

Maximum Queue

Length (vehicles)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

15 Minutes

Interval

Highest RFC

Approach

Delay per

Vehicle

(minutes)

Junction

Delay per

Vehicle

(minutes) for

Total Time

Period

07:30-08:30 0.694 2.1 0.34

08:30-09:30 0.409 0.7 0.24

16:30-17:30 0.521 1.1 0.20

0.05 17:30-18:30 0.397 0.6 0.16

18:30-19:30 0.284 0.4 0.15


06:30-07:30 0.269 0.4 0.12

0.04 07:30-08:30 0.341 0.5 0.15

08:30-09:30 0.180 0.2 0.12

16:30-17:30 0.315 0.5 0.12

0.04

17:30-18:30 0.193 0.2 0.10

18:30-19:30 0.180 0.2 0.10

Note (1): 07:15 to 07:30. Note (2): 08:30 to 08:45.

ARCADY and PICADY identify a Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC) of 0.900 as the practical capacity of junction. The highest approach delay per vehicle (minutes) is the total delay in vehicle minutes per 15 minutes interval divided by 15 minutes divided by the vehicle demand per minute.

The analysis indicates that the N28/R611 Shannonpark roundabout would operate in excess of its practical capacity during the 2023 morning peak periods, with a highest RFC of 0.997 and delays per vehicle of up to 0.63 minutes. The Shannonpark roundabout would operate within its practical capacity during the 2023 evening peak periods.

An on-site inspection of Shannonpark Roundabout, by Malachy Walsh and Partners, during the 2016 on-site traffic surveys, confirms that sight visibility was restricted by vegetation. This resulted in restricted sight visibilities for users, not in accordance with TII’s DMRB, for a national road junction. Restricted sight visibilities at roundabout junctions result in reduced operational capacity and increased queuing. It is noted that multiple staff responses to Janssen Sciences’ November 2016 staff travel survey, for their Mobility Management Plan (Updated) identified this issue (Section 6.7 refers).

The analysis indicates that the N28/L2492 Shanbally Roundabout would operate above practical capacity during the 2023 morning peak periods with highest RFC’s of up to 1.291. Highest delays per vehicle would be up to 8.09 minutes, and would occur during the 08:30 to 08:45 15 minutes interval. Delays per vehicle would be significantly lower during other intervals.

The analysis indicates that Shanbally Roundabout would operate within practical capacity during the 2023 06:30 to 06:45 and 06:45 to 07:00 morning periods.

The N28/L2492 Shanbally Roundabout would operate in excess of practical capacity during the 2023 evening period prior to 18:15 with a highest RFC of 1.161, and delays per vehicle up to 4.27

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-44

minutes. The Shanbally Roundabout would operate within practical capacity during the 2023 evening period after 18:15.

The PICADY analysis indicates that the N28/R613 and R613/Janssen Sciences Access Road junctions would operate within practical capacity during the 2023 morning and evening periods.

N28 Journey Times

The predicted 2018 and 2023 N28 peak hour journey times, between Carr’s Hill and the Janssen Sciences Access Road on the R613, without BioCork2, are provided in Table 6.41 on the basis of the foregoing ARCADY and PICADY junction analysis and the TII DMRB Speeds On Links speed/flow relationships for road links.

Table 6.41: Predicted N28 Peak Journey Times Without BioCork2

Year Peak Direction From To Total Time

Seconds

Delays

Seconds

2018

AM

Eastbound Carr’s Hill Janssen Sciences Access 645 232

Westbound Janssen Sciences

Access Carr’s Hill 614 204

PM

Eastbound Carr’s Hill Janssen Sciences

Access 502 78



2023

AM

Eastbound Carr’s Hill Janssen Sciences Access 1,053 639



PM

Eastbound Carr’s Hill Janssen Sciences

Access 592 95


Access Carr’s Hill 1,043 619

The predicted 2018 morning peak vehicle journey time eastbound on the N28, from Carr’s Hill to the Janssen Sciences Access Road would be approximately 645 seconds, including a total of 232 seconds of delays at junctions. This compares to a recorded total of 440 seconds in 2016. The predicted 2023 peak journey time is 1,053 seconds, for the 6.5 kms.

The predicted 2018 morning peak traffic hour vehicle journey time westbound on the N28, from the Janssen Sciences Access Road to Carr’s Hill, would be approximately 614 seconds, including 204 seconds of delays at junctions. This compares to a recorded total of 566 seconds in 2016. The predicted 2023 peak journey time is 717 seconds, for the 6.5 kms.

The predicted 2018 evening peak vehicle journey time eastbound on the N28, from Carr’s Hill to the Janssen Sciences Access Road would be approximately 502 seconds, including 78 seconds of delays at junctions. This compares to a recorded total of 465 seconds in 2016. The predicted 2023 peak journey time is 592 seconds, for the 6.5 kms.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-45

The predicted 2018 evening peak vehicle journey time westbound on the N28, from the Janssen Sciences Access Road to Carr’s Hill, would be approximately 796 seconds, including 372 seconds of delays at junctions. This compares to a recorded total of 711 seconds in 2016. The predicted 2023 peak journey time is 1,043 seconds, for the 6.5 kms.

TII Future Year Assessment (Opening Year Plus 15 Years)

The TII Traffic and Transport Assessment Guidelines identify the opening year, opening year plus five years and opening year plus 15 years for the assessment of a proposed development.

The provision of the M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Motorway Scheme (N28 Upgrade) will significantly reduce traffic volumes on the existing N28 route. Cork County Council’s M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project EIS, on behalf of TII, indicates that the provision of the M28 Scheme would reduce 2035 AADT volumes on the existing N28 north of Shannonpark Roundabout by in excess of 80%, and by in excess of 65% at Shanbally (Reference: Cork County Council M28 EIS Table 5.29).

Cork County Council currently envisage that the proposed M28 Scheme will be in place in 2023. Accordingly, 2023 with the proposed Port of Cork Redevelopment at Ringaskiddy and the other permitted and expected developments on the receiving road network, but without the proposed M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Motorway Scheme, represents the expected worst case background traffic scenario for the proposed development.

An opening year plus 15 years future year, with the M28 Scheme, would have lower future background traffic volumes on the existing receiving local road network than the 2023 scenario considered in this assessment, without the M28 Scheme.

In addition, the 2023 background traffic volumes on the existing N28, considered in this assessment, significantly exceed the 2035 future background traffic volumes predicted by Cork County Council, on behalf of TII, as detailed in Table 6.42 hereunder. Accordingly, the 2023 background traffic volumes considered in this assessment represent a robust future assessment year in the context of TII’s Guidelines.

Comparison of BioCork2 Baseline with M28 EIS

A comparison of the predicted BioCork2 2023 operational baseline traffic volumes, without the proposed BioCork2 expansion, with Cork County Council’s predicted M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project 2035 baseline, without the M28, is provided in Table 6.42, for the future predicted N28 traffic volumes.

The comparison confirms that the predicted BioCork2 2023 baseline traffic volumes are significantly higher than those predicted by Cork County Council for their 2035 baseline. The BioCork2 predicted 2023 baseline is the recorded November 2016 traffic volumes plus the TII predicted high growth to 2023 plus the predicted traffic volumes for the proposed GE development.

Table 6.42: Comparison of Predicted BioCork2 2023 Operational Baseline with Cork County Council M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project EIS 2035 Baseline Highest Traffic Volumes (Reference: Cork County Council M28 EIS Table 5.14 and Table 5.15)

Location Future Baseline

Total Vehicles

7.00 to 8.00

AM

8.00 to 9.00

PM

5.00 to 6.00

PM

6.00 to 7.00

PM

N28 North of Shannonpark

BioCork2 2023 2,933 2,489 2,662 2,706

M28 2035 2,243 2,196 2,225 2,375

BioCork2 2023/M28

2035 (%) 131% 113% 120% 114%

N28 East of BioCork2 2023 1,689 1,629 1,161 1,061

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-46

Location Future Baseline

Total Vehicles

7.00 to 8.00

AM

8.00 to 9.00

PM

5.00 to 6.00

PM

6.00 to 7.00

PM

Shanbally M28 2035 1,077 1,142 881 897

BioCork2 2023/M28

2035 (%) 157% 143% 132% 118%

The predicted BioCork2 2023 baseline traffic volumes on the N28, north of Shannonpark, are 113% to 131% higher than those predicted by Cork County Council for their M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project 2035 baseline.

The predicted BioCork2 2023 baseline traffic volumes on the N28, east of Shanbally, are 118% to 157% higher than those predicted by Cork County Council for their M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project 2035 baseline.

Cork County Council’s M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project EIS was published on the 16th May 2017, and has been submitted to An Bord Pleanála.


Subject to planning permission, the BioCork2 on-site construction is scheduled for 24 months, from November 2017 to October 2019. The peak construction month is September 2018.

The proposed BioCork2 construction manpower, site population, parking and vehicle traffic profile projections are provided in Appendix B.2.

Previous Construction Traffic Management Plan

The proposed construction contractor is John Sisk and Son. John Sisk and Son carried out the original construction at the existing Janssen Sciences site and operated a detailed Construction Traffic Management Plan, which was proposed in the original planning application EIS to Cork County Council and conditioned in the planning permission granted by Cork County Council (Cork County Council planning file reference number: 05/2431).

The proposed Construction Traffic Management Plan includes construction delivery vehicle routing, construction site access, construction staff vehicle occupancy incentives, construction staff arrival and departure times, construction delivery vehicle management times and local community liaison that were previously successfully implemented and operated by Janssen Sciences and John Sisk and Son during the original site construction (2005).

There were no complaints to John Sisk and Son, Janssen Sciences or Cork County Council regarding the original site construction. Janssen Sciences and John Sisk and Son have a proven record at the Janssen Sciences site for the implementation of an effective proposed Construction Traffic Management Plan. PM Group was also Project Design Consultants and Construction Managers for the previous original construction.

Proposed Construction Traffic Management Plan

Construction Vehicles Route

All construction delivery vehicles and construction contractor vehicles will travel to and from the site via the N28 only. This will be a condition of the construction contract, all sub-contracts and all suppliers.

Construction Site Access

All construction site access will be via the existing IDA site access on the N28, located immediately east of Shanbally. There will be no construction site access via Janssen’s existing R613 operational access. As currently, there will be no operational site access via the proposed

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-47

construction site access at the existing N28 access. The existing Janssen N28 site access is currently used as an emergency access only. The Janssen Sciences site access is shown in Figure 6.12.

There proposed construction site access via the existing Janssen N28 site access, immediately east of Shanbally, will result in no construction delivery vehicles and heavy vehicles travelling along the N28 east of the site access at Shanbally. There will be no construction delivery vehicles or heavy vehicles along the N28 at the Pfizer Roundabout, at the N28/R613 junction and along the R613.

Figure 6.12: Janssen Sciences Site Access

Construction Contracts

John Sisk and Son is the proposed construction contractor. John Sisk and Son will appoint a number of specialist sub-contractors. The construction contracts will include the following:

- Civil, Structural and Architecture (CSA);

- Mechanical;

- Engineering and Installation (E&I); and

- Heating, Ventilation and Sprinkler (HVAC).

On-site construction supervision and management staff will be provided by Janssen Sciences, PM Group and John Sisk and Son.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-48

Construction Hours

The proposed core construction on-site working hours are from 7.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. Monday to Friday, and from 7.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. on Saturdays, unless otherwise agreed with Cork County Council.

Construction Staff Hours

All the construction contracts will be on the basis of construction staff start and finish times specified to restrict construction staff travel during the existing morning and evening peak traffic periods in the Ringaskiddy area. These periods include 7.00 a.m. to 9.15 a.m. and 4.30 p.m. to 6.15 p.m.

John Sisk and Son has indicated that specified construction staff start and finish times will not add a restrictive financial premium to the construction contracts. A mixed distribution of construction staff start and finish times can also be achieved for the construction contracts and the likely staff travel characteristics.

John Sisk and Son has confirmed the following:

- The construction site will have full site lighting and darkness will not restrict site works or construction staff working hours;

- All site induction for construction staff will be held at 10.00 a.m. and all construction staff, new to site, arriving for induction will not arrive on-site until after 9.15 a.m.;

- Construction staff for the CSA contract (John Sisk and Son) will work the core construction site hours. All staff will be on-site from 6.00 a.m., prior to 7.00 a.m., and will depart from site prior to 4.30 p.m. or after 7.00 p.m. The majority of John Sisk and Son construction staff will be local to the Cork area. The majority of construction staff for the CSA contract will typically depart early from site on Fridays, by 2.00 p.m. Longer distance commuting construction staff for the CSA contract will arrive on-site after 9.15 a.m. on Monday mornings;

- The Mechanical, E&I and HVAC construction contracts will be on the basis of construction on-site staff arrival times of before 7.00 a.m. from 6.00 a.m., and after 9.15 a.m. only;

- The Mechanical, E&I and HVAC construction contracts will be on the basis of construction on-site staff departure times of before 4.30 p.m. and after 7.00 p.m. only. The majority of Mechanical, E&I and HVAC construction staff that arrive on-site before 7.00 a.m. will depart from site by 3.30 p.m.;

- The peak staff period for on-site CSA contract staff will occur prior to the peak staff periods for the Mechanical, E&I and HVAC contracts; and

- Barrier-controlled, security-manned, CCTV and vehicle number plate reading construction access will be provided. All construction staff will be issued with a construction security tag. A full electronic record of all construction staff and construction vehicle arrivals and departures will be available to Cork County Council, to verify compliance.

It is envisaged that on-site construction supervision and management staff provided by Janssen Sciences, PM Group and John Sisk and Son will have arrival and departure times consistent with construction contract staff, with some essential arrivals and departures during other times.

Construction Staff Vehicle Occupancy

John Sisk and Son will again operate a continuous incentive scheme to encourage car pooling and lift sharing by all construction staff, with eligibility for the incentive scheme based on a minimum vehicle occupancy rate of three construction staff per vehicle.

A premium additional incentive will be provided to contractor shuttle vehicles with eight staff or more. Subject to the approval of Cork County Council, high occupancy shuttle service could be permitted during peak traffic periods.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-49

As during the previously original construction programme, it is envisaged that this will achieve an average construction staff vehicle occupancy rate of 1.8 construction staff per vehicle during the proposed construction at the Janssen Sciences site. A full electronic record of all construction staff and construction vehicle arrivals and departures will be available to Cork County Council, to verify compliance.

Construction Parking

A total of 480 on-site construction car and van parking spaces will be provided.

Construction Earthworks Volumes

All earthworks materials excavated on-site during construction will be retained and reused on-site. No excavated earthworks materials will be removed off-site.

Construction Delivery Vehicle Times

Construction delivery vehicles will be significantly lower than construction deliveries generated during the previous original site construction.

The majority of non-essential time-based construction deliveries will not take place during the morning and evening peak traffic periods from 7.00 a.m. to 9.30 a.m., after 4.30 p.m. or at any times that might coincide with collection times at the nearby Shanbally National School.

Exceptional time essential construction deliveries will take place during peak traffic periods and will not generate significant delivery vehicle volumes.

The BioCork2 building will not be a concrete frame, which will essentially limit the extent of concrete deliveries to foundations and slabs only.

Construction Staff Facilities

All construction staff facilities will be provided on-site and construction staff will not depart from site during their working day. Facilities will include canteen, lockers and changing areas.

Community Liaison

Janssen Sciences is an active participant in the Ringaskiddy Liaison Group, which includes representatives from each of the industries in Ringaskiddy, together with Port of Cork and representatives from the Ringaskiddy and District Residents Association (RDRA).

As part of this regular engagement process, Janssen Sciences will provide regular updates to the Group on the progress on the project, receive updates from other participants regarding other active projects in the area that may require coordination with, and address any issues that might be raised by the Residents Association in relation to the project construction. Janssen Sciences will also liaise regularly with Cork County Council.

Construction Manpower, Site Population, Parking and Vehicle Traffic Profile Projections are provided in Appendix B.2.

Overall peak construction staff will be 782 staff in September 2018, including 592 trade/manpower workers and 190 supervision and management staff. This will occur during the peak Mechanical, E&I and HVAC contracts’ period.

Peak Construction Staff Traffic Volumes

The peak construction staff traffic volumes during the peak CSA contract period and during the peak Mechanical, E&I and HVAC contracts’ period are provided in the Tables 6.43 and 6.44. The peak Mechanical, E&I and HVAC contracts’ period is the overall construction peak.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-50

Table 6.43: Peak Construction Staff Traffic Volumes During Peak CSA

Time Period

Staff Vehicles

Workers Supervision +

Management Total

Before 7.00 a.m., From 6.00 a.m.

167 54 221

7.00 a.m. to 9.15 a.m. 0 0 0

9.15 a.m. to 10.00 a.m. 15 10 25

Total Daily Inbound: 182 64 246

2.00 p.m. to 3.30 p.m. 0 0 0

3.30 p.m. to 4.30 p.m. 110 34 144

4.30 p.m. to 6.15 p.m. 0 0 0

6.15 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. 0 0 0

After 7.00 p.m. 72 30 102

Total Daily Outbound: 182 64 246

During the CSA contract, all inbound construction staff vehicles, to the site, will arrive from 6.00 a.m., prior to 7.00 a.m. and between 9.15 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. No construction staff vehicles will arrive between 7.00 a.m. and 9.15 a.m.

During the CSA contract, all outbound construction staff vehicles, from the site, will depart between 3.30 p.m. and 4.30 p.m., and after 7.00 p.m. No construction staff vehicles will depart between 4.30 p.m. and 7.00 p.m.

Peak construction staff vehicles, during the peak CSA contract, would generate a peak total of 246 daily inbound vehicles and 246 daily outbound vehicles.

Table 6.44: Peak Construction Staff Traffic Volumes During Peak Mechanical/E&I/HVAC (Overall Peak)

Time Period

Staff Vehicles


Management Total

Before 7.00 a.m., From 6.00 a.m. 309 99 408

7.00 a.m. to 9.15 a.m. 0 0 0

9.15 a.m. to 10.00 a.m. 20 6 26

Total Daily Inbound 329 105 434

2.00 p.m. to 3.30 p.m. 262 73 335

3.30 p.m. to 4.30 p.m. 58 27 85

4.30 p.m. to 6.15 p.m. 0 0 0

6.15 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. 0 0 0

After 7.00 p.m. 9 5 14

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-51

Time Period

Staff Vehicles


Management Total

Total Daily Outbound 329 105 434

During the Mechanical/E&I/HVAC contract, all inbound construction staff vehicles, to the site, will arrive from 6.00 a.m., prior to 7.00 a.m. and between 9.15 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. No construction staff vehicles will arrive between 7.00 a.m. and 9.15 a.m.

During the peak Mechanical/E&I/HVAC (overall peak) contract, all outbound construction staff vehicles, from the site, will depart between 2.00 p.m. and 4.30 p.m., and after 7.00 p.m. No construction staff vehicles will depart between 4.30 p.m. and 7.00 p.m.

Peak construction staff vehicles, during the peak Mechanical/E&I/HVAC (overall peak) contract, would generate a peak total of 434 daily inbound vehicles and 434 daily outbound vehicles.

Peak Construction Deliveries Traffic Volumes

The construction delivery and heavy haul vehicle peak traffic volumes are provided in Table 6.45.

Table 6.45: Peak Daily Construction Delivery and Heavy Vehicle Traffic Volumes

Peak Construction Contract

Daily Vehicles

General Delivery Heavy Haul Total

CSA 19 19 38

Mechanical, E&I and HVAC 39 9 48

Peak construction delivery and heavy vehicle volumes, during the peak CSA contract, would generate a peak total of 38 daily inbound vehicles and 38 daily outbound vehicles.

Peak construction delivery and heavy vehicle volumes, during the peak Mechanical/E&I/HVAC (overall peak) contract, would generate a peak total of 48 daily inbound vehicles and 48 daily outbound vehicles.

Peak Construction Total Traffic Volumes

Peak construction, during the peak CSA contract, would generate a peak total of 284 daily inbound vehicles and 284 daily outbound vehicles.

Peak construction, during the peak Mechanical/E&I/HVAC (overall peak) contract, would generate a peak total of 482 daily inbound vehicles and 482 daily outbound vehicles.

The predicted 2018 N28 two-way link traffic volumes, at half-hourly intervals, with the BioCork2 peak construction CSA contract and the peak construction Mechanical, E&I and HVAC contracts (overall peak), are provided in Table 6.46.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-52

Table 6.46: Predicted N28 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction

Time Period N28 Location

2018 Baseline

(2016+TII

High Growth)

CSA Peak

Mechanical/E&I/

HVAC Peak

(Overall Peak)

Total Change Total Change

06:30 - 07.00

Shanbally 436 547 +111 640 +204

North of Shannonpark

870 981 +111 1,074 +204

07:00 - 08:00

Shanbally 1,444 1,444 0 1,444 0


2,507 2,507 0

2,507 0

08:00 - 09:00

Shanbally 1,393 1,393 0 1,393 0


2,127 2,127 0

2,127 0

09:00 - 09:30

Shanbally 359 368 +9 368 +9


1,076 1,085 +9 1,085

+9

09.30 - 10.00

Shanbally 335 356 +21 359 +24


799 820 +21

823 +24

14:00 - 15:00

Shanbally 468 478 +10 706 +238


1,622 1,632 +10

1,860 +238

15:00 - 16:00

Shanbally 635 722 +87 803 +168


1,954 2,041 +87

2,122 +168

16:00 - 16:30

Shanbally 741 823 +82 790 +49


1,158 1,240 +82

1,207 +49

16:30 - 17:00

Shanbally 561 561 0 561 0


1,143 1,143 0

1,143 0

17:00 - 18:00

Shanbally 1,038 1,038 0 1,038 0


2,275 2,275 0

2,275 0

18:00 - 19:00

Shanbally 911 911 0 911 0


2,314 2,314 0

2,314 0

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-53


2018 Baseline

(2016+TII

High Growth)

CSA Peak

Mechanical/E&I/

HVAC Peak

(Overall Peak)


19:00 - 19:30

Shanbally 328 430 +102 342 +14


978 1,080 +102

992 +14

The predicted 2018 morning traffic volumes on the N28 to the Ringaskiddy area, at Shanbally and north of Shannonpark, at half-hourly intervals, with the BioCork2 peak construction CSA contract and the peak construction Mechanical, E&I and HVAC contracts (overall peak), are provided in Table 6.47.

Table 6.47: Predicted N28 Link Traffic Volumes to Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction

Morning Time

Period

N28 Location

Direction

2018 Baseline

(2016+TII

High Growth)

CSA Peak

Mechanical/E&I/

HVAC Peak

(Overall Peak)


06:30 - 07.00

Shanbally Eastbound

379 490 +111 583 +204

North of Shannonpark Southbound

479 590 +111 683 +204

07:00 - 08:00

Shanbally Eastbound

1,215 1,215 0

1,215 0


1,449 1,449 0

1,449 0

08:00 - 09:00

Shanbally Eastbound

1,225 1,225 0

1,225 0


1,313 1,313 0

1,313 0

09:00 - 09:30

Shanbally Eastbound

269 278 +9

278 +9


477 486 +9

486 +9

09.30 - 10.00

Shanbally Eastbound

335 354 +19

356 +21

North of 799 818 +19 820 +21

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-54

Morning Time

Period

N28 Location

Direction

2018 Baseline

(2016+TII

High Growth)

CSA Peak

Mechanical/E&I/

HVAC Peak

(Overall Peak)


Shannonpark Southbound

The predicted 2018 afternoon and evening traffic volumes on the N28 from the Ringaskiddy area, at Shanbally and north of Shannonpark, at half-hourly intervals, with the BioCork2 peak construction CSA contract and the peak construction Mechanical, E&I and HVAC contracts (overall peak), are provided in Table 6.48.

Table 6.48: Predicted N28 Link Traffic Volumes from Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction

Afternoon/

Evening Time

Period

N28 Location

2018 Baseline

(2016+TII

High Growth)

CSA Peak

Mechanical/E&I/

HVAC Peak

(Overall Peak)


14:00 - 15:00

Shanbally Westbound

278 283 +5 509 +231


Northbound

820 825 +5 1,051 +231

15:00 - 16:00

Shanbally Westbound

459 541 +82

620 +161


Northbound

1,006

1,088 +82

1,167 +161

16:00 - 16:30

Shanbally Westbound

686 766 +80

732 +46


Northbound

650

730 +80

696 +46

16:30 - 17:00

Shanbally Westbound

502 502 0

502 0


Northbound

557 557

0

557 0

17:00 - 18:00 Shanbally Westbound

937 937 0

937 0

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-55

Afternoon/

Evening Time

Period

N28 Location

2018 Baseline

(2016+TII

High Growth)

CSA Peak

Mechanical/E&I/

HVAC Peak

(Overall Peak)



Northbound

1,114 1,114

0

1,114 0

18:00 - 19:00

Shanbally Westbound

648 648 0

648 0


Northbound

1,139 1,139

0

1,139 0

19:00 - 19:30

Shanbally Westbound

251 353 +102

265 +14


Northbound

495

597 +102

509 +14

The predicted 2018 total junction traffic volumes on the N28, at Shannonpark Roundabout and Shanbally Roundabout, at half-hourly intervals, with the BioCork2 peak construction CSA contract and the peak construction Mechanical, E&I and HVAC contracts (overall peak), are provided in Table 6.49.

Table 6.49: Predicted N28 Total Junction Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction


Junction

2018 Baseline

(2016+TII

High Growth)

CSA Peak

Mechanical/E&I/

HVAC Peak

(Overall Peak)


06:30 - 07.00 Shannonpark 970 1,081 +111 1,174 +204

Shanbally 532 643 +111 736 +204

07:00 - 08:00 Shannonpark 3,140 3,140 0 3,140 0

Shanbally 1,814 1,814 0 1,814 0

08:00 - 09:00 Shannonpark 2,859 2,859 0 2,859 0

Shanbally 1,760 1,760 0 1,760 0

09:00 - 09:30 Shannonpark 1,336 1,345 +9 1,345 +9

Shanbally 451 460 +9 460 +9

09.30 - 10.00 Shannonpark 992 1,013 +21 1,016 +24

Shanbally 421 442 +21 445 +24

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-56


Junction

2018 Baseline

(2016+TII

High Growth)

CSA Peak

Mechanical/E&I/

HVAC Peak

(Overall Peak)


14:00 - 15:00 Shannonpark 2,065 2,075 +10 2,303 +238

Shanbally 628 638 +10 866 +238

15:00 - 16:00 Shannonpark 2,488 2,575 +87 2,656 +168

Shanbally 852 939 +87 1,020 +168

16:00 - 16:30 Shannonpark 1,475 1,557 +82 1,524 +49

Shanbally 999 1,081 +82 1,048 +49

16:30 - 17:00 Shannonpark 1,456 1,456 0 1,456 0

Shanbally 757 757 0 757 0

17:00 - 18:00 Shannonpark 2,827 2,827 0 2,827 0

Shanbally 1,338 1,338 0 1,338 0

18:00 - 19:00 Shannonpark 2,729 2,729 0 2,729 0

Shanbally 1,121 1,121 0 1,121 0

19:00 - 19:30 Shannonpark 1,128 1,230 +102 1,142 +14

Shanbally 423 525 +102 525 +14

The BioCork2 peak construction generation hour 06:30 to 07:30 a.m. predicted 2018 junction traffic volumes, with the BioCork2 peak construction, are shown Figure 6.13.

For in

spec

tion p

urpo

ses o

nly.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-57

Figure 6.13: Predicted 2018 06:30 to 07:30 AM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction (Peak Generation 06:30 to 7:00)

The predicted 2018 daily traffic volumes, with the BioCork2 peak construction, are provided in Table 6.50.

Table 6.50: Predicted Daily Traffic Volumes With BioCork2 Peak Construction

Location Road Link

2018 AADT

Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth)

Mechanical/E&I/

HVAC Peak

(Overall Peak)

Peak Daily

Vehicles Change


N28 North 25,862 26,826

+964

N28 East 13,340 14,304

Shanbally

Roundabout

N28 West 12,940 13,904

N28 East 10,245 11,209

N28 at Carr’s Hill N28 North 25,862 26,826

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-58


The peak construction daily heavy vehicle deliveries, of up to 48 deliveries, would not significantly increase 2018 baseline daily traffic volumes on the N28 at Carr’s Hill, N40 Cork Southern Ring Road and at the N40/N28 Bloomfield Interchange.

The highest periods for construction staff arrivals and departures would occur during the morning, afternoon and evening off-peak traffic periods, when baseline traffic volumes would be significantly lower on the N40 Cork Southern Ring Road and at the N40/N28 Bloomfield Interchange, as detailed in foregoing Table 6.34 and 6.35. Construction staff traffic would not have any significant adverse traffic impact on the existing national road network.

2018 Junction Capacity Analysis with Peak Construction

The existing N28 Shannonpark Roundabout and N28 Shanbally Roundabout junctions have been analysed using the computer software programme ARCADY, and the existing N28/Janssen Sciences Access junction has been analysed using the computer software programme PICADY, for the predicted BioCork2 peak construction generation hour 06:30 to 07:30 a.m. predicted 2018 junction traffic volumes, with the BioCork2 peak construction peak period (06:30 to 07:00 a.m.) traffic volumes. The ARCADY and PICADY analysis has been carried out at 15 minutes intervals.

Full details of the ARCADY and PICADY junction capacity analysis are provided in Appendix B.3. The input details include junction geometry, junction entry/approach volumes, turning proportions and vehicle type proportions, including heavy vehicles. The results are summarised in Table 6.51.

Table 6.51: Summary of 2018 Junction Capacity Analysis With BioCork2 Peak Construction 06:30 to 07:30 @ 15 Minutes Intervals

Junction

Highest Ratio of

Flow to Capacity

(RFC)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Mean

Maximum Queue

Length (vehicles)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

15 Minutes

Interval Highest

RFC Approach

Delay per Vehicle

(minutes)

Junction Delay

per Vehicle

(minutes) for

Total Time

Period


0.824 4.4 0.17 0.11


1.037 39.8 1.33 0.67

N28/Janssen Sciences Access 0.629 1.6 0.24 0.03

ARCADY and PICADY identify a Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC) of 0.900 as the practical capacity of a junction. The highest approach delay per vehicle (minutes) is the total delay in vehicle minutes per 15 minutes interval divided by 15 minutes divided by the vehicle demand per minute.

The analysis indicates that the N28/R611 Shannonpark Roundabout would operate within its practical capacity during the 2018 predicted BioCork2 peak construction generation hour 06:30 to 07:30 a.m., with the BioCork2 peak construction peak period (06:30 to 07:00 a.m.) traffic volumes, with a highest RFC of 0.824. Highest delay per vehicle would be similar to without BioCork2.

The analysis indicates that the N28/L2492 Shanbally Roundabout would operate above practical capacity during the 2018 predicted BioCork2 peak construction generation hour 06:30 to 07:30 a.m., with the BioCork2 peak construction peak period (06:30 to 07:00 a.m.) traffic volumes, with a highest RFC of up to 1.037. Highest delays per vehicle would be 1.33 minutes, compared to 1.13 minutes without BioCork2.

The PICADY analysis indicates that the N28/Janssen Sciences Access junction would operate within practical capacity during the 2018 predicted BioCork2 peak construction generation hour

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-59

06:30 to 07:30 a.m., with the BioCork2 peak construction peak period (06:30 to 07:00 a.m.) traffic volumes, with a highest RFC of 0.629. Highest delays per vehicle would be 0.24 minutes.

R613 Carrigaline Junction

The BioCork2 construction will not route construction traffic via the R613 and R613/Carrigaline Inner Relief Road/R612 junction. Accordingly, the BioCork2 construction phase would not have any significant impact on the R613/Carrigaline Inner Relief Road/R612 junction.

Journey Times

The predicted 2018 N28 peak hour journey times, between Carr’s Hill and the Janssen Sciences Access Road on the R613, during the 2018 predicted BioCork2 peak construction generation hour 06:30 to 07:30 a.m., with the BioCork2 peak construction peak period (06:30 to 07:00 a.m.) traffic volumes, are provided in Table 6.52 on the basis of the foregoing ARCADY and PICADY junction analysis and the TII DMRB Speeds On Links speed/flow relationships for road links.

Table 6.52: Predicted N28 2018 AM Peak Journey Times With BioCork2 Peak Construction

Direction From To Total Time

Seconds

Delays

Seconds

Eastbound Carr’s Hill Janssen Sciences Access 675 259

Westbound Janssen Sciences Access Carr’s Hill 614 204

The predicted 2018 morning peak vehicle journey time eastbound on the N28, from Carr’s Hill to the Janssen Sciences Access Road would be approximately 675 seconds, including a total of 259 seconds of delays at junctions. This compares to a total of 645 seconds without BioCork2, for the 6.5 kms.

The predicted 2018 morning peak traffic hour vehicle journey time westbound on the N28, from the Janssen Sciences Access Road to Carr’s Hill, would be approximately 614 seconds, including 204 seconds of delays at junctions. This would be unchanged compared to without BioCork2.

Construction Impact Significance and Duration

The proposed BioCork2 construction phase would result in an imperceptible increase in traffic volumes during the baseline traffic peaks of 07:00 to 09:15 a.m. and 16.30 to 19.00 p.m., as detailed in the BioCork2 Construction Traffic Management Plan.

Baseline traffic volumes, on the N28 at Shanbally, during the BioCork2 construction peak generation period 06:30 to 07:00 a.m. are significantly less than during the baseline traffic peaks of 07:00 to 09:15 a.m. and 16.30 to 19.00 p.m. On the basis of the EPA EIS Guidelines, the construction impact of the proposed BioCork2 expansion will be slight to moderate and short-term.

Cumulative Construction Impacts

Subject to planning permission, it is envisaged that the proposed BioCork2 peak overall construction date of September 2018 would not coincide with the GE proposed peak construction. The proposed BioCork2 construction phase would result in an imperceptible increase in traffic volumes during the baseline traffic peaks of 07:00 to 09:15 a.m. and 16.30 to 19.00 p.m., as detailed in the BioCork2 Construction Traffic Management Plan.

The Port of Cork Company proposed Ringaskiddy Port Redevelopment includes the provision of a new container terminal, the extension of the deepwater berth and the expansion and upgrading of Port facilities, which would also accommodate the relocation of existing Port facilities from Tivoli and Cork City Quays, to Ringaskiddy. It is currently envisaged that the proposed Port of Cork construction works may not commence until after the proposed BioCork2 construction programme.

It is understood that Cork County Council will require detailed Construction Traffic Management Plans for all proposed construction works in the Ringaskiddy area, for the Council’s prior approval.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-60

These Construction Traffic Management Plans will include details of hours, volumes and mitigation for construction activities. Accordingly, it is envisaged that any cumulative construction activities traffic impact, occurring during the proposed BioCork2 construction programme, will be a temporary to short-term slight to moderate impact on the basis of the EPA EIS Guidelines.


Subject to planning permission, the BioCork2 expansion is scheduled to be operational in late 2019. The existing Janssen Sciences facility includes a total of 635 staff, including 555 employee personnel and 80 contract personnel. The proposed BioCork2 expansion would facilitate 250 additional staff over five years, including 200 employees and 50 contract staff, with 80% of additional staff working shift hours.

The Janssen Sciences peak operational traffic generation hours are 06:30 to 07:30 a.m. and 18:30 to 19:30 p.m.

There is short changeover period, between all shift personnel, at the start and end of each shift.

The existing Janssen facility typically generates up to 20 sales representatives, deliveries and other vendor visitors on weekdays, and typically five visitor guests on certain weekdays. Intermittent visitors are generated by intermittent maintenance and minor construction works, with typically up to 20 such visitors on weekdays.

It is envisaged that there would be no significant change to existing typical operational visitor and deliveries volumes, with BioCork2. Exceptional events at Janssen Sciences could generate up to 80 visitors, with BioCork2. Such exceptional events would be very occasional.

Operational access to and from the existing Janssen Sciences facility, at Barnahely, is via the existing access junction on the R613. The existing site access junction on the N28 is currently used as an emergency access only.

The existing and proposed Janssen Sciences operational staff numbers and working hours are detailed in Table 6.53.

Table 6.53: Existing and Proposed Janssen Sciences Operational Staff

Operational Staff Working

Shift/Hours

Operational Staff Numbers

(Employees + Contractors)

Existing

Existing +

Proposed

BioCork2

Change

(BioCork2)

Standard flexitime day 07:00/08:30 – 15:30/17:00 381 431 +50

4 shift 07:00 – 19:00 60 85 +25

4 shift 19:00 – 07:00 60 85 +25

2 shift 07:00 – 15:00 (5 Day week) 30 55 +25

2 shift 15:00 – 23:00 (5 Day week) 30 55 +25

2 shift 07:00 – 19:00 (7 day Week) 42 92 +50

5 shift 07:00 – 19:00 16 41 +25

5 shift 19:00 – 07:00 16 41 +25

Total 635 885 +250

The flexitime day staff arrivals and departures profile is expected to be similar to that of existing day staff, as recorded in November 2016 staff travel survey for Janssen Sciences Mobility

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-61

Management Plan (Updated). There is a relatively consistent existing profile for flexitime day staff arrivals and departures during the flexitime hours.

The operational staff travel mode share by car driver has reduced from 96.4% in 2014, to 89.0% in November 2016. It is envisaged that BioCork2 operational staff would have similar staff travel mode shares as existing staff, including set-down (Table 6.72 in Section 6.7 refers).

The peak daily number of BioCork2 operational staff working on any one day would be up to 200 staff of the total proposed 250 BioCork2 staff, on the basis of the existing and proposed shift arrangements.

The predicted BioCork2 operational weekday staff vehicle trips are detailed in Table 6.54.

Table 6.54: Predicted BioCork2 Operational Weekday Staff Vehicle Trips

Time Period Vehicles

Inbound Outbound

06:30 - 07:00 92 14

07:00 – 07:30 13 23

07:30 – 08:00 11 0

08:00 – 08:30 12 0

08:30 – 09:00 0 0

09:00 – 09:30 0 0

09:30 – 10:00 0 0

14:30 - 15.00 22 1

15:00 – 15:30 0 23

15:30 – 16:00 1 11

16:00 – 16:30 0 12

16:30 – 17:00 0 11

17:00 – 17:30 0 12

17:30 – 18:00 0 0

18:00 – 18:30 0 0

18:30 – 19:00 34 1

19:00 – 19:30 2 58

23:00 – 23:30 1 22

Daily Total 188 188

The 2016 recorded distribution of inbound and outbound traffic volumes, to and from the existing Janssen Sciences Access Road, are shown on the figures provided in Appendix B.1, for each 15 minutes interval. The morning inbound three hours' aggregate distribution is 81.6% via the R613 east and N28, and 18.4% via the R613 west. The evening outbound three hours aggregate distribution is 83.8% via the R613 east and N28, and 16.2% via the R613 west. It is envisaged that BioCork2 operational staff would have similar staff vehicle distributions as existing staff vehicles.

The predicted 2023 N28 two-way link traffic volumes, at half-hourly intervals, with BioCork2 fully operational, are provided in Table 6.55.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-62

Table 6.55: Predicted 2023 N28 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2


2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)

2023 With BioCork2 Operational

Total Change

06:30 - 07:00 Shanbally 510 596 +86

North of Shannonpark 1,018 1,104 +86

07:00 - 08:00 Shanbally 1,690 1,729 +39


08:00 - 09:00 Shanbally 1,630 1,640 +10


09:00 - 09:30 Shanbally 420 420 0

North of Shannonpark 1,259 1,259 0

09:30 - 10:00 Shanbally 392 392 0

North of Shannonpark 935 935 0

14:00 - 15:00 Shanbally 548 567 +19


15:00 - 16:00 Shanbally 743 772 +29


16:00 - 16:30 Shanbally 867 877 +10


16:30 - 17:00 Shanbally 656 665 +9


17:00 - 18:00 Shanbally 1,215 1,225 +10


18:00 - 19:00 Shanbally 1,066 1,095 +29


19:00 - 19:30 Shanbally 384 435 +51


The predicted 2023 morning traffic volumes on the N28 to the Ringaskiddy area, at Shanbally and north of Shannonpark, at half-hourly intervals, with BioCork2 fully operational, are provided in Table 6.56.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-63

Table 6.56: Predicted 2023 N28 Link Traffic Volumes to Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) With BioCork2

Morning Time

Period

N28 Location

Direction

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)


Total Change

06:30 - 07:00

Shanbally Eastbound 443 518 +75


560 635 +75

07:00 - 08:00

Shanbally Eastbound 1,422 1,442 +20


1,695 1,715 +20

08:00 - 09:00

Shanbally Eastbound 1,433 1,443 +10


1,536 1,546 +10

09:00 - 09:30

Shanbally Eastbound 315 315 0


558 558 0

09:30 - 10:00

Shanbally Eastbound 392 392 0


935 935 0

The predicted 2023 afternoon and evening traffic volumes on the N28 from the Ringaskiddy area, at Shanbally and north of Shannonpark, at half-hourly intervals, with BioCork2 fully operational, are provided in Table 6.57.

Table 6.57: Predicted N28 2023 Link Traffic Volumes from Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) With BioCork2

Afternoon/

Evening Time

Period

N28 Location

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)


Total Change

14:00 - 15:00

Shanbally Westbound 325 326 +1


Northbound 961

962 +1

15:00 - 16:00



Northbound 1,177

1,205 +28

16:00 - 16:30

Shanbally Westbound 1,154 1,164 +10


Northbound 761

771 +10

16:30 - 17:00 Shanbally Westbound 587 596 +9

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-64

Afternoon/

Evening Time

Period

N28 Location

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)


Total Change


Northbound 652

661 +9

17:00 - 18:00

Shanbally Westbound 1,096 1,106 +10


Northbound 1,303

1,313 +10

18:00 - 19:00



Northbound 1,333

1,334 +1

19:00 - 19:30



Northbound 579

628 +49

The predicted 2023 total junction traffic volumes on the N28, at Shannonpark Roundabout and Shanbally Roundabout, at half-hourly intervals, with BioCork2 fully operational, are provided in Table 6.58.

Table 6.58: Predicted N28 2023 Total Junction Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2


Junction

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)


Total Change

06:30 - 07:00 Shannonpark 1,135 1,221 +86

Shanbally 622 708 +86

07:00 - 08:00 Shannonpark 3,674 3,713 +39

Shanbally 2,122 2,161 +39

08:00 - 09:00 Shannonpark 3,345 3,355 +10

Shanbally 2,059 2,069 +10

09:00 - 09:30 Shannonpark 1,563 1,563 0

Shanbally 528 528 0

09:30 - 10:00 Shannonpark 1,161 1,161 0

Shanbally 493 493 0

14:00 - 15:00 Shannonpark 2,416 2,435 +19


15:00 - 16:00 Shannonpark 2,911 2,940 +29

Shanbally 997 1,026 +29

16:00 - 16:30 Shannonpark 1,726 1,736 +10

Shanbally 1,169 1,179 +10

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-65


Junction

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)


Total Change

16:30 - 17:00 Shannonpark 1,704 1,713 +9


17:00 - 18:00 Shannonpark 3,308 3,318 +10

Shanbally 1,565 1,575 +10

18:00 - 19:00 Shannonpark 3,193 3,222 +29

Shanbally 1,312 1,341 +29

19:00 - 19:30 Shannonpark 1,320 1,371 +51


The predicted 2023 R613 two-way link traffic volumes, at half-hourly intervals, with BioCork2 fully operational, are provided in Table 6.59.

Table 6.59: Predicted 2023 R613 Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2

Time Period Location

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)


Total Change

06:30 - 07.00 East of Access Road 256 342 +86

West of Access Road 90 110 +20

07:00 - 08:00 East of Access Road 481 520 +39




09:00 - 09:30 East of Access Road 157 157 0

West of Access Road 137 137 0

09.30 - 10.00 East of Access Road 146 146 0

West of Access Road 128 128 0










For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-66

Time Period Location 2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High







The existing and predicted Janssen Sciences peak operational traffic generation hours are 06:30 to 07:30 a.m. and 18:30 to 19:30 p.m. The predicted 2023 junction traffic volumes for the periods 06:30 to 07:30 a.m. and 18:30 to 19:30 p.m., with BioCork2 fully operational, are provided in Figures 6.14 and 6.15, respectively.

Figure 6.14: Predicted 2023 06:30 to 07:30 AM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-67

Figure 6.15: Predicted 2023 18:30 to 19:30 PM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2

The predicted 2023 daily traffic volumes, with BioCork2 fully operational, are provided in Table 6.60.

Table 6.60: Predicted 2023 Daily Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2

Location Road Link

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)


Total Change


N28 North 30,259 30,569 +310

R611 13,950 13,950 0

N28 East 15,608 15,918 +310


N28 West 15,140 15,450 +310

L2492 2,239 2,239 0

N28 East 11,987 12,297 +310

N28/R613

N28 West 8,057 8,367 +310

R613 2,362 2,672 +310

N28 East 7,336 7,336 0

R613/Janssen R613 East 6,381 6,691 +310

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-68

Location Road Link

2023 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth+GE)


Total Change

Sciences Access Road Access Road 1,166 1,542 +376

R613 West 4,672 4,737 +65


Inner Relief Road 7,008 7,029 +21

R613 West 4,248 4,260 +12

R612 10,966 10,998 +32

R613 East 5,760 5,825 +65

N28 at Carr’s Hill N28 North 30,259 30,569 +310

The predicted daily increases at the R613/Carrigaline Inner Relief Road/R612 junction would be 0.3% on the Inner Relief Road, 0.3% on the R613 West, 0.3% on the R612, and 1.1% on the R613 East.

Junction Capacity Analysis

The existing N28 Shannonpark Roundabout and N28 Shanbally Roundabout junctions have been analysed using the computer software programme ARCADY, and the existing R613/N28 and R613/Janssen Sciences Access Road junctions have been analysed using the computer software programme PICADY, for the predicted 2023 morning and evening peak period traffic volumes, with BioCork2 fully operational.

The ARCADY and PICADY analysis has been carried out at 15 minutes intervals, for three hours during the morning peak period (06:30 to 09:30 a.m.) and three hours during the evening peak period (16:30 to 19:30 p.m.).

Full details of the ARCADY and PICADY junction capacity analysis are provided in Appendix B.3. The input details include junction geometry, junction entry/approach volumes, turning proportions and vehicle type proportions, including heavy vehicles. The predicted results are summarised in Table 6.61.

Table 6.61: Summary of 2023 Junction Capacity Analysis With BioCork2

Junction

Time Period

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Ratio of

Flow to Capacity

(RFC)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Mean

Maximum Queue

Length (vehicles)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

15 Minutes

Interval Highest

RFC Approach

Delay per

Vehicle

(minutes)

Time

Period @

15

Minutes

Intervals


06:30-07:30 1.006 13.9 0.71

0.31 07:30-08:30 0.972 26.5 0.76

08:30-09:30 0.918 8.8 0.32

16:30-17:30 0.779 3.3 0.18

0.11 17:30-18:30 0.786 3.5 0.13

18:30-19:30 0.779 3.4 0.13

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-69

Junction

Time Period

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Ratio of

Flow to Capacity

(RFC)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Mean

Maximum Queue

Length (vehicles)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

15 Minutes

Interval Highest

RFC Approach

Delay per

Vehicle

(minutes)

Time

Period @

15

Minutes

Intervals


06:30-07:30 1.241 158.5 4.12

4.55 07:30-08:30 1.305 194.3 1.85

08:30-09:30 1.267 312.5 5.29

16:30-17:30 1.180 120.5 4.52

2.21 17:30-18:30 1.053 106.1 5.19

18:30-19:30 0.648 3.0 0.17

N28/R613

06:30-07:30 0.567 1.3 0.20

0.10 07:30-08:30 0.885 5.3 0.66

08:30-09:30 0.524 2.4 0.32

16:30-17:30 0.672 1.9 0.28

0.06 17:30-18:30 0.480 0.9 0.19

18:30-19:30 0.474 0.9 0.18


06:30-07:30 0.507 1.0 0.18

0.05 07:30-08:30 0.375 0.6 0.16

08:30-09:30 0.180 0.2 0.12

16:30-17:30 0.351 0.5 0.13

0.05 17:30-18:30 0.193 0.2 0.10

18:30-19:30 0.350 0.5 0.12

Note (1): 07:15 to 07:30. Note (2): 08:30 to 08:45.

ARCADY identifies a Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC) of 0.900 as the practical capacity of a roundabout junction. The highest approach delay per vehicle (minutes) is the total delay in vehicle minutes per 15 minutes interval divided by 15 minutes divided by the vehicle demand per minute.

The analysis indicates that the N28/R611 Shannonpark roundabout would operate in excess of its practical capacity during the 2023 morning peak periods, with a highest RFC of 1.006 and delays per vehicle of up to 0.71 minutes. This compares to a predicted highest RFC of 0.997 and delays per vehicle of up to 0.63 minutes, without BioCork2.

The Shannonpark roundabout would operate within a highest RFC of 0.779 during the 2023 evening peak periods, compared to a predicted highest RFC of 0.767 without BioCork2.

The analysis indicates that the N28/L2492 Shanbally Roundabout would operate above practical capacity during the 2023 morning peak periods with highest RFC’s of up to 1.305, compared to a

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-70

predicted highest RFC of up to 1.291 without BioCork2. There would be no increase in highest delays per vehicle.

The N28/L2492 Shanbally Roundabout would operate with a highest RFC of 1.180 during the 2023 evening period, compared to 1.161 without BioCork2. Highest delays would increase by 0.43 minutes.

The PICADY analysis indicates that the N28/R613 and R613/Janssen Sciences Access Road junctions would operate within practical capacity during the 2023 morning and evening periods with BioCork2. There would be no significant traffic queuing and delays at the junctions, and the existing right-turn lanes could be retained.

Janssen Sciences’ Security Access

There would be no significant traffic queuing and delays generated by Janssen Sciences along the Janssen Access Road back to the R613, with BioCork2.

Security entry to Janssen Sciences, at the security building and associated security barrier on the Janssen Access Road located approximately 200 metres from the R613 junction, for staff, is based on a staff vehicle number plate recognition system. All staff vehicles are registered electronically at Janssen Sciences. This number plate recognition system has a vehicle entry rate of up to approximately 20 vehicles/minute. Entry rates are higher during peak staff entry when the barrier remains elevated in response to continuous number plate recognition. No significant vehicle waiting times or vehicle queues would occur at security entry during highest staff demand.

R613 Carrigaline Junction

The peak daily BioCork2 operational staff working on any one day of up to 200 staff, proposed shift arrangements, and staff arrival and departure times and travel distribution would not significantly increase the predicted 2023 daily traffic volumes on the R613 and at the R613/Carrigaline Inner Relief Road/R612 junction, as detailed in foregoing Tables 6.59 and 6.60. Accordingly, the BioCork2 operational phase would not have a significant impact on the R613/Carrigaline Inner Relief Road/R612 junction.

Journey Times

The predicted 2023 N28 peak hour journey times, between Carr’s Hill and the Janssen Sciences Access Road on the R613, with BioCork2 fully operational, are provided in Table 6.62 on the basis of the foregoing ARCADY and PICADY junction analysis and the TII DMRB Speeds On Links speed/flow relationships for road links.

Table 6.62: Predicted 2023 N28 Peak Journey Times (Seconds)

Peak Direction

Total Time Delays

Without

BioCork2

With

BioCork2

Without

BioCork2

With

BioCork2

AM

Eastbound Carr’s Hill to Janssen Sciences Access 1,053 1,079 639 663


Access to Carr’s Hill 717 732 237 250

PM

Eastbound Carr’s Hill to Janssen Sciences Access

592 611 95 112


Access to Carr’s Hill 1,043 1,081 619 654

The predicted 2023 morning peak vehicle journey time eastbound on the N28, from Carr’s Hill to the Janssen Sciences Access Road, with BioCork2 would be approximately 1,053 seconds,

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-71

including a total of 663 seconds of delays at junctions. This compares to a recorded total of 1,053 seconds without BioCork2, for the 6.5 kms.

The predicted 2023 morning peak vehicle journey time westbound on the N28, from the Janssen Sciences Access Road to Carr’s Hill, would be approximately 732 seconds, including 250 seconds of delays at junctions, with BioCork2, for the 6.5 kms. This compares to a recorded total of 717 seconds without BioCork2.

The 2023 evening peak vehicle journey time eastbound on the N28, from Carr’s Hill to the Janssen Sciences Access Road would be approximately 611 seconds, including 112 seconds of delays at junctions, with BioCork2, for the 6.5 kms. This compares to a recorded total of 592 seconds without BioCork2.

The 2023 evening peak vehicle journey time westbound on the N28, from the Janssen Sciences Access Road to Carr’s Hill, would be approximately 1,081 seconds, including 654 seconds of delays at junctions, with BioCork2, for the 6.5 kms. This compares to a recorded total of 1,043 seconds without BioCork2.


The peak daily BioCork2 operational staff working on any one day of up to 200 staff, proposed shift arrangements, and staff arrival and departure times and travel distribution would not significantly increase the predicted 2023 baseline daily traffic volumes on the N28 at Carr’s Hill, N40 Cork Southern Ring Road and at the N40/N28 Bloomfield Interchange, detailed in the foregoing Tables 6.36 and 6.37. BioCork2 operational staff traffic would not have any significant adverse traffic impact on the existing national road network.

Operational Impact Significance and Duration

On the basis of the EPA EIS Guidelines, the operational impact of the proposed BioCork2 expansion will be slight and long-term.

Cumulative Operational Impacts

As detailed in Section 6.5.1, 2023 without the proposed M28 Scheme is the highest future baseline traffic scenario, for the existing road network. In order to consider a robust future baseline, it is envisaged that the 2023 baseline, without the M28, would be on the basis of the TII high growth scenario plus the GE highest predicted peak hour increase. This results in a predicted increase in baseline traffic of 22.2% from November 2016 to 2023. All expected other cumulative developments are included in the predicted 2023 baseline.

The comparison of the predicted BioCork2 2023 operational baseline traffic volumes, without the proposed BioCork2 expansion, with Cork County Council’s predicted M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Project 2035 baseline, without the M28, provided in Table 6.42 in Section 6.5.1, for the future predicted N28 traffic volumes, confirms that the predicted BioCork2 2023 baseline traffic volumes are significantly higher than those predicted by Cork County Council for their 2035 baseline.

Parking

The proposed BioCork2 parking and Cork County Development Plan parking standards are detailed in Table 6.63.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-72

Table 6.63: Proposed BioCork2 Parking and Development Plan Parking Standards

Building

Use

BioCork

2 Floor

Area

(m2)

Maximum Car

Parking

Standard

Maximum

Car

Spaces -

Cork CDP

BioCork2

Car

Parking

Supply

(Spaces)

Minimum

Cycle

Parking

Standard

Minimum

Cycle

Spaces

Required

BioCork2

Cycle

Parking

Supply

(Spaces)

Office/lab/ canteen

3,100 1 space/17 m2 + 10% visitors

200

325 (1)

1 space / 200 m2

16

72 Warehouse

+ drum store 4,962

1 space/100 m2

49 1 space / 400 m2

11

Production 11,054 1 space/50 m2 221 1 space / 250 m2

45

Total 19,116 470 325 72 72

Disabled user car parking: 5% of total car parking spaces. 5% of 325 = 17 spaces proposed.

Facilities for battery powered vehicles to be recharged: 10% of total car parking spaces required = 10% of 325 = 33. Infrastructure for 40 spaces proposed.

Motorcycle parking: 1 per 10 car parking spaces required = 325/10 = 33.

Note (1): Proposed supply based on (i) requirement for BioCork2 expansion = 225 + 20 visitor spaces and (ii) Existing site shortfall parking for shift changes (including visitors) = 80 spaces.

The proposed BioCork2 includes 325 car parking spaces, including 17 disabled user spaces. This is significantly less than the maximum of 470 car parking spaces identified by the County Development Plan parking standards. BioCork2 includes a total of 72 cycle spaces and 33 motorcycle spaces.

The expected Janssen Sciences peak car parking demand, with the proposed BioCork2 development in place, is set out in Table 6.77, in Section 6.7.



BioCork2 Construction Staff Arrival and Departure Times/Vehicles

Following pre-planning consultation with Cork County Council, the construction staff traffic volumes’ arrival and departure times for BioCork2 have been specifically designed to avoid coinciding with existing peak traffic periods; peak traffic generation periods by other construction sites in Ringaskiddy, including Indaver, GE Healthcare and Port of Cork; and school start and finish times at Shanbally National School.

The predicted overall peak construction peak staff traffic volumes for BioCork2, scheduled for September 2018, are provided in Table 6.64, below. The time profiles’ staff vehicles would be generally pro-rata throughout the construction programme.

Table 6.64: BioCork2 Overall Peak Construction Staff Vehicles (September 2018)

Time Period

Construction Staff Vehicles


Management Total

6.00 a.m. to 6.30 a.m. 202 32 234

6.30 a.m. to 7.00 a.m. 87 13 100

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-73

Time Period

Construction Staff Vehicles


Management Total

7.00 a.m. to 9.15 a.m. 0 0 0

9.15 a.m. to 10.00 a.m. 40 60 100

Total Daily Inbound 329 105 434

1.00 p.m. to 3.00 p.m. 0 0 0

3.00 p.m. to 3.30 p.m. 121 10 131

3.30 p.m. to 4.00 p.m. 121 9 130

4.00 p.m. to 4.30 p.m. 38 21 59

4.30 p.m. to 6.15 p.m. 0 0 0

6.15 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. 40 60 100

After 7.00 p.m. 9 5 14

Total Daily Outbound 329 105 434

Following consultation with Cork County Council, and the project Construction Managers Sisk, the previously proposed construction staff time profiles have been revised as follows, to provide additional construction mitigation:

- A reduction in total construction staff arriving between 6.00 a.m. and 7.00 a.m., by increasing the number of staff, and in particular supervision and management staff, arriving between 9.15 a.m. and 10.00 a.m.;

- An increase in the proportion and numbers of construction staff arriving between 6.00 a.m. and 6.30 a.m. 70% of construction staff arrivals between 6.00 a.m. and 7.00 a.m. would occur between 6.00 a.m. and 6.30 a.m.;

- No staff arrivals and departures between 1.00 p.m. and 3.00 p.m. This time period coincides with the Shanbally National School finish times of 1.30 p.m. and 2.30 p.m.;

- An increase in total construction staff departing after 6.15 p.m., and in particular supervision and management staff; and

- A more even profile of construction staff departures during the inter-peak period between the Shanbally National School finish times and the main evening peak traffic period.

2018 Traffic Volumes with Peak Construction Additional Mitigation

The BioCork2 peak construction generation hours’ 06:00 to 07:00 a.m. and 15:00 to 16:00 p.m. 2018 junction traffic volumes, with the BioCork2 peak construction, and the foregoing proposed additional mitigation in respect of construction staff traffic volumes’ arrival and departure times, are shown in Figures 6.16 and 6.17, respectively.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-74

Figure 6.16: Predicted 2018 06:00 to 07:00 AM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction (AM Peak Generation Hour)

Figure 6.17: Predicted 2018 15:00 to 16:00 PM Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction (PM Peak Generation Hour)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:11


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-75

The predicted 2018 N28 two-way link traffic volumes, with the BioCork2 peak construction, and the foregoing proposed additional mitigation in respect of construction staff traffic volumes’ arrival and departure times, are provided in Table 6.65.

Table 6.65: Predicted 2018 N28 Two-Way Link Traffic Volumes (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction Additional Mitigation


2018 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth)

Total Change

06:00 - 06:30 Shanbally 135 369

+234 North of Shannonpark 370 604

06:30 - 07.00 Shanbally 436 536


07:00 - 08:00 Shanbally 1,444 1,444

0 (1) North of Shannonpark 2,507 2,507

08:00 - 09:00 (1) Shanbally 1,393 1,393


09:00 - 09:30 (2) Shanbally 359 392

+33 North of Shannonpark 1,076 1,109

09.30 - 10.00 Shanbally 335 375


13:00 - 14:00 Shanbally 605 605

0 North of Shannonpark 1,598 1,598

14:00 - 15:00 Shanbally 468 468


15:00 - 15:30 Shanbally 306 443

+137 North of Shannonpark 807 1,044

15:30 - 16:00 Shanbally 330 466

+136 North of Shannonpark 958 1,094

16:00 - 16:30 Shanbally 741 806


16:30 - 17:00 Shanbally 561 561

0 (3) North of Shannonpark 1,143 1,143

17:00 - 18:00 (3) Shanbally 1,038 1,038


18:00 - 19:00 (4) Shanbally 911 1,017


19:00 - 19:30 Shanbally 328 342


Note (1): To 09:15. Note (2): 09:15 to 09:30.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-76

Note (3): To 18:15. Note (4): 18:15 to 19:00.

The predicted 2018 morning traffic volumes on the N28 to the Ringaskiddy area, at Shanbally and north of Shannonpark, at half-hourly intervals, with the BioCork2 peak construction, and the foregoing proposed additional mitigation in respect of construction staff traffic volumes’ arrival and departure times, are provided in Table 6.66.

Table 6.66: Predicted 2018 N28 Link Traffic Volumes to Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction Additional Mitigation

Morning Time

Period

N28 Location

Direction

2018 Baseline

(2016+TII

High Growth)

Total Change


+234 North of Shannonpark Southbound 184 418




0 (1) North of Shannonpark Southbound 1,449 1,449

08:00 - 09:00 (1) Shanbally Eastbound 1,225 1,225


09:00 - 09:30 (2) Shanbally Eastbound 269 302


09.30 - 10.00 Shanbally Eastbound 335 375


Note (1): To 09:15. Note (2): 09:15 to 09:30.

The predicted 2018 afternoon and evening traffic volumes on the N28 from the Ringaskiddy area, at Shanbally and north of Shannonpark, at half-hourly intervals, with the BioCork2 peak construction, and the foregoing proposed additional mitigation in respect of construction staff traffic volumes’ arrival and departure times, are provided in Table 6.67.

Table 6.67: Predicted 2018 N28 Link Traffic Volumes from Ringaskiddy Area (Vehicles) With BioCork2 Peak Construction Additional Mitigation

Afternoon/

Evening Time

Period

N28 Location

2018 Baseline

(2016+TII High

Growth)

Total Change


0 North of Shannonpark Northbound 776 776


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-77



+137 North of Shannonpark Northbound 423 560






0 (1) North of Shannonpark Northbound 557 557

17:00 - 18:00 (1)

Shanbally Westbound 937 937


18:00 - 19:00 (2)





Note (1): To 18:15. Note (2): 18:15 to 19:00.

2018 Junction Capacity Analysis with Peak Construction Additional Mitigation

The existing N28 Shannonpark Roundabout and N28 Shanbally Roundabout junctions have been analysed using the computer software programme ARCADY, and the existing N28/IDA Janssen Access junction has been analysed using the computer software programme PICADY, for the predicted BioCork2 peak construction generation hours 06:00 to 07:00 a.m. and 15:00 to 16:00 p.m. 2018 junction traffic volumes, with the BioCork2 peak construction peak traffic volumes, and the foregoing additional mitigation in respect of construction staff traffic volumes’ arrival and departure times. The ARCADY and PICADY analysis has been carried out at 15 minutes intervals.

Full details of the ARCADY and PICADY junction capacity analysis are provided in Appendix D. The input details include junction geometry, junction entry/approach volumes, turning proportions and vehicle type proportions, including heavy vehicles. The results are summarised in Tables 6.68 and 6.69.

Table 6.68: Summary of 2018 Junction Capacity Analysis With BioCork2 Peak Construction With Additional Mitigation - 06:00 to 07:00 Morning Peak Generation Hour

Junction

Highest Ratio of

Flow to Capacity

(RFC)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Mean

Maximum Queue

Length (vehicles)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

15 Minutes

Interval

Highest RFC

Approach

Delay per

Vehicle

(minutes)

Junction

Delay per

Vehicle

(minutes) for

Total Time

Period

N28/R611

Shannonpark

Roundabout

0.626 1.6 0.08 0.06

N28/L2492 0.859 (1) 5.4 (1) 0.23 (1) 0.13

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-78

Shanbally

Roundabout

N28/IDA Janssen

Access 0.692 2.2 0.27 0.08

Note (1): 06:45 to 07:00.

Table 6.69: Summary of 2018 Junction Capacity Analysis With BioCork2 Peak Construction With Additional Mitigation - 15:00 to 16:00 Afternoon/Evening Peak Generation Hour

Junction

Highest Ratio

of Flow to

Capacity (RFC)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

Highest Mean

Maximum Queue

Length (vehicles)

@ 15 Minutes

Intervals

15 Minutes

Interval Highest

RFC Approach

Delay per

Vehicle

(minutes)

Junction Delay

per Vehicle

(minutes) for

Total Time

Period

N28/R611

Shannonpark

Roundabout

0.610 1.5 0.10 0.07

N28/L2492

Shanbally

Roundabout

0.669 2.0 0.11 0.13

N28/IDA Janssen

Access 0.435 0.8 0.17 0.05

ARCADY and PICADY identify a Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC) of 0.900 as the practical capacity of a junction. The highest approach delay per vehicle (minutes) is the total delay in vehicle minutes per 15 minutes interval divided by 15 minutes divided by the vehicle demand per minute.

The analysis indicates that the junctions would operate within practical capacity, without significant traffic queuing and delays, during the predicted BioCork2 peak construction highest generation hours 06:00 to 07:00 a.m. and 15:00 to 16:00 p.m., with the BioCork2 peak construction additional mitigation in respect of construction staff traffic volumes’ arrival and departure times.

The N28/R611 Shannonpark Roundabout would operate within its practical capacity during the 2018 predicted BioCork2 peak construction highest generation hours, with highest RFC’s of 0.626 and 0.610 during the morning and afternoon, respectively.

The N28/L2492 Shanbally Roundabout would operate within, but approaching practical capacity during the 2018 predicted BioCork2 peak construction highest morning generation hour 06:00 to 07:00, with a highest RFC of up to 0.859. This would occur during the 06:45 to 07:00 15 minutes. The Shanbally Roundabout would operate with lower RFC’s during the period 06:00 to 06:45, within practical capacity. During the highest afternoon peak construction generation, Shanbally Roundabout would operate highest within practical capacity, with a highest RFC of 0.669.

The PICADY analysis indicates that the N28/IDA Janssen Access junction would operate within practical capacity during the 2018 predicted BioCork2 peak construction generation hours, with the BioCork2 peak construction additional mitigation, highest RFC’s of 0.692 and 0.435.

Accordingly, it is envisaged that the proposed BioCork2 additional construction mitigation, following consultation with Cork County Council, would significantly mitigate the construction traffic impact of BioCork2.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-79

Cumulative Construction Staff Vehicles

Indaver (Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre) Construction

The Indaver Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre EIS indicates that the proposed construction period would be 31 months, with peak construction occurring during the year prior to opening. The EIS indicates that peak construction would occur during 2019 and the opening year would be 2020.

On the basis of the 31 months construction programme, it is currently envisaged that peak construction would occur in the third quarter of 2019, or later. This would be after peak construction for BioCork2, scheduled for September 2018.

The Indaver EIS indicates that peak construction would generate a maximum of 320 site personnel, including 250 day shift personnel and 70 night shift personnel. The EIS indicates that there would be up to eight weeks of night shift working.

The Indaver EIS provides a daily profile of construction generated traffic volumes for peak construction. These include traffic volumes generated by the L2545 Local Road upgrade. The L2545 Local Road upgrade has been constructed and is now in place.

The Indaver EIS indicates that peak construction heavy vehicles would be up to 11 vehicles inbound and 11 vehicles outbound per hour.

The Indaver EIS indicates that no vehicles would arrive or depart during the periods from 7.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m. and from 4.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m., during construction.

The daily peak profile of construction vehicles generated by the Indaver development during peak construction and the eight weeks of night working, on the N28, is provided in Table 6.70 below, for the time periods comparable to the proposed BioCork2 construction traffic generation hours.

Table 6.70: Indaver Peak N28 Construction Vehicles (2019 3rd Quarter) With Eight Weeks of Night Working During BioCork2 Construction Traffic Generation Hours

Time Period

N28 Staff + Other

Light Vehicles N28 Heavy Vehicles N28 Total Vehicles

In Out In Out In Out

6.00 a.m. to 7.00 a.m. 199 65 10 10 209 75

7.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m. 0 0 0 0 0 0

9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.

14 14 11 11 25 25

1.00 p.m. to 2.00 p.m. 23 48 10 10 33 58

2.00 p.m. to 3.00 p.m. 13 13 10 10 23 23

3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m. 14 14 11 11 25 25

4.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. 0 0 0 0 0 0

6.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. 65 87 10 10 75 97

7.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. 3 114 2 2 5 116

GE Healthcare BioPark Construction

The GE Healthcare BioPark EIS indicates that the proposed construction period would be 18 months, from 2017. Peak construction site personnel would be up to 575 personnel. Assuming a commencement in August 2017, peak construction is likely to occur in May 2018. This would be before peak construction for BioCork2, scheduled for September 2018.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-80

The proposed on-site working hours are 7.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. The EIS indicates that site personnel would generate up to 400 vehicle arrivals and 400 vehicle departures at the start and finish, respectively, of construction working hours.

Peak construction heavy vehicle deliveries would be up to 48 trucks, both inbound and outbound, during the foundations’ concrete construction, during the initial part of the construction programme. This would not coincide with expected peak site personnel. Typical delivery vehicle volumes during peak site personnel would be up to 20 vehicles per day.

Pre-modulated building units would be shipped directly to the Pork of Cork Ringaskiddy, for transfer to site, after the foundations’ works.

Port of Cork Ringaskiddy

The Port of Cork Ringaskiddy Port Redevelopment EIS and EIS of the proposed Alterations to the Permitted Ringaskiddy Port Redevelopment indicate that it is currently envisaged that the Pork of Cork Phase 1 and Phase 2 construction works would generate a peak of 16.8 heavy vehicles per hour, both inbound and outbound.

The Alterations EIS indicates that this heavy vehicle generation would be within an eight hour working day, during the 24 months of construction proposed.

The Ringaskiddy Port Redevelopment EIS and Alterations EIS Traffic and Transportation Chapters and Project Description Chapters do not indicate the number of construction site personnel, nor their site arrival and departure times. It is indicated that this is subject to agreement with Cork County Council.

On the basis of the eight hour working day indicated in the Alterations EIS for construction heavy vehicle movements, it is envisaged that the Port of Cork construction personnel site arrival and departure times would not coincide with the highest generation times proposed for BioCork2 site personnel.

Cumulative Construction Staff Vehicles and Times

The peak construction site personnel vehicle trips and times are scheduled in Table 6.71, for the daily time periods comparable to the proposed BioCork2 construction traffic generation hours, for BioCork2, Indaver, GE and the Port of Cork. The peak construction vehicle volumes are specified for each individual construction peak. However, it is important to note that the four individual peaks are not expected to coincide.

Table 6.71: Peak Construction Staff Vehicles During BioCork2 Construction Staff Traffic Generation Hours

Time Period BioCork2 Indaver

(1) GE

(2)

Port of

Cork (3)

In Out In In In Out In Out

6.00 a.m. to 6.30 a.m. 234 0 199 65

0 0 (3) (3)

6.30 a.m. to 7.00 a.m. 100 0 400 0 (3) (3)

7.00 a.m. to 9.15 a.m. 0 0 0 0 0 0 (3) (3)

9.15 a.m. to 10.00 a.m. 100 0 14 14 0 0 (3) (3)

1.00 p.m. to 3.00 p.m. 0 0 56 81 0 0 (3) (3)

3.00 p.m. to 3.30 p.m. 0 131 14 14

0 0 (3) (3)

3.30 p.m. to 4.00 p.m. 0 130 0 0 (3) (3)

4.00 p.m. to 6.15 p.m. 0 59 0 0 0 0 (3) (3)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-81

Time Period BioCork2 Indaver

(1) GE

(2)

Port of

Cork (3)

In Out In In In Out In Out

6.15 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. 0 100 65 87 0 0 (3) (3)

After 7.00 p.m. 0 14 3 114 0 400 (3) (3)

Note (1): The Indaver peak is expected to occur during the third quarter of 2019, or later. This would be after peak construction for BioCork2, which is scheduled for September 2018. The Indaver peak would occur during eight weeks of night shift working, during the 31 months construction period. Note (2): The BioCork2 main construction staff arrivals time of 6.00 a.m. to 6.30 a.m. would not coincide with the main construction staff arrivals, for 7.00 a.m., for GE. Similarly, the BioCork2 main construction staff departure times would not coincide with the 7.00 p.m. staff departure time proposed for GE. Note (3): The Ringaskiddy Port Redevelopment EIS and Alterations EIS Traffic and Transportation Chapters and Project Description Chapters do not indicate the number of construction site personnel, nor their site arrival and departure times. It is indicated that this is subject to agreement with Cork County Council. The Alterations EIS indicates that construction heavy vehicle generation would be within an eight hour working day, during the 24 months of construction proposed. On this basis, it is envisaged that the BioCork2 main construction staff arrivals time of 6.00 a.m. to 6.30 a.m. would not coincide with the main construction staff arrivals time for the Port of Cork.

On the basis of the foregoing, the proposed BioCork2 construction staff arrival and departure profiles, revised following consultation with Cork County Council, would significantly mitigate coinciding highest peak construction staff vehicles generation with Indaver, GE and Port of Cork construction. Highest BioCork2 peak staff vehicle generation times would be outside the main traffic peaks. Baseline traffic volumes would be significantly lower during the highest construction staff vehicles generation by BioCork2.

Janssen Sciences are committed to implementing a monitoring programme to continuously review traffic volumes on the N28 arising from the BioCork2 construction programme, in line with the proposed inbound and outbound traffic profile presented in Table 1. A key element of this monitoring programme will be a commitment to engage with other 3rd parties involved in construction projects in Ringaskiddy coinciding with the BioCork2 development. Where necessary, the BioCork2 construction profile will be proactively modified to react to situations where adverse cumulative impact situations arise, or can be predicted to arise, in consultation with other project stakeholders.

Shanbally National School

The Shanbally National School hours are 9.00 a.m. to 2.30 p.m. Infants finish at 1.30 p.m. and all other pupils finish at 2.30 p.m.

Shanbally National School has advised that arrivals for the 2.30 p.m. main collection time, typically, commence at 2.15 p.m., with departures for the 2.30 p.m. finish time continuing, typically, until 2.45 p.m.

There is an off-street car park immediately adjacent to the school, on the west side of the L2492, immediately south of the N28 Shanbally Roundabout.

The proposed BioCork2 construction staff vehicles’ arrival and departure times, revised following consultation with Cork County Council, will not coincide with school start and finish times at Shanbally National School.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-82


The foregoing proposed additional construction mitigation, following consultation with Cork County Council, confirms that both the highest periods and main periods for BioCork2 construction staff arrivals and departures would occur during the morning, afternoon and evening off-peak traffic periods, when baseline traffic volumes would be significantly lower on the N28 at Carr’s Hill, N40 Cork Southern Ring Road and at the N40/N28 Bloomfield Interchange. Construction staff traffic would not have any significant adverse traffic impact on the existing national road network.

All construction parking and compounds will be provided within the site confines. Construction wheel wash facilities will be provided on-site. A specialist road washing and cleaning vehicle will be used regularly each day to maintain public roads, as appropriate. All necessary construction signage and other measures required by Cork County Council will be provided.

An updated Construction Traffic Management Plan will be submitted to Cork County Council, for approval, prior to the commencement of construction. In updating the Plan, any necessary consultation will be made with neighbouring sites, as appropriate, to ensure that any cumulative impact of construction traffic, to and from these sites, is minimized.


Janssen Sciences will continue to operate their operational mobility management measures and incentives for staff, for BioCork2. New future measures and incentives, in accordance with evolving NTA best practice, will be introduced.

6.7 Mobility Management Plan (Updated)

6.7.1 Mobility Management Measures

Janssen Sciences operates the following existing operational mobility management measures:

- Flexitime working for the majority of day personnel to facilitate staff travel outside the morning and evening peak commuter traffic peaks;

- All shift start times and finish times outside the overall Cork morning and evening peak commuter traffic peaks;

- The availability to all employees of Revenue’s approved bike to work scheme;

- The provision of staff changing facilities, lockers and shower facilities;

- The provision of designated, convenient, car parking for staff car pooling;

- The provision of sheltered cycle parking;

- The support of the Janssen Sciences Cycling Club, which is affiliated with Cycling Ireland;

- A staff car pooling website and direct staff communications, to encourage increased staff car pooling and lift sharing;

- Regular information to all staff regarding mobility management, including existing facilities, measures and incentives;

- A dedicated Mobility Manager;

- Liaison with Cork County Council to encourage the provision of improved facilities for cyclists along the existing N28 route, particularly with the proposed new M28 route in place;

- Liaison with Cork County Council and Bus Éireann to encourage the provision of the proposed Green Route to Ringaskiddy and increased public transport services;

- Shift swaps for staff, to facilitate car pooling/lift shares; and

- Free electric charging point for electric/hybrid cars.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-83

6.7.2 Staff Travel Survey (Update)

A staff travel survey was carried out in November 2016 by Janssen Sciences, to update their existing Mobility Management Plan. A previous staff travel survey was carried out in 2014. A total of 255 responses were received from staff.

The staff travel survey included the following:

- Origin of travel to work journey;

- Working hours;

- Travel to work mode;

- Any school linked trip;

- Travel distance and time;

- Any colleague lift;

- Measures that would encourage mode shift from a car; and

- Potential car lift sharing.

6.7.3 Staff Travel Modes

A summary of the existing staff travel modes, recorded in the November 2016 staff travel survey, is provided in Table 6.72, together with a comparison of the 2014 staff travel modes.

Table 6.72: Janssen Sciences Staff Travel to Work Modes

Travel to Work Mode

Travel Mode Share

November

2016 2014

Car Driver 89.0% 96.4%

Car Passenger 4.3% 2.9%

Set-Down Car Passenger 2.4% 0.7%

Bus 2.4% 0.0%

Cycle 1.2% 0.0%

Motorcycle/Scooter 0.4% 0.0%

Taxi Passenger 0.3% 0.0%

The proportion of staff that travel as car drivers has reduced from 96.4% in 2014, to 89.0% in November 2016. The proportion of car pooling/lift sharing and other non-car driver modes have increased since 2014 and the operation of Janssen’s staff mobility management measures and incentives.

The number of staff that has availed of Revenue’s Bike to Work Scheme is 36 (to November 2016). The Cycling Ireland affiliated Janssen Cycling Club has 47 staff members (to November 2016).

6.7.4 School Linked Trip

A total of 27.3% of day staff have a school linked trip as part of the journey to and/or from work. The main shift start/finish times do not facilitate school linked trips for shift staff. A summary of the recorded school linked trip proportions is provided in Table 6.73.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-84

Table 6.73: Janssen Sciences Staff With School/Crèche Linked Trip

Staff With School Linked Trip

Staff Share

November

2016 2014

Shift Staff 0.0% 0.0%

Day Staff 27.3% 23.6%

6.7.5 Car Lift Sharing

As summarised in Table 6.74, 3.5% of staff provide a car lift to a colleague on most days. However, a significantly higher 10.1% of staff provide a lift to a colleague occasionally.

Table 6.74: Janssen Sciences Staff Car Lift Sharing

Colleague Lift to Work

Frequency

Colleague Lift to Work Share

November 2016 2014

Most Days 3.5% 1.3%

Occasionally 10.1% 13.1%

6.7.6 Potential Mode Shifts

A summary of the measures identified by staff to encourage them to use an alternative mode to a car, for their travel to work, is provided in Table 6.75.

Table 6.75: Measures for Potential Travel Mode Shift from Private Car

Basis for Potential Travel Mode Shift Staff Share

More Direct Bus Routes 28.6%

More Frequent Bus Services 22.4%

Cycle Lanes 22.0%

Shower/Locker Facilities 21.6%

Preferential Car Pool Parking 13.3%

More Convenient Bus Stops 15.7%

Free Secure Bicycle Storage 9.8%

The staff responses also included the following multiple specific comments in respect of existing issues:

- There is no direct bus route from Cork city. The existing route is circuitous, via Monkstown and Passage;

- The journey time of the existing circuitous bus route is excessive;

- The walking distance between the building and bus stops is excessive;

- There is no bus service from the nearest town, Carrigaline;

- Cyclists are prohibited at the N40 Jack Lynch Tunnel;

- The N28 at Carr’s Hill has no refuge for cyclists;

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-85

- There is no refuge for cyclists on the R613 from Carrigaline;

- The palm tree on the traffic island at Shannonpark Roundabout obstructs visibility, resulting in delays;

- No continuous footways along N28;

- No continuous footways along R613 from Carrigaline;

- Car required for variable day work start/finish times;

- Car required for crèche linked trips;

- Car required for school linked trips; and

- Unavailable for car pooling due to crèche and school linked trips.

The staff responses also included the following specific comments in respect of measures to encourage alternative travel modes to a car:

- More direct access for cyclists and pedestrians, via N28 access junction, to reduce travel journey distances;

- Enforce car pooling spaces;

- Increase staff locker facilities;

- Free electric charging point for electric/hybrid cars; and

- Liaison with other local major employers for coordinated lobbying of local authorities to provide improved facilities for cyclists.

6.7.7 Potential Car Lift Sharing

As summarised in Table 6.76, over half of staff indicated that they would participate in a car lift sharing scheme.

Table 6.76: Car Lift Share Participation Availability Indicated by Staff

Staff Car Pool/Lift Share Participation Staff Share

Staff Available to Participate 53%

Staff Not Available to Participate 47%

Parking Demand

The expected Janssen Sciences peak car parking demand, with the proposed BioCork2 expansion in place, is set out in Table 6.77.

Table 6.77: Janssen Sciences Peak Operational Car Parking Demand with BioCork2

Staff Working

Hours/Shift

Staff

Numbers

Peak Staff

Site

Population

Peak

Visitors

Population

Car

Driver

Mode

Share

Peak Car

Parking

Demand (1)

Total Car

Parking

Supply

(Spaces)

Standard flexitime day 07.00/08.30 – 17.00

431 431

80 0.89 (671 x

0.89) + 80 = 678

443 permitted +

325(2) proposed =

768

4 shift 07:00 – 19:00 85 85/2 (4) = 43

4 shift 19:00 – 07:00 85 0

2 shift 07:00 – 15:00

(5 Day week) 55 55

2 shift 15:00 – 23:00 55 55

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-86

Staff Working

Hours/Shift

Staff

Numbers

Peak Staff

Site

Population

Peak

Visitors

Population

Car

Driver

Mode

Share

Peak Car

Parking

Demand (1)

Total Car

Parking

Supply

(Spaces)

(5 Day week)

2 shift 07:00 – 19:00

(7 day Week) 92 92/2 (4) = 46

5 shift 07:00 – 19:00(1) 41 41

5 shift 19:00 – 07:00(1) 41 0

Total 885 671 80 0.89 678 (1)

768 (3)

Note (1): Peak site population occurs at 15:00 p.m.

Note (2): Includes segregated provision (+12%) for site shift change over.

Note (3): Maximum car parking standard (CDP) for total site (including BioCork2 expansion) based on floor area = 1,325

Note (4): Not all staff working a specified shift cycle are on site at the same time for the same days/hours. For 50% on-site working/50% not on-site working, the total staff for the shift cycle/2 = site population for that shift cycle.

The proposed BioCork2 parking and Cork County Development Plan parking standards are detailed in Table 6.63, in Section 6.5.

Proposed Facilities

The BioCork2 expansion includes male, female and disabled showers and lockers.

Travel Mode Share Targets

Janssen Sciences will continue to operate their operational mobility management measures and incentives for staff, for BioCork2. New future measures and incentives, in accordance with evolving NTA best practice, will be introduced.

Increased Janssen Sciences’ operational staff numbers will increase coinciding staff home areas and increase coinciding staff home/work travel routes, which will increase potential Janssen Sciences’ staff lift sharing, and continue to reduce the modal shift away from car driving. The modal shift away from car driving for Janssen Sciences’ operational staff, from 2014 to November 2016, is 7.7%.

The travel mode share targets for Janssen Sciences’ staff are detailed in Table 6.78.

Table 6.78: Staff Travel Mode Share Targets

Travel to Work Mode Travel Mode Share

November 2016 Pre 2023/M28 Post 2023/M28 (1)

Car Driver 89.0% 86.5% 75.0%

Car Passenger 4.3% 6.0% 9.5%

Set-Down Car Passenger 2.4% 2.4% 2.5%

Cycle 1.2% 2.0% 8.0%

Bus 2.4% 2.5% 4.0%

Motorcycle/Scooter 0.4% 0.6% 1.0%

Note: (1): Subject to the support of medium/longer term enhancement of sustainable transport links by Cork County Council, Bus Éireann and the National Transport Authority (NTA).

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 6-87

Plan Monitoring

The Mobility Management Plan will be reviewed in accordance with Cork County Council’s requirements. Staff travel mode shares will be surveyed and monitored in accordance with Cork County Council’s requirements.



On the basis of the EPA EIS Guidelines, the construction residual impact of the proposed BioCork2 expansion will be slight to moderate and short-term.


On the basis of the EPA EIS Guidelines, the operational residual impact of the proposed BioCork2 expansion will be not significant to slight and long-term.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-1

7 Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology

7.1 Introduction

This chapter assesses and evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed development on the soil, geological and hydrogeological aspects of the site and surrounding area. This chapter should be read in conjunction with the Chapter 2 (Description of the Proposed Development), Chapter 8 (Flora and Fauna), Chapter 9 (Water and Wastewater) and Chapter 12 (Waste Management) of this EIAR.


This assessment has been prepared from both desktop interpretations of existing information and on available investigation data for the site. The assessment has been completed having due regard to the following best practice guidelines:

- IGI (2013), Guidelines for the Preparation of Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology Chapters of Environmental Impact Statements, IGI, 2013

- National Roads Authority (now referred to as Transport Infrastructure Ireland) (NRA) (2008), Guidelines and Procedures for Assessment and Treatment of Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology for National Road Schemes, 2008

The assessment of the potential impact of the proposed development on soils, geology and hydrogeology was carried out having due regard to the guidance documents issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (relevant guidance documents outlined in Section 1.7.2 of Chapter 1) and the above referenced IGI’s 2013 guidance document.

The rating of potential environmental impacts on the soils, geological and hydrogeological environment is based on the EPA matrix presented in Table 1.5 which takes account of the quality, significance, duration and type of impact characteristic identified. The NRA criteria for rating the magnitude and significance of impacts at EIA stage on the soils, geological and hydrogeological related attributes are also relevant in determining impact assessment and are presented in Table 7.1.

The principal attributes (and impacts) to be assessed include the following:

- Geological heritage sites in the vicinity of the site;

- Landfills, industrial sites in the vicinity of the site and the potential risk of encountering contaminated ground from previous site use;

- The extent of topsoil and subsoil cover and the potential use of this material on site or the requirement to remove it off-site as waste for disposal or recovery;

- High yielding water supply springs/ wells in the vicinity of the site to within a 2 Km radius and the potential for increased risk presented by the proposed development;

- Classification (regionally important, locally important) and extent of aquifers underlying the proposed development and increased risks presented to them by construction and operation related activities. Examples include the removal of subsoil cover, drawdown in water levels and change in groundwater quality;

- Natural hydrogeological/ karst features in the area and potential for increased risk presented by the activities at the proposed development site; and

- Groundwater-fed ecosystems and the increased risk presented by the construction and operational phases of the proposed development both spatially and temporally.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-2

Table 7.1 Criteria for rating impact magnitude at EIS (now referred to as EIAR) stage – Estimation of magnitude of impact on soils, geology and hydrogeology attribute (NRA, 2008)

Magnitude of Impact

Criteria Typical Examples*

Large Adverse

Results in loss of attribute and /or

quality and integrity of attribute

- Irreversible loss of high proportion of local high fertility soils

- Removal of entirety of geological heritage feature

- Requirement to excavate and replace high proportion of peat, organic soils and/or soft mineral soils

- Removal of large proportion of aquifer

- Changes to aquifer or unsaturated zone resulting in extensive change to existing water supply springs and wells, river base flow or ecosystems

- Potential high risk of pollution to groundwater from routine run-off#

- Calculated risk of serious pollution incident >2% annually$

Moderate Adverse

Results in impact on integrity of

attribute or loss of part of attribute

- Irreversible loss of moderate proportion of local high fertility soils

- Removal of part of geological heritage feature

- Requirement to excavate and replace moderate proportion of peat, organic soils &/or soft mineral soils

- Removal of moderate proportion of aquifer

- Changes to aquifer or unsaturated zone resulting in moderate change to existing water supply springs and wells, river base flow or ecosystems

- Potential medium risk of pollution to groundwater from routine run- off 2

- Calculated risk of serious pollution incident >1% annually$

Small Adverse

Results in minor impact on integrity of attribute or loss

of small part of attribute

- Irreversible loss of small proportion of local high fertility soils and/or high proportion of local low fertility soils

- Removal of small part of geological heritage feature

- Requirement to excavate and replace small proportion of peat, organic soils and/or soft mineral soils

- Removal of small proportion of aquifer

- Changes to aquifer or unsaturated zone resulting in minor change to water supply springs and wells, river base flow or ecosystems

- Potential low risk of pollution to groundwater from routine run-off #

- Calculated risk of serious pollution incident >0.5% annually$

Negligible

Results in an impact on attribute but of insufficient

magnitude to affect either use

or integrity

- No measurable changes in attributes

- Calculated risk of serious pollution incident <0.5% annually$

* Additional Examples are provided in the NRA Guidance Document – Box 5.1 to 5.3 # Refer to Method C, Annex 1, Annex 1 of HA216/06 – Design Manual for Roads and Bridges $ Refer to Appendix B3 / Annex 1, Method D, Annex 1 of HA216/06 – Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-3

7.2.1 Information Sources

Sources of information consulted during the desktop interpretation include:

- Geological Survey of Ireland (GSI) on-line mapping – Bedrock Geology, Aquifers, Geo-hazard Database, Geological Heritage Sites, minerals and Karst Database9.

- EPA Geoportal Maps – soils, subsoils, water quality10 .

- EIS for Infrastructural Development Works on IDA Lands at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, PM Group, May 2004

- EIS for Centocor Biologics Ltd. for Proposed BioMedicines Facility at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork, PM Group, April 2005

- EIS for Janssen Biologics (Ireland) for Proposed Wind Turbine at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork, ARUP, April 2011

Information pertaining to site specific soil, geology and hydrogeology was obtained from the following site investigations:

- 1997 Site Investigation: As part of a due diligence assessment Dames and Moore (now AECOM) conducted a geotechnical investigation at the site in 1997. As part of these works 10 trial pits were dug and five groundwater monitoring wells were bored. Details of this site investigation are provided in Appendix C.1

- 2005 Site Investigation: This site investigation work performed by IGSL Ltd. was carried out in 2005 as part of the EIS for the existing facility. This site investigation involved the digging of thirty trial pits, one large trial excavation, six rotary core boreholes and four ground water monitoring wells. Further details on these site investigations are provided in Appendix C.1.

- 2006 Site Investigation: An intrusive investigation was also carried out by IGSL in June 2006 to determine the composition and structure of the fill materials for the landscape embankments around the northeast and eastern perimeter of the site.

- 2016/2017 Site Investigation: A geotechnical investigation was carried out by IGSL covering the period December 2016 to February 2017 (herein referred to as IGSL Dec. 2016 site investigation). The site investigation covered the areas of the proposed development and the areas covered by the site development planning permission (planning reference no. 16/07150). The works involved rotary core (8 No.), trial pits (60 No.), soakaway testing (1 No.), plate bearing tests (5 No.) and a geophysical survey (performed by Apex). Refer to Figure C.3 in Appendix C.2 for a drawing showing the approximation location of the site investigation works.


The characteristics of the proposed development with regard to the soil, geological and hydrogeological environment are outlined in the sub-sections to follow.


The earthworks aspects of the proposed development will include the following;

- Stripping of topsoil from the main site works areas and other areas of the site on which car-parking and other infrastructure such as access and haul roads, will be developed

- Excavation of approximately 20,000 m3 of material from the following areas to create a level base (to the required formation levels) for the proposed buildings:

- WWTP Expansion (north east of existing WWTP) area 9 GSI, (2016), Online Mapping (accessed Nov 2016). Available at: http://www.gsi.ie/Mapping.htm 10 EPA Geoportal database (2016) Groundwater Quality, Soils and Subsoils Database. Available at: http://gis.epa.ie/

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-4

- New Lab/Administration Building area (south of the existing Lab/Admin Building) - Warehouse Expansion area (south of the existing Warehouse) - New Waste Holding Building area (south of the existing Utility Yard) - Access roads

- A process of “cut and fill” will be employed within the site so that the excavated material will be reused in landscaping and in a berm located to the west of the new car park area

- Installation of capping layers and geotextile (non-woven, 1000 gauge) for the new production building area, ancillary buildings and paved areas together roads. It is currently estimated that approximately 8,000 m3 of fill material will be required. The installation of the geotextile may not be required in certain areas but this will be confirmed during the excavation works.

Limited dewatering is expected as the excavations levels are above the water table levels. Foul sewer drainage and surface water drainage from the construction offices will connect to the existing equivalent site systems.


Underground foul sewer, process waste drainage lines will be installed for the proposed new Production Building, Warehouse Building/Expansion and Lab/Admin Building and connect to the site’s existing foul sewer and process drainage systems respectively. There will be no discharges to the ground.

Process waste from the new production building will be pumped onwards to the WWTP. The underground external pumped line will be double contained polypropylene rising main. Underground process waste drainage within the building will be double contained having a material of construction of either stainless steel or fibre reinforced vinyl-ester resin. The process waste drainage within the other buildings will be either double contained stainless steel or polypropylene.

In terms of surface water drainage works:

- A new surface water drainage collection system will be installed around the two new cark parks and connect via an oil interceptor to the site’s existing surface drainage system

- Similarly, new surface water drainage collection systems will be installed around the two new concrete yard areas and will connect to the existing storm water drainage to the retention pond via a petrol interceptor

- Rainwater run-off from the new buildings will connect to the existing surface water drainage systems


7.4.1 Soils and Sub-Soils

The EPA and Teagasc Soil map, viewable on the GSI Spatial Resources Viewer11 indicates that the soils underlying the site comprises primarily of Acid Brown Earths/ Brown Podzolics (Figure 7.1).

A description of these soil types is presented as follows:

Brown Earths – These soils are mature, well drained soils with a uniform, brown soil horizon showing high fertility

Brown Podzolics – Podzols are poor, acidic soils formed in hill and mountain areas. Podzols are grey in colour and low in humus. Brown podzols are less depleted, with a good mix of mineral and organic matter in the surface layer.

11 Teagasc & EPA Soils (2015), GSI Spatial Resources Viewer, accessed Nov 2016, http://www.gsi.ie/Mapping.htm

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-5

Site Specific Soils

The soils are interpreted as periglacial deposits (silty/clayey gravel). During the 1997 investigation it was noted that soil thickness across the site varied between less than 1m thick in the north of the site and 19m thick in the extreme south-west of the 1997 study area (refer to Figure C.1 in Appendix C.1). Soils are considerably thinner across the remainder of the site, being generally less than 2.5m thick. Under the northern half of the site soils are typically less than 1m thick. It should be noted that the area to the south-west with the thickest soil depth, is adjacent to the ESB Barnahely sub-station and is not within the Janssen Sciences site boundary.

Figure 7.1 Soil underlying and surrounding the site

Subsoil types are relatively uniform across the site. The 2005 IGSL investigation indicated that the superficial soil covering at the site consists of a reddish brown, sandy gravelly clay. The EPA and Teagasc Subsoil map12 indicates the subsoils underlying the site comprises primarily of sandstone till (Devonian) (Figure 7.2).

The clay is classed as a lightly over-consolidated boulder clay or glacial till. This is broadly consistent with the findings of the 1997 study. Where subsoils are very thin (less than 0.5m thick), only brown sandy, angular gravel soil (weathered shale bedrock) is present above the competent bedrock. In many of the trail pit locations as part of the IGSL Dec 2016 site investigation (refer to Figure C.3 in Appendix C.2) a relatively thin layer of brown and grey brown sandy gravelly clay with low cobble content was encountered in the topsoil or made ground.

12 Teagasc & EPA Soils (2015), GSI Spatial Resources Viewer, accessed Apr 2017, http://www.gsi.ie/Mapping.htm

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-6

Figure 7.2 Subsoil underlying and surrounding the site

In the 2005 trial pits, boulder clay material was thickest in the more elevated regions of the site, up to 1.3 m thick in places. The boulder clay thins to the south-east, where topsoil (0.1 m to 0.5 m thick) was noted lying directly on top of variably weathered rock at two locations.

The geophysical survey aspect of the IGSL Dec 2016 site investigation (performed by Apex Geoservices Ltd.) established the following stratification for those areas of the site on which the new buildings for the proposed development will be located (from surface downwards):

- Layer 1 comprising made ground and soft-firm/loose-medium dense overburden which has been interpreted as extending to a depth of 0.4 - 3.2 mBGL (meters below ground level) and an average depth of 1.1 mBGL. This material includes some completely weathered bedrock.

- Layer 2 comprising completely-highly weathered bedrock which should be rippable with the appropriate excavator. The bottom of Layer 2 has been interpreted to extend to a depth of 0.5 – 8.8 mBGL, with an average depth of 4.2 mBGL.

- Layer 3 comprising slightly weathered fresh bedrock which will require breaking/blasting upon excavation. Bedrock comprises mudstone, siltstone and sandstone which are likely to be dipping to the South.

Made Ground

As part of the initial site development, landscaped earth berms were created at the north-eastern boundary of the site to provide screening of the site thereby reducing the visual impact. The 2006 IGSL site investigation determined the composition and structure of the fill materials used for these berms.

During the IGSL Dec 2016 site investigation, made ground/fill was encountered in many of the trial pit locations Referring to the IGSL report13 the fill encountered was grouped into two main categories. The first category of made ground, which was clay or silt dominant material, was “found

13 IGSL (2017), Geotechnical Interpretative Report, Project No. 19750, Rev 1, March 2017

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-7

beneath an initial cover of topsoil in trial pits to the south of the site near an undulating landscaped area and to a lesser degree on a large flat grassed area to the north of the site”. The second category was re-worked granular material (considered to be variably weathered upper bedrock) which was “present in some of the trial pits found to the south, again located within the landscaped areas” At the proposed new Production Building area, granular sub-base was encountered.

As part of the site development works planning application (planning ref. no. 16/07150) the excavated soil, subsoil and bedrock (approximately 91,000 m3) will be used to create landscaped berms to the north of the site.

Analytical Results

During the 1997 investigation ten soil samples were analysed from fifteen trial pits. Samples were analysed for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), Semi Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOC), alcohols, Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB), organohalogens, acid herbicides, and metals (cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, zinc). URS (formerly Dames and Moore), in describing the results in the 2005 EIS, indicated that “None of the parameters tested were detected at elevated concentrations in any of the trail pits samples collected”.

7.4.2 Bedrock Geology

Figure 7.3 shows the underlying bedrock geology of the site and surrounding area based on GSI data.

Figure 7.3 Bedrock geology around the site

Regional Geology

The regional geology of the Ringaskiddy area comprises folded and faulted Lower Carboniferous (Dinantian) limestones, sandstones and mudstones, which are divided into:

- Waulsortian Limestones: Consists of massive fine grained limestones;

- Kinsale Formation: Consists of interbedded sandstones and mudstones

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-8

Fault lines are clearly indicated on the geological maps but these are considered inactive. Bedrock close to the mapped faults is likely to be more heavily fractured.

Site Specific Geology

The Janssen Sciences site occupies the centre of an anticlinal fold, which strikes east-west through the Ringaskiddy area. The structure is complicated by a number of east-west and north-south trending faults, which subdivide the bedrock into numerous fault blocks of approximately 1 km2 in extent. The site itself is underlain by rocks of the Cuskinny Member, which is part of the Kinsale Formation. The Cuskinny Member is described as being composed of thinly inter-bedded fine sandstones and mudstones, including relatively thick (0-2.65m), sometimes conglomeratic, sandstone units (54%), alternating with thin sandstone-laminated mudstones (3%), massive mudstones (8%) and heterolithic sediments (35%).

The Cuskinny Member crops out along the ridge of higher ground forming the site and the Waulsortian Limestones underlie the flanks of the hill to the north and the south of the site. The contacts with the limestones to the north and south are mapped as east-west faults and roughly correspond with the northern and southern boundaries of the site. North-south faults are also mapped at the eastern and western margins of the site, meaning that the site is essentially located on a single, fault-bounded block of sandstone/mudstone bedrock.

Geological Heritage

The Geological Survey of Ireland (GSI) online heritage database was consulted (www.gsi.ie/mapping). There are no recorded sites on the site. The nearest geological heritage features are as follows:

- Ringaskiddy Golden Rock: 1.2 km (approx.) from nearest site boundary point. This feature, which is located along the coast section near Ringaskiddy, has the designation of County Geological Site. This designation is due to it being a large boulder of exposed limestone.

- Lough Beg Section: 1.5 km (approx.) from nearest site boundary point. It is a low mound of exposed limestone that the sea has cut a cliff-section across. This feature has the designation of County Geological Site and may be recommended for a geological NHA.

Karst Features

The Karst database held by the GSI was consulted. This database holds records of locations and types of reported Karst features. The GSI database shows no record of any karst features at the subject site. Nearby recorded Karst features are:

- A borehole approx. 0.3km north-east of the site boundary on the Pfizer Ringaskiddy site, in which karsification was observed. The National karst database number for this feature is 1705NWK002

- Shanbally Cave (1705NWK002) approx. 0.6 km north-west of the site boundary

Economic Geology

The Extractive Industry Register14 and the GSI mineral database15 was consulted to determine whether there were any mineral sites close to the proposed development. The nearest quarry is Ballygarvan Sandstone Quarry, 7km to the west of the site.

Geo-hazards

14 EPA, Extractive Industries Register, (date of last update not indicated), accessed Nov 2016. Available at: http://watermaps.wfdireland.ie/ExtractiveFacilities/Default.aspx 15 GSI Active Minerals database (2014) , accessed Nov 2016. Available at: http://dcenr.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=de18ea08ecd344b88c52b65b55fd9abb#visualize

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-9

According to the GSI web database, the nearest landslide occurred approximately 2km north-west of site in the townland of Ballymot. The soil type and bedrock type at the landslide location are different to that of the site.

Radon

Radon concentrations for the area where the site is located are not considered to be high with less than 5 to 10% of homes in the area16 exceeding the National reference level of 200 Becquerel (Bq)/m3.

7.4.3 Hydrogeology

Aquifer Classification

Aquifers are underground layers of rock which contain water and which are capable of yielding it to surface waters such as streams and rivers and groundwater-fed ecosystems. Reference to the GSI National Bedrock Aquifer Map17 (see Figure 7.4) for the site indicates that it is underlain by a ‘locally important” bedrock aquifer. There is no gravel aquifer present in the site area.

Figure 7.4 Bedrock Aquifer Map

Groundwater Flow Direction

From the site’s existing groundwater monitoring wells (refer to Figure 7.7) and also taking into account the topography of the site, the most recent groundwater contour map was created by Verdé (who perform the biannual monitoring of groundwater for Janssen Science’ IE Licence requirements) and is reproduced in Figure 7.5. The interpreted flow direction is a general easterly to south easterly direction.

16 EPA Radon Map (date of last update not indicated), accessed Nov 2016. Available at: http://gis.epa.ie/Envision 17 GSI Bedrock and Gravel Aquifers Spatial Map (2016), accessed Nov 2016, http://www.gsi.ie/Mapping.htm

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-10

Figure 7.5 Groundwater Flow Directions (figure reproduced from Verdé Mar’17 groundwater monitoring report)

Groundwater Vulnerability

Vulnerability is defined by the GSI as the intrinsic geological and hydrogeological characteristics that determine the ease with which groundwater may be contaminated by human activities. The GSI uses four groundwater vulnerability categories - Extreme, High, Moderate and Low - in the assessment of risk to groundwater. The GSI has classified the majority of the site as High, as shown in Figure 7.6, with certain areas to the north and east of the site classified as Extreme.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-11

Figure 7.6 Groundwater Vulnerability

Borehole log information for the site’s four groundwater monitoring wells (shown in Figure 7.7) , which is shown in Table 7.2, indicate the depth of weathered bedrock varies from 1.8 to 2.4 mBGL indicating an extreme vulnerability rating.

Table 7.2 Groundwater monitoring wells borehole log information18

Borehole Gravelly Clay Overburden

Weathered Bedrock

Competent Siltstone Bedrock

Total Borehole Depth

AGW1 0 – 1.9 m 1.9 – 14.9 m 14.9 m 25 m

AGW2 0 – 2.1 m 2.1 – 7.0 m 11.3 m 25m

AGW3 0 – 2.4 m 2.4 – 5.5 m 10.7 m 25m

AGW4 0 – 1.8 m 1.8 – 6.5 m 13.6 m 25m

Therefore groundwater at the site is considered to be extremely vulnerable to contamination due to the generally thin subsoil depth, with the exception of the locally thick subsoils in the south-western corner.

There are no Source Protection Areas on, or in the immediate vicinity of, the site, according to the GSI national database. A Source Protection Area is a land area that contributes groundwater to a borehole or spring.

18 Data obtained from Verdé report “Biannual IE Groundwater Monitoring Report for Janssen Biologics (Ireland), Barnahely, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork”, October 2016.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-12

Groundwater Quality

Statutory Instrument No. 9 of 2010, EC Environmental Objectives (Groundwater) Regulations 2010, (as amended) gives effect to the criteria and standards to be used for classifying groundwater in accordance with the requirements of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The current status of the groundwater under the site is classified as “Good” according to the WFD19.

Condition 6.1 of the site’s Industrial Emissions Licence (Licence No. P0778-01) requires the biannual monitoring of groundwater at the site’s four licenced monitoring wells (refer to Figure 7.7). As part of the site development works planning application (planning ref. no. 16/07150) groundwater monitoring well AGW01 was relocated to an equivalent monitoring location further north west of the current location.

There was a historical exceedance of the nitrate standard value of 37.5 mg/l in 2008 which was thought to be attributed to surrounding agricultural activities. A decreasing nitrate concentration level has since been observed in the monitoring results

The main conclusions from the biannual 2015 and 2016 groundwater monitoring reports, including the latest March 2017 report, are that “groundwater monitoring round is generally very good and consistent with previous rounds with no significant exceedance of the relevant groundwater quality standards” and that “no physical evidence of contamination was detected in any of the four groundwater monitoring wells sampled”

Slightly acidic pH groundwater, below the EPA Interim Guideline Value (IGV)20 and Parametric Value (PV) of EU (Drinking Water) Regulations SI No. 122 of 2014, are frequently observed. These occurrences are explained in the monitoring reports as follows: “These slightly acidic groundwater conditions are generally similar to the previous monitoring rounds and likely to be naturally related to the bedrock aquifer chemistry. Information from the Geological Survey of Ireland (GSI) shows that there are a number of groundwater sources in South Cork where the pH values are below 6.0 and thought to be related to the geological unit they are abstracting from, including the Kinsale formation that underlies the Janssen Sciences site”

Groundwater Abstraction

The site is located within the Ringaskiddy groundwater body (EU code IE_SW_G_072). There are no public supply source protection areas within a 2km radius of the site. The GSI database on groundwater wells and springs21 was consulted to identify nearby wells within an approximate radius of 2km. The wells identified, along with yield data (where available) are listed in Table C.1 in Appendix C.3. It should be noted that this database is not comprehensive and the location of records have different precisions depending upon the source of data.

There is an onsite groundwater abstraction well (PW1), as shown in Figure 7.7 that is occasionally used for supplementing the site’s cooling water.

19 SWRBD (2010). SWRBD Management Plan, 2009-2015 , Available at: http://www.wfdireland.ie/docs/1_River%20Basin%20Management%20Plans%202009%20-%202015/SWRBD%20RBMP%202010/ 20 EPA (2003). Towards setting guideline values for protection of groundwater in Ireland – Interim Report 21 GSI Database on groundwater wells and springs. Available at: http://spatial.dcenr.gov.ie/GeologicalSurvey/Groundwater/ (accessed Mar 2017). Note that this datebase is not comprehensive

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-13

Figure 7.7 Location of Groundwater Monitoring Wells (AGW01 to AWG04) and Abstraction Well (PW1) (also shows relocated monitoring well AGW01 as approved by the EPA in 2017) (Background Image source: Google Earth)

7.4.4 Conceptual Site Model

A CSM represents the characteristics of a site in diagrammatic form and shows the possible relationships between potential contaminants (source), pathways (pollutant linkages) and receptors.

The Conceptual Site Model (CSM) presented in Figure 7.8 shows a schematic cross section of the site and was produced by Verdé in 2015. It summarises the soil, bedrock and hydrogeology characteristics of the site as discussed in the previous sections.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-14

Figure 7.8 Conceptual Site Model (produced by Verdé – taken from Mar’17 groundwater monitoring report) (NOTES: (1) Kinsale formation Sandstone and Mudstone is known as Cuskinny Member)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-15

7.4.5 Rating of Importance of Soil, Geological and Hydrogeological Features

Based on the NRA criteria for rating site importance of soil and geology attributes, the site is rated as Medium importance based on the assessment that the attribute has a medium quality significance or value on a local scale.

As discussed in Section 7.4.3, the bedrock aquifer underlying the site is classified as “Locally Important” and is therefore rated as Medium Importance, based upon the NRA importance criteria for hydrogeology attributes.


The potential impacts to soils, geology and hydrogeology from the proposed development are considered in this section


Excavation and Infilling

During the construction phase of the project, soil, subsoils and bedrock will be excavated to facilitate the levelling of the area adjacent to the existing WWTP. These excavations will result in unavoidable soil and bedrock removal. The excavated material will be reused for the creation of new boundary landscaped berm along the northern boundary. No excavated material will be sent off-site. The IGSL Dec. 2016 site investigation factual report indicates that upper bedrock materials could be used in landscape berms, with any low strength soils (soft or soft to firm) being excluded.

The potential impact is permanent, local, Imperceptible-Negative.

Fuel and Chemical Handling, Transport and Storage

As the project site is generally located within the area of high to extreme aquifer vulnerability there is a potential that any fuels or chemicals used during construction, if inappropriately handled or stored or lost through spillages (including fuel leakage from construction machinery) could potentially have a degree of impact on both soil quality and groundwater quality in the area.

Stockpiles Surface Run-off

Runoff containing large amounts of silt could migrate vertically and impact on the groundwater quality underlying the site. Silt water can arise from exposed ground and soil stockpiles (prior to reinstatement).

This potential impact is temporary, local – Slight-Negative.

Dewatering

Limited localised dewatering may be required and if inappropriately handled it has the potential to discharge silty water into the existing storm water drainage system onsite causing blockages. As any dewatering will be limited in nature no impact upon the underlying ground water is anticipated. This potential impact is temporary, local, Imperceptible– Neutral.

Concrete

Concrete (specifically, the cement component) is highly alkaline and any spillage which migrates though sub-soils would be harmful to groundwater quality.

These potential impacts are temporary, local, Moderate/Slight-Negative.

Source of Aggregates

If inappropriately sourced aggregates are used for capping material they could potentially be contaminated. This would have a negative impact on both on soil quality and groundwater quality in the area.

This potential impact is permanent, local – Slight-Negative.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-16


The operational phase of the proposed development is unlikely to have any impacts on the local geological / hydrogeological environment due to the environmental design considerations that will be considered during the detailed design.

The construction of the hard standing area for the proposed new car parks, yards and sections of road and will result in an increase in the proportion of rainfall that forms surface water runoff. This will result in an imperceptible reduction in the amount of rainfall recharge to groundwater below the site.

Any accidental emissions of fuel or oil from the car-park areas and the two new concrete yard areas could result could cause contamination if the emissions enter the soil and groundwater environment.

In relation to the operational phase, the potential impact on the soils, geology and hydrogeology is long term local – Imperceptible-Negative.


No significant cumulative effects are predicted on soils, geology or hydrogeology.



The following mitigation measures are proposed:

Excavation and Infilling

Although there is no evidence of contamination in the area, excavated materials are to be visually assessed for signs of possible contamination such as staining or strong odours. Should any unusual staining or odour be noticed, samples of this soil will be analysed for the presence of possible contaminants in order to ensure that historical pollution of the soil has not occurred. Should it be determined that any of the soil excavated is contaminated, this will be dealt with appropriately as per the Waste Management Act of 1996 (as amended) and associated Regulations.

Fuel and Chemical Handling, Transport and Storage

Due to the high to extreme vulnerability of the local bedrock aquifer it will be necessary to adopt the following mitigation measures in order to prevent any spillages to ground of fuels and to prevent any consequent groundwater quality impacts;

- Designate a bunded refuelling area at the contractor’s compounds away from the site drainage infrastructure. Fuel leaks identified in any equipment will be reported and fixed as soon as possible

- Designate an area within the contractor’s compound for routine plant maintenance. Plant maintenance is to be on hard-standing and away from the site drainage infrastructure. Regular checks will be carried out on machinery hydraulics

- Spill kit facilities will be provided at the fuelling area and any other relevant area, in order to provide for any accidental releases or spillages

- Any used spill kit materials will be disposed of using a hazardous waste contractor

- Where mobile fuel bowsers are used on the site the following measures will be noted:

- Any flexible pipes including delivery, tap, pump or valve must be fitted with a lock and locked shut when not in use

- Each bowser will carry a spill kit and each bowser operator must have spill response training

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-17

- Portable generators will be placed on suitable drip trays and any spillages should be cleaned up using spill kit materials

In the case of drummed fuels or other chemicals which may be used during construction the following measures will be adopted (also relevant to waste containers):

- Securely store and bund all containers that contain potential pollutants e.g. fuel oils ,waste chemicals in a dedicated internally bunded chemical storage cabinet unit or inside a concrete bunded area

- Label containers clearly so that appropriate remedial action can be taken in the event of a spillage

- Avoid storing drums tightly against each other. Store drums in a manner which allows them to be easily checked for leaks

- Before moving a drum check that the bung is secure

- Ensure that only drums which are UN approved and in good condition are allowed on to the site or reused within the site

- When moving drums from the bunded storage area a suitably sized spill pallet must be used for containing any spillages during transit

- Drums will be unloaded and loaded only by competent trained personnel using forklifts with drum grab attachments

- Leaking or empty drums will be removed from the site immediately. All wastes will be correctly disposed of through a registered waste disposal contractor or facility.

Stockpiles Surface Runoff

In order to minimise the potential environmental impact of stockpiles it will be necessary to adopt the following mitigation measures:

- Once soil is excavated, it is to be transported directly to the area of the proposed landscaped earth berm west of the proposed car-park area. This area is free of any watercourses.

- Stock piles are to be shaped at regular intervals to ensure appropriate compaction and gradient formation to prevent soil creep. Unstable areas will be protected until they have stabilised and/or vegetation has established. No materials or spoil produced during construction are to be stockpiled within or adjacent to site drainage channels

- A temporary swale will be constructed at the base of the proposed berm, for the purpose of capturing any silt-contented run-off from the berms during construction. This swale will be inspected regularly and will remain in place up until the newly formed berm and associated soil have stabilised/revegetated

- Adequate environmental protection measures, french drains, as appropriate, will be used in the control of suspended solids run-off during construction, in order to avoid any impacts on the current drainage infrastructures

Dewatering

For any dewatering operations the water is to be pumped to a settling tank or equivalent to allow any suspended solids to settle out before the water is discharged to the surface water drainage system on site

Concrete

- The majority of concrete will be mixed off–site and imported to the site. The pouring of concrete will take place within designated areas to prevent concrete runoff into the soil/groundwater media

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 7-18

- Wet concrete and cement will be adequately controlled so as to reduce any risk of such material entering the local drainage infrastructure. This will include the location of concrete mixing facilities (if required for small quantities of concrete) away from the associated site drainage infrastructure and consideration of weather conditions (e.g. dry weather), allowing for sufficient curing of concrete

- Wash down and washout of concrete transporting vehicles will take place within a designated area of the site

- Regular inspections are to be carried out on concrete transporting vehicles to check for defects

- Lime or cement, will be stored internally away from rainfall or other water or liquid sources.

Sources of Aggregates for the Project

The project contract and procurement procedures will be developed to ensure that all aggregates are sourced from reputable sources. All potential suppliers will be vetted for the following criteria:

- Environmental management status

- Regulatory and legal compliance status of the company

- Only suppliers who are in compliance with the relevant planning requirements should be considered for inclusion in the project.


Foul and Process Waste

- The underground foul drainage and process waste associated with the new buildings will be connected to the site’s drainage systems, which in turn are connected to the site’s WWTP

- The underground process waste drainage will be double-contained

- Existing Janssen Sciences site procedure DS-SOP-4741 on groundwater monitoring and protection programme

Surface Water Drainage

In terms of surface water drainage works:

- A new surface water drainage collection system will be installed around the two new cark parks and connect via an oil interceptor to the site’s existing surface drainage system

- Similarly, new surface water drainage collection systems will be installed around the two new concrete yard areas and will connect to the existing storm water drainage to the retention pond via a petrol interceptor

- Rainwater run-off from the new buildings will connect to the existing surface water drainage systems

7.7 Residual Impact

With mitigation measures in place there will be no negative impact (either short term, long term, direct or indirect) as a result of this proposed development on the surrounding soils, geological and hydrogeological environment

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-1

8 Biodiversity

8.1 Introduction

Ecology Ireland Ltd. was commissioned by PM Group, on behalf of Janssen Sciences Ireland UC, hereinafter referred to as Janssen Sciences, to undertake an Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) of a proposed development at their facility located at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy Co. Cork which will involve expansion and modification works at the site. An Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) was undertaken as part of the planning application for the proposed development.

This chapter should be read in conjunction with the Chapter 2 (Description of the Proposed Development) and Chapter 9 (Water and Wastewater) of this EIAR.

The main objectives of the study were to:

- undertake a desktop review of available ecological data of the study area (i.e. development site and surrounding area), including a review of designated nature conservation sites within 15km of the development site and the completion of a Stage 1 Screening Statement in support of the Appropriate Assessment (AA) process. The Appropriate Assessment Screening Report is included as part of this planning application.

- complete baseline ecological field assessments of the study area in order to describe existing flora and fauna

- evaluate the ecological significance of the study area

- assess potential impacts on existing ecology that could arise from the proposed development

- consider mitigation measures to reduce potential negative impact(s) on the existing ecology arising from the proposed development where relevant


8.2.1 Relevant Legislation, Policy and Guidelines

The ecological assessment was carried out according to the current guidance on ecological assessment and with due regard to other specific documents referred to below and in the appropriate specialist flora and fauna sections.

- Guidelines for Ecological Assessment in UK & Ireland (Terrestrial, Freshwater and Coastal) – CIEEM, 2016

- Guidelines for Assessment of Ecological Impacts of National Roads Schemes – NRA, 2009

- Guidelines on the Information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements, EPA 2002 and Draft Revised Guidelines September 2015

- Advice Notes for Preparing Environmental Impact Statements EPA , 2003 and Draft Advice Notes September 2015

The conservation status and legal protection afforded to the species and habitats present within and adjacent to the proposed development site was considered.

8.2.2 Desk Study

A detailed desktop review was undertaken drawing upon previous ecological surveys carried out for previous planning applications at this site. Available published ecological records, literature and GIS data sources, were consulted. The information was used to supplement the field data collected as part of the current ecological assessment. Further details on the extent of the desk top study are provided in Appendix D.1.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-2

8.2.3 Consultation

Pre-application consultation was undertaken with CCC’s Heritage Officer as part of the pre-submission scoping exercise to ascertain any specific requirements CCC have pertaining to the assessment of Biodiversity in the region. This chapter addresses the requirements off CCC’s Heritage Officer and in particular:

- possible implications of the proposed expansion on the qualifying features of local Natura Sites (Cork Harbour SPA and Great Island Channel SAC);

- possible implications for protected species;

- possible implications for habitats of high conservation value.

- the importance of the site for over wintering bird species

- cumulative impact assessment

- potential emissions to the harbour

- application of appropriate mitigation

In addition, all requirements as per the guidance and advice notes outlined in Section 8.2.1 were addressed during the assessemtn and are detailed within this Chapter.

8.2.4 Field Survey Methodology

The site was visited by Ecology Ireland on four occasions between January 27th and February 24th 2017. The initial visits were baseline field walkovers primarily associated with the enabling works with general notes taken on the flora and fauna at the site. Appendix D.4, Table D.4.1 details the two dedicated walkover visits in February 2017 during which the fauna, flora and habitats at the site were assessed.

The habitat site and flora assessment was carried out in accordance with the Heritage Council's guidelines (Smith et al. 2010). This involved a walkover of the study area where the dominant habitats present were classified according to Fossitt (2000) and recorded on a field map. Additional grassland habitat classification was completed with reference to the Irish Semi-Natural Grassland Survey 2007-2012 (O’Neill et al. 2013). The dominant plant species in each habitat were identified and recorded. Any other records of interest (e.g. invasive plant species) were also marked on field maps and/or locations were recorded using GPS handheld units. Evaluation of the habitats present in terms of their ecological value was assessed using criteria by Nairn & Fossitt 2004 ( see Appendix D.2).

As part of this EcIA general winter bird usage within the study area was assessed on two separate occasions in late winter; 20th and 24th of February 2017, using standard transect methodology (after Bibby et al 2000). A total of five, 500m transects were walked on each occasion, where all bird species seen and/or heard within 0-25m, 25-100m and <100m from the observer was recorded (Figure 8.1). Birds flying over the immediate study area were included as part of each transect. The maximum number for each bird species recorded within 100m of the observer, for each transect was collated. Bird species recorded beyond 100m was indicated by a ‘P’ for present.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-3

Figure 8.1 Bird Survey Transects – 2017

The field aspect of the fauna assessment involved a site walkover of the study area where direct and/or indirect observations were noted (e.g. breeding sites, droppings, prints) in accordance with standard guidelines (e.g. Hundt 2012, Bang & Dahlstrom 2004, JNCC 2004, Sutherland 1996). The fauna assessment was undertaken on the 20th of February 2017.

In addition, a digital trail camera (Camera-traps) which takes photographs and/or video when triggered by heat or motion, was also deployed to record mammal activity within the study area. One trail camera was erected adjacent to immature woodland/scrub habitat towards the north of the site and left in place between the 20th and 24th of February 2017. Additional photographs and/or videos from four digital trail cameras which were deployed at the development site, between January 27th and February 1st 2017, as part of the pre-vegetation clearance checks were included in this assessment (Ecology Ireland Ltd. 2017).

A passive bat detector (Wildlife Acoustics SM3BAT) was erected at the site between the 20th and 24th of February 2017. Although February is considered relatively early for bat surveys due to the mild prevailing conditions (Appendix D.4, Table D.4.2) it was considered likely that bat species would be active throughout the period of deployment. Species identification was aided by Post hoc sonogram analysis using BatSound software v.4.2 (Pettersson, Sweden) and Kaleidoscope Professional v 4.1(Wildlife Acoustics, USA).

Other taxa encountered during the habitat and botanical, wintering bird transects and mammal walkovers were casually recorded. Seasonal constraints for invertebrates have been considered as part of this ecological impact assessment.

8.2.5 Ecological Evaluation and Impact Assessment Methodology

An overall ecological evaluation of the proposed development site follows the criteria set out in Nairn & Fossitt (2004) see Appendix D.2. The description and evaluation of potential and residual impacts associated with the proposed expansion on the existing ecology of the study site and surrounding area follows guidelines published by the EPA (2003 and as amended 2015; Appendix D.3).

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-4


Please refer to Chapter 2 Description of the Proposed Development for further information on the characteristics of the proposed expansion project.


8.4.1 Designated Nature Conservation Sites

The proposed development site is not located within or directly adjacent to any designated conservation site. There are two Natura 2000 sites and twenty pNHA’s within 15km of the study area. There are no NHA sites located within 15km of the proposed development. The designated conservation sites within the wider hinterland are as follows (in order of increasing distance from the site):

Natura 2000 sites:

- Cork Harbour SPA

- Great Island Channel SAC

pNHA sites:

- Monkstown Creek

- Loughbeg

- Owenboy River

- Templebreedy National School

- Whitegate Bay

- Douglas River Estuary

- Cuskinny Marsh

- Great Island Channel

- Fountainstown Swamp

- Rockfarm Quarry Little Island

- Rostellan Lough

- Minane Bridge Marsh

- Dunkettle Shore

- Glanmire Wood

- Cork Lough

- Carrigacrump Caves

- Lee Valley

- Leamlara Wood

- Carrigshane Hill

- Ballynaclashy House, N. of Midleton

There are no direct hydrological links between the proposed development site and any of the designated sites within 15km of the proposed development. There are no formal watercourses within the development site, the nearest watercourses, the Owenboy River and Glounatouig Stream (Hilltown 1, epa.ie) are located approximately 2km south and north of the proposed development site respectively and are separated from the site by public roads, industrial units, residential properties and agricultural fields. Cork Harbour coastal waterbody is c. 0.33km

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-5

downstream of the development site but again there are no direct hydrological links between the proposed development site and Cork Harbour which is separated by roads, residential/urban properties, industrial estates and farmland.

All storm water run-off is adequately controlled (e.g. fuel interceptors, storm water retention lagoon), prior to discharge to existing site drainage services and ultimately to Loughbeg Inlet. All wastewater from the existing development is transferred to an onsite WWTP for treatment prior to discharge to existing IDA drainage infrastructure, which ultimately discharges to Dognose Bank. All activities on site are licensed by the EPA (IE Licence P0778-01). Proposed upgrades to the on site WWTP are being sought as part of this application to ensure it has the capacity to serve the increased demands of the enlarged facility. The potential impacts on these designated conservation sites will be assessed in Section 8.5 of this report. A Screening Statement in support of the Appropriate Assessment process has also been completed for the proposed development and is submitted with the planning application.

Great Island Channel SAC (also a proposed NHA), located over 5km from the Janssen Sciences site, is designated for the protection of qualifying habitats and does not contain any fauna that could suffer disturbance/displacement impacts (including ex-situ impacts) as a result of the proposed development. No disturbance impacts on this designated site are therefore expected as a result of the proposed development and this site will not be considered further in this report. Other pNHAs such as Rockfarm Quarry, Glanmire Wood, Cuskinny Marsh, Lee Valley and Minane Bridge Marsh are of national interest for rare and protected habitats. However, given the distance from the proposed development site, the site characteristics, nature and scale of the proposed development and lack of a hydrological link: these sites do not contain any qualifying faunal interests that could suffer disturbance/displacement impacts (including ex-situ impacts). No impacts on these designated sites are therefore expected as a result of the proposed development and these sites will not be considered further in this report.

Cork Harbour SPA, which overlaps with a number of pNHAs (e.g. Monkstown Creek, Loughbeg, Owenboy River & Douglas River Estuary), is designated for the protection of highly mobile bird species (e.g. wintering Golden Plover, Lapwing, Curlew and Breeding Common Tern) and wetland habitats. The potential for ex-situ impacts (i.e. where individuals from the designated sites may occur at the proposed development site) on avian species will be assessed in Section 8.5 of this report.

Templebreedy National School, is designated a pNHA, due to the presence of a Leisler’s bat, Nyctalus leisleri, nursery roost in the attic of the church here. A nursery colony of the whiskered bat Myotis mystacinus has been recorded in the attic of Ballynaclashy House pNHA, north of Middleton, Co. Cork, where in 1987 c. 30 bats were recorded in the attic, roosting between the felt and the slates. As the national population of this species is only several hundred, all nursery colonies are of national importance. The existing modern buildings at the proposed development site provide very limited roosting potential for bat species, however bats are likely to forage and commute through the site, at least on occasion.

Appendix D.5 provides a summary of these designated sites, including their minimum distance from the proposed development site boundary. The full site synopses and conservation objectives for Natura 2000 sites are available on https://www.npws.ie/protected-sites. The Natura 2000 sites in the wider hinterland are shown in Figure 8.2 and the location of the designated pNHA sites in the wider area are shown in Figure 8.3.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-6

Figure 8.2 Designated Natura 2000 Sites within 15km

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-7

Figure 8.3 Designated pNHA Sites within 15km

8.4.2 Desktop Study Results

There are no watercourses at or in the vicinity of the proposed development site. The nearest Natura 2000 site; Cork Harbour SPA, is located c. 0.33km from the proposed development site.

The proposed development site is located within the Lee, Cork Harbour and Youghal Bay catchment (Water Frameworks Directive WFD catchment, www.epa.ie), The Lower Lee/Owenboy Water Management Unit, Cork Harbour Hydrometric Area and in the Southwestern River Basin District (www.epa.ie). The nearest watercourses, the Owenboy River and the Glounatouig stream (Hilltown 19, epa.ie), are located approximately 2km south and north of the proposed development site. The Owenboy River flows into Owenboy Estuary, to the south of the proposed development site, which is adjacent to Cork Harbour. The Glounatouig stream (Hilltown 19, epa.ie), flows to Cork Harbour to the north of the proposed development site. The proposed development site is separated from Cork Harbour by industrial units, public roads, residential properties and agricultural fields. Cork Harbour is of ‘Good’ status (WFD; 2010 – 2015), Owenboy Estuary has not been assigned a WFD status, however upstream the Owenboy River is at risk of not achieving ‘Good’ status (www.epa.ie 2010 – 2015). The Glounatouig stream (Hilltown 19, epa.ie) has not been assigned a WFD status. Cork Harbour is designated as an SPA (site code: 004030).

Further details from the Desktop Study on Habitats & Flora, Avian Species, Non Volant Mammals, Bats and other Taxa are presented within Appendix D.6. The Desktop Study as described in Appendix D.6, takes account of previous studies conducted for the site including that for the Enabling Works planning application 2016 amongst which included three dedicated overwintering bird surveys and the bird assessments undertaken for the Wind Turbine planning application 2011 and the original site development in 2005 . The details within Appendix D.6 are further substantiated by the following field survey results.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-8

8.4.3 Field Survey Results

The following sections detail the results of field surveys carried out at the proposed development site in January and February 2017.

Habitat and Botanical Survey 2017

No botanical species protected under the Flora (Protection) Order 2015, listed in Annex II or IV of the EU Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC), or listed in the Irish Red Data Books were recorded during the 2017 walkover surveys. All species recorded during the botanical survey are considered common for similar habitats in the general area.

No invasive species, occurring on Invasive Species Ireland’s ‘most-unwanted list’ (i.e. species at high-risk of having damaging effects on native species) were recorded within the study area in 2016 or 2017. One invasive species Buddleia Buddleja davidii, which is listed on Invasive Species Ireland’s as a species at moderate-risk of having damaging effects on native species, was found within the proposed development site boundary in 2016 and 2017. No species listed on the Third Schedule of the 2011 European Communities (Birds and Natural Habitats) Regulations (i.e. species of which it is an offense to disperse, spread or otherwise cause to grow in any place) were noted within the study area.

Consistent with the 2016 field surveys, there are no habitats within the study area that conform to those listed under Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive. Buildings and artificial surfaces (BL3) and amenity/landscaped or agricultural habitats dominate the site and the surrounding landscape. These habitat types are highly modified and/or subject to ongoing, intensive management and considered of low to medium ecological value overall.

No botanical species protected under the Flora (Protection) Order (1999 as amended 2015), listed in Annex II or IV of the EU Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC), or listed in the Irish Red Data Books were recorded in the study area. All species recorded during the botanical survey are considered common for similar habitats in the general area.

The following thirteen habitats were recorded within the proposed development site boundary (see Figure 8.4), a description of each of the dominant habitats is provided below:

- Buildings and Artificial Surfaces (BL3)

- Arable Crop (BC1)

- Amenity Grassland (GA2)

- Hedgerows (WL1)

- Treeline (WL2)

- Immature Woodland (WS2)

- Scrub (WS1)

- Mesotrophic Wet Grassland (GS4)

- Stone Walls and Other Stone Work (BL1)

- Recolonising Bare Ground (ED3)

- Spoil and Bare Ground (ED2)

- Dry Meadow and Grassy Verge (GS2)

- Other Artificial Lakes and Ponds (FL8)

Detailed descriptions and assessments of the habitats recorded on-site are presented in Appendix D.8.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-9

Figure 8.4 Habitat Map

Bird survey 2017

A total of 33 bird species were recorded during dedicated winter bird transects completed by Ecology Ireland at the proposed development site in 2017 (Appendix D.7; Table D.7.2). One further species Jay, Garrulus glandarius was recorded on a trail camera. Three Red-listed (High Conservation Concern) birds Yellowhammer, Meadow Pipit Anthus pratensis and Grey Wagtail Motacilla cinerea, were recorded on transects within the study area. Yellowhammer and Meadow Pipit were associated with the arable crop, grassy verge and hedgerow to the west of the study area. Nine Amber-listed species of medium conservation concern (Greenfinch Carduelis chloris, Skylark Alauda arvensis, Goldcrest Regulus regulus, Mistle Thrush Turdus viscivorus, Stonechat Saxicola torquata, Linnet Carduelis cannabina, Stock Dove Columba oenas, Robin and Starling Sturnus vulgaris) were recorded (see Colhoun & Cummins 2013). Greenfinch, Robin, Goldcrest and Mistle Thrush were principally associated with the site Hedgerows (WL1), Immature woodland (WS2) and grassland (GS4, GS2, GA2), while Starling, Stonechat and Skylark were recorded foraging on Arable land (BC1) and Grassy verge (GS2) habitat. The remaining bird species recorded are not currently considered to be of elevated conservation concern in Ireland. No Annex I bird species of the EU Birds Directive were recorded during the dedicated winter transects.

Non Volant Mammal survey 2017

No Badger sightings (or signs of Badger) were recorded during the site walkovers in 2017. The proposed development site contains suitable foraging habitat for this species, which is known to occur historically within the 10km grid-square surrounding the development site (W76, NBDC database). Existing palisade fencing around part of the site may limit access by foraging Badger.

Evidence of Rabbit was widespread on the site, with numerous Rabbit burrows located along the earth banks surrounding the site. This species appears to be particularly abundant at the proposed development site, as does its main predator – Fox. Fox scat and scent were recorded at several locations on the proposed development site and this species is also known to occur historically

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-10

within the 2km grid-square surrounding the development site (W76S, NBDC database). Rabbit and Fox (see Appendix D.7, Plate D.7.1) were also recorded on the trail cameras deployed at the proposed development site. Irish Hare Lepus timidus hibernicus were widespread at the site, with numerous direct and indirect observations (e.g. trail camera, foraging signs etc.) of Irish Hare recorded. Irish Hare are also common in the wider area (G. Fennessy pers obs). The sub-species is endemic to Ireland and is found in many different habitats including unimproved, semi-improved and improved grassland, upland habitats such as heather-dominated heaths and bogs and in coastal habitats including sand-dunes and even on the sea shore (NPWS 2005). Irish Hare also tend to occur on modified grassland habitats such as golf courses and airfields (e.g. Fairley, 2001; Dingerkus & Montgomery, 2002; pers obs.).

Historically, the Irish hare was widespread and common throughout Ireland, but concerns with regard to perceived population declines led to the preparation of an All-Ireland species action plan for Irish Hare in 2005 (NPWS 2005). Concerns were chiefly focused on Northern Ireland where declines in population density and range were recorded and where the non-native European Hare, Lepus europaeus, has been introduced. No evidence of any other mammal species was found at the site during the site visit, however the Owenboy River and Estuary and Cork Harbour, to the south and east of site, and the river corridor to the north, are considered suitable for Otter Lutra lutra. This species is known to occur historically within the 10km grid-square surrounding the development site (W76, NBDC database), however there are no habitats on the site itself considered attractive to this species.

The field hedgerows, treeline, immature woodland and scrub and grassland at the site provide good cover and food for terrestrial mammal species. Similar habitats are also present in the wider landscape (e.g. field boundaries, immature woodland).

Otter and Red Squirrel are considered to be ‘Near Threatened’ in Ireland at present (see Marnell et al. 2009). The other species listed above are considered to be of ‘Least Concern’ in Ireland at present (see Marnell et al. 2009), apart from Fallow Deer, Sika Deer, House Mouse, Bank Vole, American Mink and Coypu which are not rated as they are introduced species. All mammals, except for introduced species, are protected under the Wildlife Acts (1976-2010).

Bat Survey 2017

The passive time-expansion bat detector was erected in the Immature woodland (WS2) habitat to the north of the site and Post hoc sonogram analysis of bat call data recorded confirmed the presence of five species of bat (Table 8.1 below). Soprano Pipistrelle was the most commonly recorded species of bat with 1,301 registrations over the four dawn/dusk survey periods. Common Pipistrelle was the second most common species with 511 registrations. Leisler’s Bat was the third most common bat species detected at the proposed development site with 39 registrations. There were six registrations for a Myotis species (registration was faint, but potentially Daubenton’s Bat) and two registrations for Brown Long-eared Bat.

Table 8.1. Bat Registrations recorded on the Passive Bat Detector from the 20th

to the 24th

of February 2017.

Common Name Scientific Name No. of Registrations

Soprano

Pipistrelle

Pipistrellus

pygmaeus 1,301

Common

Pipistrelle

Pipistrellus

pipistrellus 511

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-11

Leisler's Bat Nyctalus

leisleri 39

Myotis species Myotis species 6

Brown Long-

eared Bat

Plecotus

auritus 2

All bat species occurring in Ireland are legally protected under the Irish Wildlife Acts (1976 - 2012). Under this protection, it is an offence to hunt or interfere with or destroy their breeding or resting places (unless under statutory licence / permission). The species listed above are also listed on Annex IV of the EU Habitats Directive.

Other Taxa

Common Frog, Rana temporaria was observed during the site walkovers but no spawning sites were recorded. No other taxa of interest were recorded on the site. It is important to note however that the survey was completed in February which is a sub-optimal time for recording many species of (for example) Lepidoptera and Odonata. While a number of invertebrate species have been recorded historically in the 10km grid square surrounding the development site (W76, NBDC database), none are listed on Annex II of the EU Habitats Directive. No ‘other’ species were recorded historically in the 2km grid square surrounding the site (W76S, NBDC database). The hedgerows, scrub and grassy verge on the site provide some suitable habitat for other taxa, however, the existing buildings/hardstanding areas, arable fields and amenity grassland are considered to be of low value for most species.

Overall Site Evaluation

Taking the above into consideration, the proposed development site is currently of Low to

Moderate Value, Locally Important (E - D rating, see Appendix D.2) as it contains some semi-natural habitat (hedgerows, treelines, stonewalls, grassland) and immature woodland, us europaeus, has been introduced.


Potential impacts of the proposed expansion on ecology are discussed below. The potential impacts of the construction and operational phases are discussed separately.


The construction period of c. 24 months will involve the movement of plant and construction staff and associated traffic, noise and localised disturbance. Earthworks and import of materials will all be done in a planned and phased fashion in accordance with the CEMP. Site drainage and run-off will be controlled and care will be taken to ensure biosecurity. This will include site induction and oversight by an environmental construction manager. Materials will be stockpiled at planned locations and all refuelling will be controlled – planned refuelling location, bunded refuelling tanks, oil spill response protocols etc. Similarly, standard environmental measures to control dust and noise emissions will be implemented as described in the CEMP, as submitted with the BioCork2 planning application.

Designated Conservation Sites

The Screening Statement in support of the Appropriate Assessment process, which accompanies this planning application, objectively concludes that no significant effects arising from the proposed development will impact upon any Natura 2000 sites.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-12

The potential impacts on key species of designated sites, arising from the construction phase of the proposed expansion, are considered neutral. This conclusion is based on the taking all of the points as outlined in Appendix D.9 into consideration.

Habitats & Botanical Species

The construction phase will not impact upon any rare or protected botanical species or high value habitats. The proposed development will involve the loss of some modified habitats which will have a very localised and short-term impact for local habitats and flora. Final landscaping will include the provision of new Amenity grassland (GA2), Immature woodland (WS2) and Grassy verge (GS2) habitat areas and as such any temporary loss of these modified habitats during construction will have a negligible impact on existing habitats and flora. There will be no loss of semi-natural Hedgerow (WL1) and/or Treeline (WL2) associated with the construction phase. Disturbance or loss of sections of Scrub (WS1) and low conservation value mesotrophic Wet grassland (GS4) is not considered to be of ecological significance as these impacts are highly localised and will be offset by the creation of new woodland/scrub and grassland during landscaping of new berm and open amenity grassland provided at the landscaped stage of the proposed expansion.

Newly landscaped berm and amenity grassland will help maintain habitat biodiversity in the area, as well as continuing to provide cover and food for a range of mammal and bird species.

In conclusion, the loss of primarily modified habitats, as a result of the construction phase of the proposed expansion will have a slight, temporary negative impact on the existing habitats and plant species at the site. However, the planting of shrubs/immature woodland along the northwestern site boundary and re-instatement of grassland areas will lead to a neutral impact on the existing habitats and plant species at the site in the longer term. There are no anticipated impacts upon adjacent habitats.

Fauna Species

Construction related activities have the potential to cause local disturbance and displacement effects on the faunal species that occur at the site. However, in the context of existing operations at the site and given the habitats on which construction will occur, the potential impacts are likely to be highly localised.

- Increased construction noise and traffic has the potential to disrupt the existing fauna community within and adjacent to the construction footprint. Certain species are less tolerant of noise and the operation of construction plant (e.g. some mammal species and passerine birds) and are less likely to occur in the vicinity of the works area during active periods. In contrast, certain other species (e.g. scavengers) may be attracted into a construction site as there may be new feeding opportunities presented.

- Deep excavations have the potential to inadvertently trap animals moving around the site. Similarly, areas of pooled water can present a drowning hazard or barrier to movement for certain species.

- No Annex I bird species were recorded using the proposed development site and the dominant habitats on site are not considered of high value for any of the Annex I species known to occur historically in the wider area. Three Red listed bird species (Yellowhammer, Meadow Pipit and Grey Wagtail), were recorded during the wintering bird surveys (Yellowhammer was present in 2016 and 2017).

- Meadow Pipit are still extremely common but like many other small resident passerines they had suffered a population decline as a consequence of the two exceptionally harsh winters in 2009/2010 and 2010/2011. Meadow Pipit has shown signs of recovery in recent CBS national trend data.

- The population trend for Grey Wagtail also indicate signs of recovery from 2012 to 2014, with just a slight drop in 2015 and 2016 (https://goo.gl/w6Y45E).

- Yellowhammer have suffered longer term declines due primarily to changing farm practices (switch away from arable and mixed farming) and for that reason are considered of high

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-13

conservation concern in Ireland. Yellowhammer forage in open arable crop fields and breed in nearby hedgerows. A small area of Arable crop (BC1) will be lost to accommodate the new berms to the north of the site.

- While there will be a minimum loss of foraging habitat for Yellowhammer, associated with construction phase, the remaining Arable crop (BC1) will be maintained and any loss will be negligible in the longer term.

- Additional Grassy verge (GS2) habitat planted at the base of the new berm, primarily to enhance habitat availability for Irish Hare, will also provide additional foraging potential for Yellowhammer. Hedgerows (WL1) will be maintained and as such there will be no loss of breeding habitat for Yellowhammer as a result of the proposed expansion.

- Similarly, Meadow Pipit were documented within the arable fields (BC1) and grassy verge (GS2) habitat associated with the proposed development site and there will be a minimum loss of habitat for Meadow Pipit as a result of the proposed expansion. New amenity grassland areas provided as part of the final landscaping design will provide additional habitat for Meadow Pipit in the longer term. Given that availability of suitable habitat at the site and surrounding locality, together with the provision of Amenity (GA2) and Grassy verge (GS2) grassland habitats as part of landscaping works, the small loss of Arable crop (BC1) will have a negligible impact on Meadow Pipit.

- There is limited habitat available to Grey Wagtail which is typically associated with riparian habitats, the loss of Arable crop (BC1) is unlikely to have an impact on Grey Wagtail and as such any loss will be negligible.

- The habitat of highest value on the site for most bird species recorded at the site are Hedgerow/Treeline (WL1/WL2) and Immature woodland (WS2) and Scrub (WS1) to the east of the study area and these areas will not be impacted by the proposed expansion which will be confined to the west, north west of the site. The extent of immature woodland (WS2) will be increased in width using excess soil from construction works (P16/7150) and will be planted with a variety of native shrubs (e.g. Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, Holly Ilex aquifolium and Gorse Ulex europaeus), which will enhance biodiversity in this area, as well as providing cover and food for a range of bird species. The potential impacts on birds as a result of the proposed expansion are considered to be neutral.

- There will be no removal of mature trees or any other suitable bat roosting habitats/structures on the site and no impacts on roosting bats are therefore expected. The hedgerows/treeline/immature woodland on the site provide suitable foraging habitat and commuting corridors for bats. The Hedgerows (WL1) and Treeline (WL2) will be left in-situ and will not be impacted by the proposed expansion. The Immature woodland (WS2) where bat activity was recorded will also be maintained with any removal of small areas of Immature woodland (WS2) confined to the south of the proposed development site, which is more open and less suitable for foraging bats. Furthermore, the additional planting of native immature woodland shrubs along the berms on the northern boundary of the site (P16/7150) will enhance the quality of the foraging and commuting habitat within the site for bats. The potential impacts on bats are therefore considered to be neutral.

- The construction phase of the proposed expansion has the potential to cause disturbance to fauna occurring at the development site. Irish Hare, Rabbit, Fox and most likely a range of terrestrial mammal species occur at the site. No Badger or active Badger setts were recorded on the site. The species of Hare known to occur on the site are widespread and abundant in the Irish landscape and, for the most part, are not of high conservation concern in Ireland.

- There is no suitable habitat on site for Otter. The River corridors, located to the north and south of the proposed development contains suitable Otter habitat. However, given the distance and landscape characteristics between the proposed development site and river corridors no significant disturbance impacts on otters are considered likely.

- No potential impacts on fauna are expected as a result of habitat loss at the development site. The habitat of highest value on the site for most fauna are Hedgerows (WL1), Treeline (WL2),

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-14

Immature woodland (WS2) and grassland verges (GS2). These habitats will be maintained and/or provided during subsequent landscaping at the site and as such potential impacts on fauna is considered neutral. The additional planting of shrubs/immature woodland along the berm on the northern boundary of the site (P16/7150) will enhance the quality of the foraging habitat on the site for fauna in the longer term. The potential impacts on fauna overall are therefore considered to be neutral during the construction phase of the development.

- Lighting for the proposed project has the potential to cause disturbance to Bat species occurring at the site. In addition, lighting has the potential to attract bird species to the site, including night-time migrants, which can potentially increase the risk of collision and disrupt the existing bird community. During the initial phase of the Project (groundworks, steelwork, cladding), working areas will be required to be lit by a combination of tower lighting and LED external down lighters fixed to the structure. These will be cowled and positioned to directly illuminate the working area only. Lighting for works outside daylight hours will be provided by means of portable diesel powered down lighter towers, used in localized areas. Such construction site lighting required for outside daylight hours will be placed with consideration of and away from the foraging/roosting areas of fauna associated with the site.


The potential for significant operational stage impacts on the flora, habitats and fauna that occur locally is considered to be very low. The site operation will be governed by the requirements of the IE licence with strictly controlled emissions. The proposed expansion will see an expected increase in traffic (and footfall) at the site and this will represent a marginal increase on the levels of human disturbance at the site. However, the landscaped berms as part of the site enabling works (P16/7150), in particular and the landscaping plans for BioCork2 have the potential to increase local biodiversity as the planted features mature.

Designated sites

No significant impacts are expected on designated sites during the operational phase of the proposed development.

- The development site is not part of any designated site nor does it require any resources from them; thereby ruling out any direct habitat loss from designated conservation sites.

- As described, all storm water from the operational phase of the proposed expansion will continue to be collected and controlled through the existing drainage infrastructure serving the existing site, which ultimately discharges to Loughbeg Inlet,

- All storm water run-off is adequately controlled (e.g. SuDs - fuel/oil interceptors, attenuation etc.) and monitored (continuous TOC and pH) prior to discharge to Loughbeg inlet.

- All waste water from the operational phase of the development will continue to be collected in the existing sewerage infrastructure (including required upgrades) and on site WWTP which provides full biological secondary treatment prior to discharge from long sea outfall to Cork Harbour at Dognose Bank. The existing WWTP, operating in compliance with Janssen Sciences’ IE Licence has capacity and permission to treat and discharge up to 800m3 of waste water per day, with current emission levels in the order of <300m3/day, below capacity. As such, impact due to increase in effluent discharge during the operational phase will be negligible.

- Potential disturbance to the key faunal species of Cork Harbour SPA and associated pHNAs is not expected during the operational phase; given the distance and landscape characteristics between the proposed development site and nearby designated sites together with the proposed mitigation to ensure there are no adverse impacts as a result of lighting on the nearby Natura 2000 site, disturbance on designated sites as a result of operational lighting is considered negligible.

- There will be some additional human activity/vehicular noise during the operational phase of the proposed project which will lead to a slight increase in noise levels at the site. However, as

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-15

discussed, fauna species are likely to be already tolerant of a certain level of noise as the area already holds industrial units, residential areas, and busy roadways and as such there is no predicted significant impact on key species as a result of noise from the operational phase proposed BioCork2 Expansion. Cork Harbour SPA is also adjacent to other designated sites which provide a large area of contiguous waterbodies and wetland habitats to utilise.

Taking the above into consideration, potential impacts on the designated sites arising from the operation of the proposed expansion are considered neutral. Furthermore, the Screening Statement in support of the Appropriate Assessment process, which accompanies this planning application, objectively concludes that no significant effects arising from the proposed development will impact upon any Natura 2000 sites.

Habitat & Botanical species

As the additional native shrubs planted along the newly constructed berms on the northern boundary of the site mature they will enhance the local biodiversity providing cover and foraging opportunities for mammals and birds. Maturing trees and shrubs will provide improved foraging and commuting routes for bats that occur at the site.

It is concluded that the operation of the proposed expansion will have a neutral impact on habitats and flora at the site. There will be no direct or indirect impacts upon adjacent habitats.

Fauna species

There will be no additional removal of habitat during the operational stage of the expansion, no impacts on non-volant mammals are therefore considered likely during the operational phase of the expansion.

- As the additional native shrubs planted along the berms on the northern boundary of the site mature they will enhance the quality of the foraging habitat on the site, as well as providing additional cover for resident mammals.

- Lighting for the proposed project has the potential to cause disturbance to Bat species occurring at the site. In addition, lighting has the potential to attract bird species to the site, including night-time migrants, which can potentially increase the risk of collision and disrupt the existing bird community.

- There will be additional human activity/vehicular noise during the operational phase of the proposed development which will lead to a slight increase in noise levels at the site. However, fauna species present at the site (e.g. Irish Hare) are likely to be already relatively tolerant of noise as the proposed development area holds the exiting site campus and the wider area has several industrial units, residential areas, and urban/suburban environment and as such there is no predicted significant impact on key faunal species as a result of noise associated with the operational phase of the proposed expansion.

- All emissions to air (as described in Chapter 11) and water (as described in Chapter 10) during the operational phase of the proposed expansion will be controlled/limited under the terms of the IE licence and as such potential impacts on fauna as a result of emissions during the operational phase are considered negligible.

The potential impacts on fauna arising from the operation of the proposed development are therefore considered to be neutral.

8.5.3 “Do Nothing” Scenario

With regard to the ‘do-nothing’ scenario, it is assumed that, without permission to extend and modify the existing biomedicines facility, the facility will continue to operate within its current capacity. Existing habitats at the site would persist (e.g. Buildings and artificial surfaces (BL3), Amenity grassland (GA2), Arable crop (BC1), Grassy verge (GS2) and Scrub WS1)). Flora and fauna species that are currently associated with the habitats of the proposed site will continue to persist.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-16

Consequently, there is the potential for on-going low-level disturbance/displacement impacts associated with the operation of the current facility (and movement of vehicles and personnel) and those associated with neighbouring/industrial sites.


The enabling works at the site which were permitted under P16/7150 involved the clearance of areas of scrub. The construction of the proposed expansion will involve the permanent loss of some open habitat (amenity grassland, wet grassland and arable crops). The proposed development site is situated in the lower harbour area which is characterised by industrial complexes, the ferry port and residential development. Within the site itself the 40ha area was prepared by the IDA as a site for industrial development. The development within the Janssen Sciences site has involved several stages to date from the establishment of the facility, through the installation of a wind turbine and several minor layout amendments. Taken together, and in combination with the proposed expansion project, there will have been significant permanent losses of semi-natural habitats within the site footprint.

However, the construction phase of the proposed project will reverse some of the local losses of vegetative ‘cover’ associated with the enabling works and the construction of the expanded facility. The landscaping will be carried out in parallel with and post the construction phase, leading to the establishment of vegetated berms and mounding fringed by long-grass cover (see Appendix D.10 Extract from Landscaping Design Report – Suggested Species). This will add high quality habitat attractive for a range of species including mammals and birds. In the short to medium term the construction of the expanded facility will increase the amount of localised disturbance within and directly adjacent to the construction footprint. However, the habitats present were of relatively low ecological value and the local biodiversity will be enhanced as the landscaped areas planned as part of the proposed expansion continue to mature.


Any potential impacts will be minimised by implementing the following construction and operation stage mitigation and enhancement measures, such that residual impacts will be negligible in magnitude.


Construction works will be carried out according to the provisions of the CEMP (as submitted with this planning application) which draws on standard best practice in the industry. Embedded environmental controls (e.g. use of bunded fuel tanks) will be in place to prevent any damaging run-off from the site during the construction phase. The CEMP will include a demolition and construction waste management plan and details of procedures to protect the environment from potential impacts and pollution during the works. All staff will be aware of the details of the plan to be implemented during construction works at the site.

In addition to the mitigation measures outlined in Chapter 7 (Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology), the following mitigation measure are recommended to be included in the CEMP:

- As part of good working practices, the principal wastes/spoils generated during works will be stored in bulk on the site to be recycled and/or disposed of correctly through a registered waste disposal contractor or facility.

- Pollution prevent measures (as outlined in the mitigation for designated sites) will mitigate indirect impacts on habitats, flora and fauna occurring at the development site

- No additional removal of scrub or immature woodland areas will occur within the bird breeding season.

- No removal of habitats will occur outside of the development works area/footprint during the construction phase, where the works area/footprint will be clearly marked for associated site staff.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-17

- In the event that any protected species including Irish Hare are unintentionally injured during the scheduled works a protocol should be applied by all contractors on site. Contactors should be aware of the protocol and be directed to contact the EHS manager in the first instance. The EHS Manager should have a Vet-on-Call contact and (if safe to do-so) the injured animal should be placed in a cardboard box with sufficient ventilation and the animal conveyed to the Vet. Project environmental staff should be informed and will be in a position to advise on the appropriate rehabilitation and release options available. An incident log should be maintained by the environmental staff. Any animal injuries or fatalities, including road-killed should be logged throughout the works period.

- Construction site lighting where required during construction works will be placed with consideration of and away from the foraging/roosting areas of fauna associated with the site.

- It is recommended, given the local population density of Irish Hares observed at site that the recommended working protocols are adopted and that future landscaping considers options for the enhancement of the site for breeding and resting hares (see Operational Phase Mitigation Measures below).


Additional post construction landscaping along the northern and eastern boundaries, will be carried out with consideration of the existing local habitats and associated native species assemblage. Adequate protection against Hare damage (e.g. Tree Guards) will be installed and maintained on trees and shrubs until these plants are successfully established.

During the operational phase of the development all additional/new lighting systems will be designed to minimise nuisance through light spillage. Shielded, downward directed lighting will be used and all non-essential lighting will be switched off during the hours of darkness.

The landscaping plan for the berm, as outlined in the Planning Application P16/7150 coupled with the Landscaping Design Report as submitted with this BioCork2 Planning Application, will in-time, provide good alternate cover for local birds and mammals (see Appendix D.10 Extract from Landscaping Design Report – Suggested Species). A long-grass headland will be incorporated at the base of the new berms. This is to provide good breeding habitat for Irish Hare which occur at the site. A meadow-type headland of 5-10m width will be of significant benefit to local biodiversity.


The proposed development site is currently considered to be of Low - Moderate Value as it contains some semi-natural habitat (hedgerows, treeline, scrub, grassland). The proposed expansion area itself will be largely confined to modified habitats, which are considered to be of low ecological value overall. Any potential impacts on biodiversity as a result of the proposed expansion are primarily confined to the construction phase, which will be relatively short in duration (approximately 24 months).

No significant impacts on designated sites, habitats, flora or fauna have been identified as a result of the proposed expansion and the additional planting of woodland and grassland habitats on the site will result in an overall neutral to slight positive impact on ecology.

Taking the above into consideration, it is deemed that the proposed expansion will result in a neutral residual impact on ecology overall.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 8-18


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-1

9 Noise and Vibration

9.1 Introduction

This chapter has been prepared to assess the potential for noise and vibration impact from the proposed expansion.

The construction noise impact assessment was carried out using the calculation method and evaluation criteria described in British Standard BS 5228:1 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites – Part 1: Noise+A1:2014 (British Standards Institute, 2014).

The impact assessment of operational noise was carried out applying calculation method Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors – Part 2: General method of calculation (International Standards Organisation, 1996), determining the predicted operational sound levels and comparing these with both the site’s industrial emission (IE) licensed noise conditions for boundary locations and World Health Organisation (WHO) criteria for human receivers.

Construction vibration was also assessed in terms of potential sources of vibration and the nearest sensitive receivers. There is no expected vibration impact from the ongoing operation of the facility and the proposed extension.

Based on this information, necessary mitigation measures are incorporated into the construction phase or the facility’s design, thereby avoiding any adverse impact or non-compliance.

9.1.1 Effects of Noise

Care has been taken in this chapter between use of ‘sound’ and ‘noise’. Sound is measured with a sound level meter or measuring apparatus. Noise is considered unwanted sound and is related to a receiver response (human or fauna).

While the impacts of noise are subjective, it can affect human receivers both behaviourally and physiologically. As described in Guidelines for Environmental Noise Impact Assessment (Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, November 2014), the behavioural affect can be described over three levels of increasing response:

1. Noise disturbance which causes distraction of physically interfering with human activity (speech interference, disruption of work, disruption of mental ability, sleep disturbance);

2. Noise disturbance can be experienced as annoyance (or an indirect response to the first level of physical disturbance) and;

3. Overt reaction (complaints).

Physiological effects are either auditory effect such as hearing loss, tinnitus or non- auditory effects such as stress and non-auditory health effects.

9.1.2 Effects of Vibration

Humans can perceive vibration at levels of low magnitude, typically from 0.14 mm/s to 0.3 mm/s. At vibration levels greater than this and similarly to noise, vibration can cause the same levels of response such as distraction, leading to annoyance and disturbance. Greater levels of vibration (a minimum of 15 mm/s) are required to cause structural damage.

In terms of this assessment and in line with the Advice Notes for Preparing Environmental Impact Statements-Draft (Environmental Protection Agency, September 2015), vibration in the receiving environmental is “Any movement of ground or structures which can cause structural damage, nuisance or a deterioration of amenities or quality of life”.


This chapter was prepared noting the assessment requirements in the EPA EIA guidance documents described in EIAR Section 1.6.1 ‘EIAR Preparation’. In all cases of the assessment,

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-2

stated sound pressure levels were calculated or measured as external levels and do not represent internal sound pressure levels.

9.2.1 Assessment of Construction Phase Noise

There is no statutory legislation or guidance relating to the maximum permissible sound pressure level that may be generated during the construction phase of a project. Planning authorities typically control noise from construction activities by restricting hours of operation and may consider, at their discretion, the imposition of emission limits.

Best practice limits are available from the Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) publication (formerly the National Roads Authority) Good Practice for the Treatment of Noise During the Planning of National Road Schemes (March 2014) for permissible construction sound pressure levels at noise sensitive locations (NSLs)22 during construction of public road schemes. Table 9.1 states the maximum construction permissible levels at the façades of the nearest dwellings as per the TII guidelines.

Table 9.1 Maximum Permissible Construction Sound Levels at the Façade of Dwellings

Days Times Noise Levels (dB re. 2x10

-5 Pa)

LAeq (1 hr) LAmax

Mondays to Friday 07.00-19.00 70 80

Monday to Friday 19.00-22.00* 601 651

Saturdays 08.00-16.30 65 75

Sundays and Bank Holidays 08.00-16.30 601 651

Note 1: Construction activity at these times, other than that required for emergency works, will normally require the explicit permission of the relevant local authority.

Additional guidance in relation to construction noise is available in Annex E of BS 5228:1 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites – Part 1: Noise+A1:2014 (British Standards Institute, 2014). Residential sound pressure threshold limits based upon ambient levels are described as the ‘ABC method’. Table 9.2 states these threshold limits, which if exceeded, represent a potential significant effect on the dwelling (receiver).

Table 9.2 BS 5228-1 Construction Threshold Limits

Assessment category & threshold value period Threshold value, (dB LAeq,T)

Category A (1)

Category B (2)

Category C(3)

Night-time (23.00-07.00) 45 50 55

Evenings and weekends (Note 4) 55 60 65

Daytime (07.00-19.00) and Saturdays (07.00-13.00) 65 70 75

Note 1: Threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (rounded to nearest 5 dB) are less than these values

Note 2: Threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (rounded to nearest 5 dB) are the same as category A values

Note 3: Threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (rounded to nearest 5 dB) are higher than category A values

Note 4: 19.00-23.00 hrs weekdays, 13.00-23.00 hrs Saturday and 07.00-23.00 hrs Sundays

BS 5228-1:2009 Annex F also provides methods for calculating construction noise from site for stationary and mobile plant together with typical sound pressure levels for various plant and machinery associated with construction activities provided in Annex C of the standard. These

22 any dwelling house, hotel or hostel, health building, educational establishment, place of worship or entertainment, or any other facility or other area of high amenity which for its proper enjoyment requires the absence of noise at nuisance levels”. (Guidance Note for Noise: Licence Applications, Surveys and Assessments in Relation to Scheduled Activities, EPA 2016)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-3

prediction methods were employed and levels calculated for the nearest NSLs and compliance analysed in line with limits described in Tables 9.1 and 9.2.

9.2.2 Assessment of Operational Phase Noise

Operational prediction modelling was carried out using Bruel and Kjær Predictor software version 9.12 employing ISO 9613-2: 1996 Acoustics -Attenuation of sound outdoors- Part 2: General Method of Calculation (International Standards Organisation, 1996).

Industrial Emission Licence Conditions and Boundary Locations

Operational noise emissions are licensed under the site’s existing IE Licence (Licence No. P0778-01). Condition 4.5 of this licence states “Noise from the installation shall not give rise to sound pressure levels (Leq,T) measured at the site boundary which exceed the limit value(s).” The boundary emission limits values specified in the licence are stated in Table 9.3.

Table 9.3 IE Licence Limit Values -Schedule B.4 Noise Emissions

Daytime dB LAeq (30 minutes) Night-time dB LAeq (30 minutes)

551 451

Note 1 There shall be no clearly audible tonal component or impulsive component in the noise emission from the activity at any noise sensitive location

The results are used to calculate sound pressure levels at the site’s boundary locations for compliance analysis with the licensed emission limits and the relevant sound level criteria specified in the EPA’s 2016 Guidance Note for Noise: Licence Applications, Surveys and Assessments in Relation to Scheduled Activities (NG4).

Best Practice Criteria and Noise Sensitive Locations

The impact assessment also considers the impact of these predicted levels on the nearest noise sensitive locations Best practice limits are available from the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Guidelines for Community Noise (1999). External limits for outdoor living areas for protection from “serious annoyance” of 55 dB LAeq and from “moderate annoyance” of 50 dB LAeq are recommended. A night-time limit of 45 dB LAeq is recommended for night-time (or 42 dB LAeq, façade).

The subjective significance of impact is also described used in the terms in Table 9.4, derived from Guidelines for Environmental Noise Impact Assessment (Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, November 2014).

Table 9.4 Relationship of Noise Impact Magnitude (Adverse), Effect and Significance

Magnitude Description of Effect Significance

Negligible No discernible effect on the receptor Not significant

Slight Receptor perception = Non-intrusive

Noise impact can be heard but does not cause any change in behaviour or attitude

Less likely to be significant

↕ More likely to be significant

Moderate Receptor perception = Intrusive

Noise impact can be heard and causes small changes in behaviour and/ or attitude

Substantial Receptor perception = Disruptive

Causes a material change in behaviour and/or attitude.

Severe Receptor perception = Physically harmful

Significant changes in behaviour and /or an inability to mitigate effect of noise leading to psychological or physiological effects.

Significant

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-4

9.2.3 Assessment of Road Traffic Noise

Sound pressure levels associated with the construction and operational traffic were estimated using the methodology set out in Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN) (Department of Transport Welsh Office, 1988). The sound level difference with and without the proposed expansion were assessed in terms of perceptible sound level difference and magnitude of this impact.

The detail of the traffic impact assessment is described in EIAR Chapter 6 ‘Traffic and Transportation’. The principal contractor for the expansion also provided estimated monthly construction traffic, in terms of both light goods/ cars and heavy good vehicles. Based on these traffic counts, traffic flow volumes are predicted for future years and the nearest noise sensitive locations to the principal roads for construction/ operation traffic were chosen to assess the significance of this potential impact of noise from increased traffic.

9.2.4 Assessment of Construction Phase Vibration

There are two types of vibration standards: those dealing with human perception/comfort and those dealing with cosmetic or structural damage to buildings. In both instances, the magnitude of vibration is expressed in terms of Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) in millimetres per second (mm/s).

British standard BS 5228-2: 2009 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites- Part 2: Vibration (British Standards Institute, 2009) states that the threshold of human perception being typically in the range of 0.14 mm/s to 0.3 mm/s, with a vibration level of 1.0 mm.s-1 in residential environments are likely to cause complaint. Beyond 10 mm/s, vibration is likely to be intolerable for any more than a brief exposure period.

British standard BS 7385-2: 1993 Evaluation and measurement for vibration in buildings – Part 2: Guide to damage levels from groundborne vibration (British Standards Institute, 1993)outlines transient vibration threshold criteria for cosmetic damage, which are shown in Table 9.523.

Table 9.5 Transient vibration guide values for cosmetic damage (BS 7385-2)

Type of Building

Peak component particle velocity in frequency range of predominant pulse

1

4 Hz to 15 Hz 15 Hz and above

Reinforced or framed structures – Industrial and heavy commercial buildings

50 mm/s 50 mm/s

Unreinforced or light framed structures – Residential or light commercial type buildings

15 mm/s at 4 Hz increasing to 20 mm/s at 15 Hz

20 mm/s at 15 Hz increasing to 50 mm/s at 40 Hz and above

Note 1 Important buildings that are difficult to repair might require special consideration on a case-by-case basis

The TII guidelines (Good Practice for the Treatment of Noise during the Planning of National Road Schemes, 2014) recommend that vibration from road construction activities is limited to the values shown in Table 9.6 and that compliance with these limits should ensure there is little to no risk of cosmetic damage to buildings.

Table 9.6 Allowable vibration during road construction in order to minimise the risk of building damage

Allowable vibration velocity (Peak Particle Velocity) at the closest part of any sensitive property to the source of vibration, at a frequency of;

Less than 10 Hz 10 to 50 Hz 50 to 100 Hz (and above)

23 These levels are also stated in British Standard Institution BS 5228-2 2009 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites- Part 2: Vibration.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-5

Allowable vibration velocity (Peak Particle Velocity) at the closest part of any sensitive property to the source of vibration, at a frequency of;

8 mm/s 12.5 mm/s 20 mm/s

The sources of potential construction vibration were assessed based on the proposed construction methodologies and the distances to the nearest vibration sensitive receivers.

9.2.5 Assessment of Operational Phase Vibration

There are no expected sources of operational vibration from the proposed expansion.


9.3.1 Construction Noise

The construction of the buildings involve laying of concrete foundations with some buildings requiring reinforced concrete elements, followed by erection of steel structure and cladding/ roofing. The final stage will involve building fit-out.

Bored piling will be required at both the High Bay Warehouse and Freezer Area. There may be a limited rock breaking required at the proposed Production Building foundations depending on ground conditions. Erection of the new steel and envelope will include cranes on the site and some site drilling of existing steel for new connections as well as a substantial amount of metal cutting and shot fixing for metal decking, cladding and roofing materials. There will be mechanical and electrical workshops set-up on the site for pre-fabrication of brackets and piping and this will involve a constant amount of cutting / grinding / and drilling of steel. There will be construction traffic on the site with reversing alarms. Delivery vehicles (HGVs, LGVs) and cars will travel to and from the site on a daily basis.

All of these sources will increase the ambient sound pressure levels at noise sensitive locations with the potential to create noise during the construction phase.

9.3.2 Operational Noise

There are new sources proposed as part of the expansion including new cooling towers, an additional emergency generator and equipment associated with the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) expansion. In addition, there will be additional levels from the traffic on-site associated with the new 250 no. jobs resulting from the site’s expansion.

An inherent element of the design centring the utilities on the site surrounded by the expansion buildings and the recently constructed northern berms provides an effective form of sound screening.

9.3.3 Construction Vibration

Ground improvement and foundations works will be required with piling and rock breaking proposed at the site for certain structures.


9.4.1 Existing Facility

The Janssen Sciences site has operated under licence from the Environmental Protection Agency since January 2006. There have no been complaints received (including relating to noise) by the Agency while the site has been licensed.

The annual environmental reports from 2008 to 2016 were reviewed and although during some years, environmental noise levels were noted above the conditioned emission limit values, the cause of the exceedances were not related to site sources but rather off-site sources such as traffic. The site is considered to be fully compliant with its conditioned limit values as described in Table 9.3.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-6

9.4.2 Noise Environment

The existing facility and proposed expansion are located within land primarily comprised of similar industrial sites and is zoned for industrial use. The closest population cluster is Shanbally Village 1.2 km to the west of the site. The closest noise sensitive locations to the site are;

- national schools to the west and south-east (Shanbally and Ringaskiddy national schools at 1.2 and 1.1 km respectively),

- a cemetery 580 m to the south-east,

- a small HSE facility (local health centre) 1 km to the south-west east and,

- the closest residential properties approximately 1 km to the west and 700 m to the east.

An illustration of NSLs relative to the site is presented in Figure 9.1.

The existing facility operates on a shift system, 7 days per week, 24 hours per day with the principal noise sources on site being;

- Air handling units;

- Emergency generators (when used);

- Utility yard plant;

- Wastewater treatment plant;

- CHP system and boiler flues and;

- Cooling towers.

Other noise sources in the area aside from the Janssen Sciences site are the other pharmaceutical sites to the immediate south and north (Novartis and Pfizer respectively), operations at the Port of Cork to the north-east and traffic on the N28 national route passing through Shanbally Village along the northern boundary of the site.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-7

Figure 9.1 Noise Sensitive Locations in Proximity to the Site

The study area for this chapter incorporated the closest noise sensitive locations. Compliance at these locations with the relevant construction and operation emission limits infers compliance and reduced impact at more distance NSL.

As described in Section 9.2.2, operational noise is surveyed annually in accordance with emission limits described in the site’s IE licence. The most recent survey was carried out in February 2017 by Verdé Environmental Consultants at the locations described in Table 9.7 and Figure 9.2.

Table 9.7 February 2017 Noise Survey Results

Averaged (LAeq, dB) Daytime Evening-time Night-time

IE Licence Limit (Applicable to boundary locations only) 55 50 45

Boundary Locations

N1 52 45 41

N2 46 47 43

N3 47 44 44

N4 56 53 52

N5 55 48 44

Noise Sensitive Locations

NS1 48 44 38

Legend

Residential Sensitive Receivers

Non- Residential Sensitive Receivers

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-8

Averaged (LAeq, dB) Daytime Evening-time Night-time

IE Licence Limit (Applicable to boundary locations only) 55 50 45

NS1 (ALT) 48 43 38

NS2 53 48 43

NS3 47 43 41

Figure 9.2 2017 Noise Monitoring Locations with Site Boundary and Highlighted

Proposed Development

Based on the contemporaneous notes provided by Verde and presented in Appendix E.1 ‘2017 Noise Survey Monitoring Notes’, the levels recorded at the boundary locations shown in Table 9.8 do not reflect the site’s operations but instead reflect extraneous noise sources audible at the site’s boundary locations.

The dominant source at each noise sensitive location in the 2017 survey was traffic, both local and distant, rather than Janssen Sciences sources. Notably at boundary location N4 which exceeds the boundary emission limits, the levels were deemed to be from non-Janssen Sciences based noise sources24.

The sound levels measured at the nearest noise sensitive locations are not required to meet the emission limit values for the boundary locations but the levels from site operations should be lower than the limit values through distance attenuation.

Notably, monitoring locations NSL1 and NSL2 were also used for the 2005 planning application for the Centocor Biologics project (under Cork County Council planning permission reference 052431). The 2004 and 2017 data are compared in Table 9.8. The data indicates that the levels measured in 2004 were predominantly higher than the levels recorded in 2017. Rather than industrial

24 Pers comm with Verdé regarding 2017 survey

Legend

Site boundary

Monitoring locations

Proposed buildings

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:12


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-9

development in the area allowing for ‘noise creep’ (i.e. the incremental increasing over time of overall noise levels from additional developments), the 2004 levels highlight an existing level in the area. These locations can therefore not be considered as quiet areas or highly sensitive to noise.

Table 9.8 Comparison of 2005 and 2017 Sound Pressure Level Data

Locations Daytime LAeq, dB Daytime LA90, dB Night-time LAeq, dB Night-time LA90, dB

NSL1 20041 52.2/ 51.2 47.4/ 47.1 42.5 40.2

NSL1 Feb 2017 48 45 38 30

NSL2 20041 51.6/ 52.1 44.7/ 49.4 45.2 43.6

NSL2 Feb 2017 53 49 43 39

Note 1: Daytime data was collected over two survey periods in 2005; 18 and 21 December 2004

9.4.3 Vibration Environment

Common sources of non-construction ground-borne vibration are trains, heavy good vehicle movements and large earth-moving equipment. In terms of this site and immediate environs, the only possible source of vibration would result from HGV movements on the N28 national road and local roads. However, the level of vibration generated is directly related to the condition of the road on which the vehicle is travelling and speed of said vehicle with road surfaces, notably those with pot-holes, more likely to generate ground-borne vibration. The conditions of roads leading to the site both for operational traffic and proposed route for construction traffic off the N28 are in good condition and it is unlikely that traffic will cause perceivable vibration levels.

In terms of receivers, there are no external vibration sensitive locations such as hospitals or research sites with vibration sensitive equipment. A review of the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage (Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs)25 shows the closest heritage sites at 1.2 km to the south-west and the west of the site. The distances of these features to the proposed expansion works negate the risk of structural damage from construction-borne vibration. This chapter will therefore be limited to consideration of vibration on human perception levels.


9.5.1 Potential Noise Impacts – Construction Phase

Construction works will occur for a period of 24 (no.) months with core construction working hours of Monday to Friday 7:00am to 7:00pm, and 7:00am to 4:00pm on Saturdays, unless otherwise agreed with Cork County Council. The primary noise-generating sources during the construction phase will be short-term, intermittent and include:

Ground preparation phase – excavators, dump trucks and rollers for ground, filling and levelling Structural phase – installation of foundations and erection of new buildings involving the use of equipment such as compressors, generators, pneumatic tools, hand-held power tools, mobile/fixed cranes and construction related traffic

During the construction phase of the proposed expansion, a variety of items of plant will be in use, such as excavators, lifting equipment, dumper trucks, compressors and generators. A feature of this activity type is the intermittent and highly changeable nature of the sound pressure level and its characteristics. Impulsive-type noise26 will be limited as far as possible but will be associated with activities like rock breaking. The associated annoyance with this form of noise is accounted for with the inclusion of a 5dB penalty to the predicted sound pressure level.

25 http://webgis.buildingsofireland.ie/HistoricEnvironment 26 A noise that is of short duration (typically less than one second), the sound pressure level of which is significantly higher than the background e.g. hammer blow to metal sheet.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-10

Prediction Calculation

The predicted sound levels associated with the construction phase were calculated using the prediction method described in Annex F ‘Estimating Noise from Sites’ of BS 5228: Part 1: 2009 (+A1:2014) (BSI, 2014). The construction sequencing was provided by the Principal Contractor for the extension works together with the expected plant usage for each phase on a monthly basis. This detail is provided in Appendix E.2 as ‘Construction Phase Sequencing and Associated Plant’. Each of the proposed pieces of plant was then allocated a LAeq

27 sound level from sound level data provided in BS 5228: Part 1 Annex C tables, also described in Appendix E.2.

Following compilation of the sound pressure levels, the respective distances from each NSL to section of the proposed expansion was estimated and is shown in Table 9.9.

Table 9.9 Separation Distances between Noise Sensitive Location and Proposed Expansion

Noise Sensitive

Location

Proposed

Building

NSL1 (m) NSL1-ALT (m) NSL2 (m) NSL3 (m)

Production building 917 882 844 683

Lab/Admin area 1097 1063 661 501

High bay warehouse 1071 1018 685 518

Freezer area 1044 988 713 542

Waste sort area 955 915 810 635

New dispensary 991 958 771 608

WWTP additions 1281 1249 500 366

Calculation method ‘Method for activity LAeq, T’ (Annex F.2.2 of BS 5228-1:2009) was used to estimate the sound pressure levels taking distance and screening attenuation into account and considering reflection for conversion from free-field to façade levels.

Conservative factors for distance adjustment and screening were applied, assuming hard ground propagation and only allowing screening where the site buildings were entirely screened from the receiver “assume an approximate attenuation of 5dB when the top of the plant is just visible to the receiver over the noise barrier and of 10dB when the noise screen completely hides the sources from the receiver” (BS 5228-1:2009+A1:2014 Procedure F.2.2.2.1). The screening assessment was carried out using the ‘ground level view’ function in Google Earth software incorporating a 3-D model produced of the site.

Furthermore, it was assumed that the plant will be used for 100% of the operating times which is as a worse case. A rating penalty factor of 5 dB was also applied to each month’s predicted level to represent a worse-case impulsive characteristic. Such characteristics will be minimised as far as practicable on site and this detail is provided in Section 9.7.1 under construction mitigation measures.

Predicted Construction Sound Levels and Impact Assessment

The predicted construction noise levels based on the aforementioned methodology and parameters are presented in Table 9.10.

27 At a reference distance of 10 m

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-11

Table 9.10 BS 5228-1 Predicted Construction Sound Pressure Levels

Receiver

Predicted Construction Sound Pressure Levels (LAeq, dB)

NSL1 NSL1-ALT NSL2 NSL3

Nov-17 51 51 63 62

Dec-17 49 49 60 59

Jan-18 37 37 47 46

Feb-18 49 49 62 62

Mar-18 45 45 56 55

Apr-18 45 45 58 57

May-18 48 49 60 60

Jun-18 44 44 58 57

Jul-18 39 40 52 51

Aug-18 38 38 51 50

Sep-18 45 45 63 63

Oct-18 26 26 26 26

Nov-18 45 45 63 63

Dec-18 26 26 26 26

Jan-19 31 31 48 47

Feb-19 31 31 48 47

It is predicted that the maximum level arising off-site during the construction works (including a 5 dB penalty for impulsive noise) will be below the 70 dB LAeq limit value provided in the TII guideline level of 70 dB LAeq and below the BS 5228-1 Category A threshold limit value of 65 dB LAeq.

Given that the predicted noise levels constitute worst case conditions, actual construction noise levels will likely be below these predicted leveld. Furthermore compliance with the BS 5228-1:2009 Category A daytime limit of 65 dB LAeq demonstrates that a significant adverse impact is not likely at any of the modelled receivers during the construction phase.

An assessment was also carried out on the impact of construction traffic on the construction traffic access to the site from the N28 road and the nearest noise sensitive receptor being NS1 as shown in Figure 9.3. Prediction modelling was carried out using the Calculation of Road Traffic Noise method (Department of Transport Welsh Office, 1988).

Again, a conservative assumption was made when carrying out the calculation. Of the traffic number estimates provided by the contractor, it was assumed that the traffic movements all represent movements occurring within a 1-hour period which is unlikely as these movements may occur over several hours. The maximum predicted sound pressure level was 58 dB LAeq, 1 hour which is dominated by the conservative traffic prediction.

A exercise was carried out at receiver NSL1 which is the closest noise sensitive location to construction traffic, calculating the overall sound pressure level comprising both stationary plant and construction traffic. Table 9.11 presents the overall level predicted at this receiver for each construction phase month. The overall level complies with both the TII guideline level of 70 dB LAeq and the BS 5228-1 Category A threshold limit value of 65 dB LAeq. As such, a significant adverse impact is not considered likely.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-12

Nevertheless, best practice mitigation measures are recommended during the construction phase to minimise the potential for noise generation and in line with good construction practice. These measures are designed to reduce the potential for impulsive characteristics of the noise sources which can cause annoyance together with measures to reduce overall levels. These measures are detailed in Section 9.7.1

Figure 9.3 Construction Traffic Access

Table 9.11 Overall Construction Traffic Sound Levels at Receiver NSL1

Construction Phase Month Stationary plant level,

dB LAeq, 1 hr

CRTN Traffic level, dB LAeq, 1

hr Cumulative Level,

dB LAeq, 1 hr

Nov-17 51 51 54

Dec-17 49 55 56

Jan-18 37 55 55

Feb-18 49 57 57

Mar-18 45 57 58

Apr-18 45 57 57

May-18 48 57 58

Jun-18 44 57 57

Jul-18 39 58 58

Aug-18 38 58 58

Sep-18 45 58 58

Construction Traffic Access via N28

NSL1

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-13

Construction Phase Month Stationary plant level,

dB LAeq, 1 hr

CRTN Traffic level, dB LAeq, 1

hr Cumulative Level,

dB LAeq, 1 hr

Oct-18 26 58 58

Nov-18 45 58 58

Dec-18 26 57 57

Jan-19 31 57 57

Feb-19 31 56 56

Mar-19 - 56 56

Apr-19 - 55 55

May-19 - 53 53

Jun-19 - 50 50

Jul-19 - 45 45

Aug-19 - 42 42

Sep-19 - 41 41

Oct-19 - 41 41

9.5.2 Potential Noise Impacts - Operational Phase

There will be a number of noise generating equipment items and activities associated with the operation of the proposed expansion. An assessment was carried out modelling the operational sound pressure levels at both licensed boundary locations and the nearest noise sensitive locations. The boundary locations are considered in terms of compliance with the IE license emission limits rather than quantification of impact. Whereas the noise sensitive locations are not required to comply with IE licence noise emission limits and instead are considered in terms of increased levels over existing background levels and the resultant impact.

Prediction Calculation

The sound levels associated with proposed stationary external sources at the site were predicted according to the International Standard ISO 9313-2: 1996 Acoustics -Attenuation of sound outdoors- Part 2: General Method of Calculation (ISO, 1996) using Brüel & Kjær Predictor software (Version 9.12). The details of the operational prediction model are described in the operational noise modelling report (PM Group report reference IE0311854-22-RPT-0006), provided in Appendix E.3.

Each of the major potential noise sources associated with the proposed project was identified with the site designers and representative sound power data (SWL) or sound pressure level (SPL) data was assigned to reflect the acoustic design goals. The sound power data allocated to each source is representative of the expected level of each source. The locations of these proposed sources are shown in Figures 9.4 and 9.5 and are detailed in the operational noise modelling report provided in Appendix E.3.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-14

Figure 9.4 Location of Proposed Utility/Warehouse and Laboratory Noise Sources

Figure 9.5 Location of Proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant Noise Sources

SOURCES: S1 Cooling Tower S2 Cooling Tower Pump S3 Emergency Generator #3 Exhaust S4 Emergency Generator #3 S10 Existing warehouse condensing unit S11 Freezer Rooms Cooling Tower S12-1 Lab exhaust fans stack (Three combined fans as duty-duty-standby) S12-2 Lab exhaust fans stack (Single fan)

SOURCES: S13 EQ Tank No. 1 agitator S14 EQ Tank No. 2 agitator S15 EQ Tank No. 3 agitator S16 Off spec tank agitator S17 Cooling Tower #2 S18 Odour Control Unit #2 S19 MWW Inlet Sump #2 Pumps S20 WWTP Dosing Stations #2 S21 Equalisation Tank #3 Pump S22 Equalisation Tank #4 (future) Pump

S23 Anoxic Tank mixer S24 Nitrification tank mixer S25 Nitrification Tank Recycle Pumps S26 Anoxic Tank #2 (Future - Phase 2) mixer S27 Nitrification Tank (Future - Phase 2) mixer S28 Nitrification Tank Recycle Pumps (Future) S29/S30 MBR Pumps #2 S31 Relocated P addition pump S32 P addition pump S33 P addition pump S34 P addition pump

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-15

Discrete receivers (i.e. noise sensitive locations) and a receiver grid were used in the model to reflect the predicted levels emitting from the proposed development and for production of noise level contour maps respectively. These locations comprise both noise sensitive locations and licenced boundary monitoring locations as described in Section 9.4. A receiver height was set at 1.5m representative of the standard human receiver and was used for all modelled receptors with an additional height of 4.0 m for noise sensitive locations to reflect a building’s second storey.

Operational scenarios for daytime (07:00 to 19:00 hours), evening-time (19:00 to 23:00 hrs) and night-time (23:00 to 07:00hrs) periods were modelled. In addition, an alternative scenario was modelled for both daytime and night-time periods, illustrating the predicted noise levels if the new proposed emergency generator operates.

- Scenario 1: Daytime/Evening-time Scenario with all sources except emergency generator - Scenario 2: Daytime/Evening-time Scenario with all sources

- Scenario 3: Night-time Scenario with all sources except emergency generator and lab exhausts

- Scenario 4: Night-time Scenario with all sources except lab exhausts

Predicted Operational Sound Levels and Impact Assessment

The predicted operational sound pressure levels are presented in Table 9.12 for both boundary locations and the nearest noise sensitive locations with the noise contour plots of 1.5 m height LAeq levels are presented in Figures 9.6 to 9.9.

Table 9.12 Predicted Operational Sound Pressure Levels

Receiver Height (m) Predicted Noise Level dB LAeq

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

Boundary Locations

N1 1.5 26.9 27.6 24.6 25.7

N2 1.5 35.0 35.2 28.3 29.1

N3 1.5 37.8 37.9 36.3 36.5

N4 1.5 31.1 35.8 29.9 35.4

N5 1.5 30.8 32.6 24.4 29.5

Nearest Noise Sensitive Locations

NSL1 1.5 22.6 23.5 20.1 21.6

4 22.8 23.7 20.3 21.8

NSL1 (ALT) 1.5 26.5 26.8 21.0 22

4 28.0 28.3 21.5 22.5

NSL2 1.5 25.4 25.7 20.6 21.4

4 26.6 26.8 21.6 22.3

NSL3 1.5 30.8 31 -2 -2

Impact Assessment for Boundary Locations

The results for the boundary locations and the noise sensitive locations are separately assessed in terms of the IE licence limits/ EPA NG4 guidance and WHO criteria for residential environments.

The results from the prediction modelling demonstrate that the predicted noise level contribution from the proposed expansion are below the applicable noise criteria described in Section 1.2, i.e. LAeq,T of 55dB at daytime, 50dB at evening time and 45dB at night-time.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-16


Legend

Site boundary

Predicted LAeq Levels (dB)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-17

Figure 9.7 Scenario 2 Predicted LAeq Levels at 1.5 m Receiver Height

Legend

Site boundary


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-18


Legend

Site boundary


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-19


Legend

Site boundary


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-20

When these predicted levels are combined with the existing boundary noise levels measured in February 2017, the results, as presented in Table 9.13, demonstrate that the overall sound pressure level (with the exception of location N4) from the existing facility and proposed project are compliant with the daytime and night-time licensed limits of 55 and 45 dB LAeq and can also meet a proposed evening time limit of 50 dB LAeq.

The sound pressure levels measured at boundary location N4 were deemed to be from non-Janssen Sciences based noise sources28 and therefore there are no non-compliances predicted at this location.

Table 9.13 Predicted Overall Sound Pressure Levels at Site Boundary Locations

Receiver Height

(m)

Predicted Cumulative Levels, dB LAeq

Daytime Scenarios Evening-time Scenarios Night-time Scenarios

1 2 1 2 3 4

N1 1.5 52 52 45 45 41 41

N2 1.5 47 47 48 48 43 43

N3 1.5 48 48 45 45 44 44

N4 1.5 56 57 53 53 52 52

N5 1.5 55 55 48 48 44 44

Impact Assessment for Nearest Noise Sensitive Locations

As described previously, the boundary locations and noise sensitive locations are assessed under different criteria to reflect the licence compliance requirements at the former and adverse impact assessment required at the latter.

The predicted levels from the proposed facility are significantly less than the existing levels measured at the noise sensitive locations. When combined to generate the overall predicted levels at the nearest noise sensitive locatons (Table 9.14), the predicted levels do not increase above the measured noise levels with the exception of NSL3 evening where the overall level increases by 1 dBA. A 1 dB change is not perceptible and is therefore of negligible magnitude and is not significant.

Table 9.14 Predicted Overall Sound Pressure Levels at Noise Sensitive Locations

Receiver Height

(m)

Predicted Cumulative Levels, dB LAeq

Daytime Scenarios Evening-time Scenarios Night-time Scenarios

1 2 1 2 3 4

NSL1 (ALT) 1.5 48 48 43 43 38 38

4 48 48 43 43 38 38

NSL1 1.5 48 48 44 44 38 38

4 48 48 44 44 38 38

NSL2 1.5 53 53 48 48 43 43

4 53 53 48 48 43 43

NSL3 1.5 47 47 44 (+1 dB) 44 (+1 dB) -1 -1

Note 1: Since noise sensitive location NSL3 is a graveyard, there is no requirement to assess impact during night-time periods since this facility should not be in use during this period.

28 Pers comm with Verdé regarding 2017 survey

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-21

The final on-site cumulative contribution to sound levels at the nearest noise sensitive locations is from the wind turbine. Since the wind speeds during the 2017 survey were less than 5 m/s, the turbine will not have been operating at rated power and will have contributed very little to the measured LAeq values. The wind turbine EIS29 contained prediction modelling of a proposed turbine at noise sensitive locations, comparable to NSL1 and NSL2. The turbine sound pressure level was predicted for a wind speed of 10 m/s (i.e. the rated output of the turbine) at NSL1 and NSL2 and are shown in Table 9.15.

When combined with the overall sound pressure level described in Table 9.14, the overall sound pressure level with the maximum sound level from the wind turbine is presented in Table 9.15 and indicates a maximum increase of 2 dB over existing levels. A 2 dB change is not perceptible and is therefore of negligible magnitude and is not significant.

The overall levels are compliant with the WHO Community Noise daytime guideline limit of 50 dB LAeq (for prevention of moderate annoyance) and night-time limit of 45dB LAeq for prevention of sleep disturbance.

Table 9.15 Predicted Overall Sound Pressure Levels Including Turbine Source

Receiver Predicted Turbine Sound Level Cumulative Sound Level

dB LA90 dB LAeq Day, dB LAeq Evening, dB LAeq Night, dB LAeq

NSL1 33 35 48 45 (+2dB) 40 (+2 dB)

NSL2 35 37 53 48 44 (+1 dB)

Operational Phase Traffic on Public Roads

A traffic assessment has been prepared by Malachy Walsh & Partners and provided in EIAR Chapter 6 ‘Traffic and Transportation’. This has been used to determine the predicted change in noise levels on the road routes in the vicinity of the proposed expansion for the future years 2023. The predicted levels based on the CRTN calculation are provided in Table 9.16 based on the relative increase in noise level associated with traffic movements with and without the development using the provided AADT flow figures.

The traffic level change results in a maximum of 1 dB change at where there is the most significant traffic flow increase, all other modelled locations will experience much less level increases. There is negligible impact predicted as the level increases are imperceptible.

Table 9.16 Predicted Operational Traffic Sound Pressure Levels

Location Road Link 2023 Baseline

AADT (2016+TII High Growth+GE)

2023 AADT With BioCork2 Operational

Distance to nearest

receptor, m

Change in Sound

Pressure Level, dB Lden Total Change


N28 North 30,259 30,569 310 34 <<0.5

R611 13,950 13,950 0

N28 East 15,608 15,918 310 22 <<0.5


N28 West 15,140 15,450 310 10 <<0.5

L2492 2,239 2,239 0

N28 East 11,987 12,297 310 17 <0.5

N28/R613 N28 West 8,057 8,367 310 180 <0.5

R613 2,362 2,672 310 150 0.50

29 Janssen Biologics (Ireland) Wind Energy Project Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1 (Arup, April 2011)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-22

Location Road Link 2023 Baseline

AADT (2016+TII High Growth+GE)

2023 AADT With BioCork2 Operational

Distance to nearest

receptor, m

Change in Sound

Pressure Level, dB Lden Total Change

N28 East 7,336 7,336 0 190

R613/Janssen Access Road

R613 East 6,381 6,691 310 50 <0.5

Access Road

1,166 1,542 376 65 1.0

R613 West 4,672 4,737 65 42 <<0.5


Inner Relief Road 7,008 7,029 21 26 <<0.5

R613 West 4,248 4,260 12 17 <<0.5

R612 10,966 10,998 32 12 <<0.5

R613 East 5,760 5,825 65 22 <<0.5

N28 at Carr’s Hill

N28 North 30,259 30,569 310 38 <<0.5

9.5.3 Potential Noise Impacts – Cumulative Construction

The nearest sites with greatest potential to cumulatively add to the sound pressure levels associated with the construction phase of the proposed expansion are:

- the enabling works associated with the proposed GE BioPark to the south of the site (subject to a third party appeal with An Bord Pleanála);

- the materials extraction and transportation to East Tip, Haulbowline Island (in planning with Cork County Council);

- the development of a resource recovery centre by Indaver in Ringaskiddy (in planning with An Bord Pleanála) and;

- the Ringaskiddy Port redevelopment project (granted planning permission).

This assessment assumes all these sites are granted planning and are developed.

The wastewater treatment plant at Shanbally for the Cork Lower Harbour Main Drainage Project was completed and the drainage network construction is being carried out in the area since March 2017. This is expected to be completed before construction of the proposed expansion will commence. Similarly, enabling works for the GE Biopark is expected to be completed. It is assumed that the construction works for building extensions at neighbouring sites (Pfizer, Biomarin and Novartis) will also be completed by this stage.

The noise sensitive location for this project that is most susceptible to cumulative noise during the construction phase of the named projects is NS3, i.e., the graveyard to the east of the site. The locations of NSL3 and the site are shown in Figure 9.10.

The predicted construction level at this location (or a comparable/closest calculated location) from these four developments are as follows;

- 54 dBA from construction of GE BioPark30;

- 60 dBA from materials extraction and transportation to East Tip31;

30 Section 9 of EIS for Proposed Biopark at Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork, September 2016, McCutcheon Halley Walsh 31 Section 9 of EIS for Materials Extraction and Land Re-profiling, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork, RPS, August 2016

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-23

- 50 dBA from construction of the Ringaskiddy Port redevelopment project32, 33;

- 48 dBA from construction of Indaver Resource Recovery Centre34 and ;

Figure 9.10 Construction Sites Relative to Janssen Sciences Site

Cumulatively, the overall level at NSL3 if all four projects are constructed concurrently is 62dBA. Considering the worst-case noise levels from the construction of the proposed expansion is predicted to be 63 dBA35, the overall cumulative construction noise level (including a rating for impulsive noise) is 65 dBA. This level is compliant with both the TII guideline levels at the façade of dwellings during construction of 70 dB LAeq and the BS 5228-1 Category A threshold limit value of 65 dB LAeq. As such, a significant adverse impact is not considered likely.

Regular construction monitoring is recommended in Section 9.6.1 and a location such as NSL3 should be included to consider the impact of cumulative noise from other sites.

9.5.4 Potential Noise Impacts – Cumulative Operational

M28 Road Scheme

The M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy project EIS was published in May 201736. The TII design goal is 60 dB Lden at sensitive receivers set to protect them from new road schemes but this would not be required to be met at the existing facility or subsequent proposed developments at the site.

‘Figure 14.10 (Sheet 6 of 7) Do Something with Mitigation Lden Noise Contour Map’ of the scheme’s EIS37 illustrates the operational noise model Lden results along the route at the Janssen Sciences

32 Section 9 of the EIS of the Ringaskiddy Port Redevelopment , RPS, May 2014 33 Section 9 of EIS of the proposed alterations to Permitted Ringaskiddy Port Redevelopment, RPS, January 2017 34 Section 10 of EIS of Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre, Arup, January 2016 35 Table 9.10, predicted for September and November 2018 36 http://www.n28cork-ringaskiddy.com/ 37 http://www.n28cork-ringaskiddy.com/EIS/vol5/Chapter%2014%20Figures/Figure%2014.2%20-%2014.11%20Noise.pdf

GE Biopark

Port of Cork Redevelopment

NSL3

Indaver Recovery Centre

Legend

Site boundary

Other development boundaries

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-24

site with figure 9.11 below demonstrating the predicted levels around the Janssen Sciences site. The existing development, according to the model, would be exposed to levels of less than 55 dB around the site with the exception of the southern façade of the existing warehouse of levels between 55 to 59 dB. As the site is not considered to be a noise sensitive receiver and the levels are less than the 60 dB Lden design goal, there is no requirement for noise mitigation.

Figure 9.11 Excerpt from N28 Scheme Figure 14.10 (Sheet 6 of 7) ‘Do Something with Mitigation Lden Noise Contour Map’ with Proposed BioCork 2 Development

The façades of the proposed expansion buildings are predicted to be exposed to levels of between 55 and 59 dB Lden which is less than the design goal. In addition, the prominent façades facing the proposed scheme are designed to have few openings, with construction of solid façade and glazed stairwells and it is not expected that external noise from the proposed scheme will negatively affect internal building noise environments.

A cumulative operational level was calculated based on the developments described in Section 9.5.1 combined with the M28 road scheme and the proposed BioCork 2 development.

The same receiver, NSL3, was used as per the cumulative construction assessment due to its central location to the described projects. Note as the road scheme is designed according to an Lden metric (a day-evening-night value derived from LAeq values) therefore the predicted LAeq values for the aforementioned projects were used to derive Lden values for each. Table 9.17 describes the derived Lden values for the 2017 surveyed level, the proposed developments and the overall cumulative level.

Legend

Existing buildings

Proposed BioCork 2 buildings

Predicted Lden Values, dB

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-25

Table 9.17 Cumulative Operational Level at Location NSL3

Receiver Height

(m) Day, dB

LAeq Evening, dB

LAeq Night, dB LAeq

24-Hour dB

Lden,

2017 surveyed existing levels 1.5 47 43 41 49[4]

Predicted Operational Levels from New Facilities

NSL3 from BioCork 2 1.5 31 31 23 33[5]

M28 scheme 60

GE BioPark[1] 32 32 32 38[5]

East Tip[2] 0

Ringaskiddy Port redevelopment project 44.8 44.8 41.7 49[5]

Indaver Resource Recovery Centre[3] 33 32 33 39[5]

Overall Cumulative (dB)

49 48 45 61[5]

In the absence of the road scheme, the cumulative daytime and evening-time levels are compliant with the WHO 50 dB LAeq limit for protection from “moderate annoyance” in external areas.

The cumulative operational Lden value is 61 dB, of which the proposed M28 scheme is the main contributor. Note that the road level is compliant with the Lden design goal of 60dB at this location. The existing and proposed sites (including the BioCork 2 development) only contribute 1 dB towards the cumulative Lden level at this location.

9.5.5 Potential Vibration Impacts

Ground improvement and foundations works will be required with piling and rock breaking proposed at the site for the High Bay Warehouse/ Freezer Area and Production Building respectively. The piling activities are commonly attributed sources of construction ground-borne vibration with the possibility of vibration being felt off-site at sensitive receivers.

For this project, bored piling (i.e. non-percussive) is proposed which minimises the potential for ground-borne vibration. Together with the distances to the sensitive receivers from the proposed piling works being greater than 500m, the vibration causing aspects of bored piling (casing driving and auger hitting the base of the hole) will be insignificant at these distances and the piling activities will be imperceptible at sensitive locations.



As outlined in Section 9.5.1, the construction phase of the proposed expansion is not expected to cause a significant adverse impact. However, as part of the construction contract the Principal Contractor will be obliged to minimise so far as is reasonably practicable the potential noise impact of the construction activity. Throughout the entire construction phase, reference will be made to BS

[1] Predicted at NSL to north of GE Biopark site [1] Predicted at NSL to north of GE Biopark site [2] No operational noise impacts from site once material has been extracted, EIS Section 9.4.3 ‘Materials Extraction and Land Re-profiling, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork’, RPS, August 2016 [3] Predicted levels taken from R7 location, closest point to NSL [4] Calculated from surveyed levels using [5] Calculated from predicted sound pressure levels

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-26

5228-1:2009+A1:2014: Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites – Part 1: Noise. In particular, it is proposed that the following practices be adopted during the construction phase and included in the Construction Environmental Management Plan for the proposed development;

- Control of Working Hours – These will be limited to conditioned construction hours. Official site hours will be maintained with exception only where necessary.

- Limiting the hours during which site activities likely to create high levels of noise or vibration are permitted. Also these activities will be carried out at an appropriate part of the site to minimise potential nuisance to sensitive receptors.

- The duration of construction activities associated with a high level of noise generation will be minimised as far as is practicable

- Machinery and equipment is to be appropriately maintained and operated in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations and switched off when not in use with preferable selection of plant with lower inherent potential for generation of noise and/or vibration

- All construction equipment used will be required to comply with the relevant regulations on plant and equipment noise, namely the European Communities (Construction Plant and Equipment) (Permissible Noise Levels) Regulations, 1988 (S.I. No. 320 of 1988) as amended (S.I. No. 359 of 1996) and the European Communities (Noise Emission by Equipment of Use Outdoors) Regulations, 2001 (SI.. No. 632 of 2001), as amended (S.I. No. 241 of 2006);

- Monitoring of typical noise levels during critical construction periods (for e.g. rock breaking) at noise sensitive locations will be carried out where required. And where necessary, attenuation such as erection of noise screens will be implemented.

- Minimisation of impulsive noise sources and activities, including reduction of material drop heights, minimising hammering activities, restricting rock breaking activities during morning-tie hours together with regular checks during impulsive noise generating activities at the nearest noise sensitive locations such as the national schools and the nearest residential properties;

- Keeping all site access roads even so as to mitigate the potential for vibration from HGV movements.

- Establishing channels of communication between the Principal Contractor / Developer, Cork County Council, and residents.

- Appointing a site representative responsible for matters relating to noise and vibration.

- Monitoring typical levels of noise and vibration during critical periods and at sensitive locations.


As discussed in Section 9.2.2, noise emissions from the site are controlled under the site’s IE Licence (Reg. No. P0778-01) and the operational phase of the proposed development will be conditioned under the noise emission limits laid out in Schedule B or any future revision thereof. Although the site’s operational noise levels are expected to comply with the licence boundary limits and significant adverse impacts are not predicted at the noise sensitive locations, adherence to the design criteria for new noise sources as described in Appendix E.3 is required. Where these design criteria cannot be met, further iterations of the operational noise model are recommended for assurance that the noise conditions can be met.

Specific operational mitigation measures are as follows:

- Design, procurement and installation of equipment to relevant industry standards (IS, EN etc.);

- Specification of maximum noise limit criteria for equipment in procurement contracts, including the absence of tonal/impulsive components in external equipment;

- Inspection and maintenance of equipment as part of the site’s preventive maintenance programme to ensure continued normal operation and minimisation of any noise issues occurring and;

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-27

- Restricting any specific noisy activities which could impact on ambient noise levels (e.g. testing of equipment) to daytime hours only.

9.6.3 Operational Phase Traffic on Public Roads

As it has been concluded that the associated noise impact of increased traffic as a result of the proposed development will be imperceptible, no mitigation measures are necessary.


With the employment of the mitigation measures as detailed above for operational phase, and given the temporary nature and mitigation measures detailed for the construction phase, it is not expected that the proposed development will have any significant adverse residual noise or vibration impact on the local environment during the construction or operational phases.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 9-28


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-1

10 Water and Wastewater

10.1 Introduction

This chapter assesses and evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed BioCork2 development on the surrounding water environment. This chapter should be read in conjunction with the Description of the Proposed Development (Chapter 2), Soils, Geology & Hydrogeology (Chapter 7) and Biodiversity (Chapter 8) of this EIAR.

This Chapter of the EIAR addresses the identification and assessment of any potential impacts on water quality and/or flooding arising from the generation and discharge of effluent / waste water, and/or changes in the volume and characteristics of storm water run-off from the site arising from the proposed development.

The following key aspects of the water environment are covered in detail within this section:

- Existing surface water environment including natural water bodies in the vicinity of the proposed development site

- Waste water (foul and process waste water) from the proposed development and associated Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) expansion

- Storm water (rainfall run-off) from the proposed development

- Potential flood risk

The following figures / diagrams are referenced throughout this Chapter.

Figure 10.1 - Indicative Route for Treated Wastewater Discharge to Cork Harbour

Figure 10.2 – Schematic Diagram, On-Site Waste Water Management

Figure 10.3 – Indicative Layout – WWTP Expansion

Figure 10.4 – Indicative Route for Storm Water Run-Off to Cork Harbour

Figure 10.5 – Schematic Diagram, On-Site Storm Water Management

10.2 Existing Surface Water Environment and Natural Water Bodies

There are no watercourses at or in the vicinity of the proposed development site. The nearest Natura 2000 site; Cork Harbour, which is designated as an SPA (site code: 004030), is located c. 0.33km from the proposed development site.

The proposed development site is located within the Lee, Cork Harbour and Youghal Bay catchment (Water Frameworks Directive WFD catchment, www.epa.ie), the Lower Lee/Owenboy Water Management Unit, Cork Harbour Hydrometric Area and in the Southwestern River Basin District (www.epa.ie). The nearest watercourses, the Owenboy River and the Glounatouig stream (Hilltown 19, epa.ie), are located approximately 2km south and north of the proposed development site respectively. The Owenboy River flows into Owenboy Estuary, to the south of the proposed development site, which is adjacent to Cork Harbour. The Glounatouig stream (Hilltown 19, epa.ie), flows to Cork Harbour to the north of the proposed development site. The proposed development site is separated from Cork Harbour by a combination of; other industrial sites, public roads, residential properties and agricultural fields. Cork Harbour is classified as being of ‘Good’ status (WFD; 2010 – 2015). The Owenboy Estuary has not been assigned a WFD status, however upstream the Owenboy River is identified as being at risk of not achieving ‘Good’ status (www.epa.ie 2010 – 2015). The Glounatouig stream (Hilltown 19, epa.ie) has not been assigned a WFD status.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-2

10.3 Existing Environment – Water and Wastewater

10.3.1 Water

The existing Janssen facility draws potable water from the Cork Harbour water supply scheme. A peak daily design demand up to 400m3/day is readily met through the existing Irish Water infrastructure in the Ringaskiddy area. Additional potable water supply will be required to support the start-up and operation of the new BioCork2 manufacturing operations, over and above the quantity of public water supply currently required to support the existing facility. In consultation with Irish Water it has been confirmed through pre-connection enquiry that projected additional demand, as set out in table 10.1 below, can be met within the capacities of the existing local infrastructure. Table 10.1 also includes the equivalent maximum quantities of wastewater arising for the same operational scenarios.

Table 10.1 Existing and Projected Future Water and Wastewater Volumes

Scenario

Max. Water In (m

3/day)

Max. Wastewater

Out (m3/day)

1

Current Design Capacity (existing operations)

400 800

Interim Design Capacity – Post construction (2020)

740 800

Ultimate Design Capacity - Future 1040 1200

Notes:

1. Maximum wastewater discharges include provision for periods of storage and balancing >24 hours.

Water demand for the proposed development will continue to be minimised in line with current best practice which is employed within the existing operations. The following initiatives have been included in the design of both the new Production and Laboratory & Administration buildings;

• Both buildings will have their own rainwater harvesting system to collect rainwater from the roof, to serve toilets and urinals. The intention is to have 100% of water for sewage conveyance by non-potable water.

• Water usage for domestic purposes (toilets, showers, wash hand basins) will be reduced by at least 50% against the LEED (industry norm) baseline, by using rainwater harvesting for toilet flushing and low flow/flush fixtures.

In addition, no potable water will be used for irrigation purposes.

Based on the foregoing, any potential impacts on the water environment associated with the use of potable water relate less to the demand on the resource and more to the conversion of potable water to a wastewater, through the manufacturing operations, and its subsequent treatment and discharge to the environment. As such, the following assessment of impact focuses on the generation and management of wastewaters arising from the use of potable public water supply.

10.3.2 Wastewater

The onsite WWTP provides full biological secondary treatment prior to discharge to the IDA / Irish Water long sea outfall to Cork Harbour. The existing on site WWTP, which operates in compliance with Janssen Sciences’ IE Licence ( P0778-01), has capacity and permission to treat and discharge up to 800m3 of waste water per day, with current emission levels typically <300m3/day.

In addition to continuous flow, temperature and pH monitoring, effluent quality is monitored weekly for Chemical Oxygen Demand and Suspended Solids, monthly for Biological Oxygen Demand,

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-3

Total Nitrogen and Oils, Fats & Greases, quarterly for Total Phosphorus and Sulphates and annually for Toxicity in accordance with IE Licence requirements.

10.4 Potential Impacts - Wastewater

10.4.1 Construction Phase Impacts

Effluent generated during the construction phase, over and above that currently generated by the Janssen Sciences operating site, will be confined to foul effluent arising from the increase in construction personnel on the site during the 24 month construction period. At peak construction, this will equate to an additional 782 people on site, representing an effluent loading of circa 33m3 per day of wastewater arising from toilets and associated welfare facility provided for the temporary construction staff.

10.4.2 Operational Phase Impacts

As set out in Chapter 2, the development as proposed involves the creation of a new production building, warehouse building extension, laboratory and adminstration building extension , ancillary services and the addition of 250 new staff and contractors that will give rise to an increase in sanitary waste water emissions (circa 10m3/d) post-construction.

An increase in the capacity of the production / manufacturing facility will also see an increase in the generation of manufacturing waste water.

In summary, wastewater will arise from the following areas as a result of the proposed development:

- Aqueous production waste

- Inactivated biowaste

- Utility waste e.g. boiler blowdown, cooling tower effluent

- Sanitary waste water (normal sewage form toilets, lockers, showers and canteen)

It is estimated that the hydraulic load, including sanitary effluent, will increase from the current capacity of 800m3/d to a cumulative total of circa 1,200m3/d as a result of the proposed expansion. Further detail on the effluent characteristics and treatment are outlined in Section 10.5, Mitigation of Impacts.

10.5 Mitigation Measures – Wastewater


All wastewater arising from the construction workforce will be collected in the sanitary sewerage system serving the Janssen Sciences site, and will be directed by gravity to the existing on-site wastewater treatment plant.

Based on current average effluent load of <300m3/d to the existing on-site WWTP which has a capacity to treat up to 800m3/d of waste water, a peak additional contribution of approximately 33m3 per day during the construction phase is well within the design capacity and permitted discharge allowance of the existing WWTP. Accordingly, impact due to increase in effluent loading during the construction phase is deemed to be short -term and negligible.


All wastewater generated as a result of the proposed expansion will be treated within the on-site secondary WWTP (to be expanded) before discharge to the receiving environment of Cork Harbour at Dognose Bank, via the IDA Ireland long sea outfall from Ringaskiddy. See Figure 10.1 below which shows indicatively the route of treated wastewater from the site to Cork Harbour via the

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-4

outfall. The on-site facility currently operates and discharges treated wastewater in compliance with the site’s existing IE Licence ( P0778-01). It is proposed that all future effluent loads will continue to be discharged in compliance with the licence following review and agreement with Irish Water and the EPA regarding emission limit values (ELVs).

An increase in hydraulic loading will be sought from the existing limit of 800m3/d to 1,200m3/d. It is important to note however, that all concentration and mass loads will ultimately be lower than the existing discharge limits arising from an increase in treatment performance in the expanded plant, and resulting in an overall reduced impact on the receiving environment.

Proposed loadings to the outfall are outlined in Table 10.2, ‘Anticipated Wastewater Loads’.

Figure 10.1 Indicative Route for Treated Wastewater Discharge to Cork Harbour

Proposed Expansion of On-Site Wastewater Treatment Plant

The existing WWTP will be expanded, in phases as required, to treat additional effluent loadings from the proposed development expansion. The on-site wastewater management facilities will provide treatment to the combined process effluent from the existing and new operations, and will consist of the following component treatment steps:

- Effluent Reception & Equalisation (New equalisation tanks, 2 x 350m3)

- Effluent Cooling (New Cooling system e.g. cooling tower)

- pH Correction (New pH correction system)

- Phosphorus Reduction (Expanded lime dosing and clarification system for phosphorus reduction)

- Biological Stage Carbonaceous & Nitrogeneous Oxidation (New Anoxic, Aeration & Membrane Bioreactor system)

- Sludge Handling (Expansion of the sludge dewatering system)

- Odour abatement (Expansion of the Odour abatement system)

- In accordance with the requirements of the site’s existing Genetically Modified Miro-Organism (GMM) permit from the EPA, heat inactivation of aqueous waste potentially containing GMM cells from the proposed Production Building will be carried out within the proposed Production Building prior to discharge to the WWTP.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-5

Figure 10.2 below shows schematically how the WWTP is planned to be expanded to cater for the new development. Figure 10.3 is an indicative layout showing the extents and scope of the WWTP expansion.

Figure 10.2 Schematic Diagram, On-Site Waste Water Management

Figure 10.3 Indicative Layout – WWTP Expansion

BAT associated emission level values (ELVs) as per IED Directive 2010/75/EU

BAT Conclusions for common wastewater and waste gas treatment/management systems in the chemical sector were implemented by the European Union (Commission Implementing Decision

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-6

(EU) 2016/902) on May 30th 2016. It is proposed that these new ELVs are due for enforcement in Ireland by June 2020. Accordingly the expansion of the on-site WWTP is being designed on the basis that all treated wastewater from the WWTP plant will comply with these new ELVs.

A full characterisation of the wastewater streams from the BioCork2 development, in context of the overall resultant emissions from the site, is described in Table 10.2.

Table 10.2 Anticipated Wastewater Loads & Limits

Parameter

Unit Existing Licenced

Loading / Limit to Sewer

New BAT Limit

Proposed Maximum Loading to

Outfall

(post-BioCork2)

Daily Volume m3/d <800 N/A 1200

Hourly volume m3/h 100 n/a 50

Biochemical Oxygen Demand

mg/l <60 n/a 20

kg/d <48 n/a 24

Chemical Oxygen Demand

mg/l <300 100 100

kg/d 240 n/a 120

TOC mg/l 100 n/a 100

Suspended Solids mg/l <50 35 <35

kg/d <40 42

Total Phosphorus mg/l <20 3 3

kg/d 16 n/a 3.6

Total Nitrogen mg/l <80 25 25

kg/d 64 n/a 30

Total Sulphates mg/l <200 n/a 200

Oil, fats and grease mg/l <20 n/a 20

Temperature (oC) <30 30 30

pH pH units 6 to 9 n/a 6 to 9

Notes: 1. Existing IE Licence provides a concentration and mass load limit only to the following parameters; BOD;

COD and Total Suspended Solids 2. All sanitary effluent resulting from the operation of the facility will be treated in the on-site WWTP, in

combination with the process wastewater, before discharge.

It is concluded that because the proposed expansion of the existing WWTP for BioCork2 will result in an overall net reduction in mass loadings being emitted to the environment, the impact can be classified as neutral at worst, and long term in context of the existing baseline scenario.

10.6 Existing Environment - Storm Water Run-Off

Site storm water from the existing Janssen Sciences site discharges to the sea at Loughbeg, c. 0.8km to the south east of the site. All run-off from paved and roofed areas within the existing CUB, production and administration building areas flows through the on-site storm water / firewater retention lagoon before entering an IDA Ireland storm water sewer to Loughbeg.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-7

Run-off from car park areas is also collected in storm water drains and this flows through full retention petrol interceptors which collect any oil or fuel arising in the run-off from entering the storm drains and flowing to the storm water / firewater retention lagoon.

Figure 10.4 below shows the indicative route for storm water run-off from the site to Cork Harbour via the on-site retention pond and IDA sewer.

Figure 10.4 Indicative Route for Storm water Run-Off to Cork Harbour

All site petrol interceptors are inspected weekly for signs of oil or fuel and cleaned out on a regular basis to remove grit and maintain proper operation in accordance with the site’s IE Licence requirements.

TOC (Total Organic Carbon) and pH monitors continuously monitor storm water discharge quality from the site. In the event of storm water quality rising above monitored TOC and pH warning or action limits on the storm water retention lagoon intake, an alarm is activated and an automatic valve closes and prevents discharges from the lagoon to Loughbeg.

Any contaminated storm water or firewater is therefore isolated and prevented from discharge to the environment. Any retained contaminated material can then be treated in the on-site wastewater treatment plant or reviewed for alternative treatments offsite.

In addition to continuous TOC and pH monitoring, storm water quality is monitored weekly for temperature, Chemical Oxygen Demand, Total Ammonia, Total Nitrogen, Conductivity and Visual Inspection.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-8

10.7 Potential Impacts - Storm Water Run-Off

All storm water run-off from roofs, roads and paved areas associated with the new BioCork2 development will be collected within the site’s existing storm water drainage collection system (twin-walled HDPE and concrete pipes). A schematic diagram of how storm water from the new development will be integrated into the existing network is shown in Figure 10.5 below.

Figure 10.5 Schematic Diagram, On-Site Storm Water Management

The design philosophy for the BioCork2 development is that the new project will mimic the existing storm water drainage set-up and broadly provide two separate drainage systems – one for plant areas, and one for car park areas.

As per the existing site arrangement, storm water run-off from new BioCork2 plant areas (production, utilities, warehouse) will be routed through the site’s storm water / fire water retention pond. Storm water run-off from the new car park area will be connected to the exiting petrol interceptor (which will be replaced and upgraded for the increased duty) near the fire water retention tank.

The plant area and car park drainage systems for the overall site then combine downstream of the storm water / fire water retention pond. The combined system discharges to the IDA storm water outfall at the south east corner of the site. The IDA storm water outfall has a minimum capacity of 3,200 l/s and is fully dedicated to the Janssen Sciences Barnahely site.

At 1000mm nominal diameter, the IDA pipeline was originally sized so that the Janssen Sciences site would not require on-site storm water attenuation. Notwithstanding this, the design of the BioCork2 storm water management is based on the principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDs) and incorporates a new 225m3 storm water attenuation tank to serve the new car park area,

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-9

as well as new and upgraded petrol interceptors. The design also includes the potential to utilise the existing 3,600m3 firewater retention pond as an attenuation system if required.

10.7.1 Construction Phase Impacts

The existing Janssen Sciences facility is developed on a site where significant excavation and regrading works were originally (2005) carried out to accommodate the facility buildings on a level platform site. An extension of the earthworks strategy adopted as part of the original development, whereby bulk excavated material from the central part of the site was utilised for the creation of attractive, landscaped screening berms along the northern boundary of the site, is currently being carried out in accordance with Planning Permission 16/7150 to facilitate the creation of a new 1.2 hectare level platform upon which the BioCork2 development is now being proposed to be constructed. As part of the current site development works, a series of mitigation measures have been put in place to prevent any adverse impacts arising for storm water run-off during the construction phase and these are summarised in Figure 10.6 below and comprise

• Temporary swale at the base of the new landscape berm to act as a silt trap for surface water run-off during placement and shaping

• Permanent french drain around the base of the new embankment cut, to collect, channel and dissipate excess surface water in the area of the new platform for development

Figure 10.6 Current enabling works mitigation measures for run-off management

10.7.2 Operational Phase Impacts

The proposed BioCork2 development works will give rise to an increase in the net impervious area of the overall Janssen Sciences campus. This increase relates to the requirement to provide:

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-10

- New Production Building

- Expansion of the existing Warehouse Building

- Modification and expansion of the existing Laboratory and Administration building


- Expansion of the on-site WWTP

- Modification and expansion of other aspects of the existing site infrastructure including; car parking, underground services, internal roads, yards and pipe racks

The increase in impervious area is estimated to be in the order of 33,000m2, which represents an increase of about 60% on the existing impervious area of the overall campus. This increase in impervious area will give rise to an equivalent increase in the storm water run-off from the site during wet weather conditions. However, it is to be noted that the Janssen Sciences site is served by a dedicated 1000mm nominal diameter storm water pipe which was installed by IDA Ireland in 2005 prior to the original development of the Janssen facility (see Figure 10.4). This pipeline was designed and installed to convey storm water run-off from the Upper Barnahely industrial lands to the Loughbeg inlet to the south, and to cater for the long term development of the industrial zoned lands in upper Barnahely, covering a potential development area of over 40 hectares. To date, these lands have only been developed to the extent of approximately 20 hectares (by Janssen Sciences) and as such, significant residual capacity remains in the pipeline for the further expansion of the site. Surface water drainage calculations for the collection system and IDA pipeline indicate that, based on a 5 year return period storm, the pipeline operates at <30% of capacity (i.e. peak flow of <1,000 l/s in a pipeline of capacity 3,200 l/s) following completion of the BioCork2 expansion, and ultimately has capacity to cater for a 100 year return period storm event.

The condition, integrity and capacity of the IDA storm water pipe has been confirmed through a CCTV inspection carried out in June 2017.

10.8 Mitigation Measures - Storm Water Run-Off

10.8.1 Construction Phase Mitigation Measures

In order to effectively manage all potential environmental impacts during the BioCork2 construction phase, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be implemented. The CEMP will set out the responsibilities, environmental standards and requirements for the duration of the construction phase of the project. This will include the necessary environmental controls and mitigation measure to prevent/mitigate any potential impact on the water environment.

The following mitigation measures will, at a minimum, be implemented during the construction phase;

• To minimise any impact on off-site surface waters arising from material spillages, all oils, solvents and paints used during construction will be stored within temporary bunded areas. Oil and fuel storage tanks will be stored in designated areas, and these areas will be bunded to a volume of 110% of the capacity of the largest tank/container within the bunded area(s) (plus an allowance of 30 mm for rainwater). Drainage from the bunded area(s) will be diverted for collection and safe disposal.

• Refuelling of construction vehicles and the addition of hydraulic oils or lubricants to vehicles, will take place in a designated area (where possible) of the site, which will be away from surface water gulleys or drains. In the event of a machine requiring refuelling outside of this area, fuel will be transported in a mobile double skinned tank. An adequate supply of spill kits and hydrocarbon adsorbent packs will be stored in this area. All relevant personnel will be fully trained in the use of this equipment. Relevant guidelines will be adhered to.

• Concrete will be mixed off–site and imported to the site. The pouring of concrete will take place within a designated area to prevent concrete runoff into the site surface water drainage

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-11

network. Wash down and washout of concrete transporting vehicles will take place at an appropriate facility offsite.

• A programme of regular inspection and maintenance of the silt traps on the existing site storm water drainage system will be carried out over the duration of the construction works for the purpose of removing any excess silt that runs-off to the storm water sewer system arising from construction works.

10.8.2 Operational Phase Mitigation Measures

As outlined in section 10.7.2, more than adequate residual capacity remains in the existing storm water sewer which conveys storm water run-off from the Upper Barnahely industrial lands (including Janssen Sciences) to the Loughbeg inlet to the south, and the increase in overall impervious area arising from this development will not adversely impact on this.

Notwithstanding this, a programme for the inspection and maintenance of the storm water drainage pipeline, and its associated flap valve outfall to Loughbeg, is being implemented as part of Janssen Sciences’ Environmental Management Programme under the requirements of their site IE Licence. This programme will help ensure the on-going efficient operation of the outfall and continued safe release of clean storm water from the Janssen Sciences site to Loughbeg.

In terms of water quality, the proposed car parks will be constructed in accordance with specific requirements governing storm water run-off and potential impacts on surface waters as contained in Janssen Sciences’ IE Licence, which specifies that;

“All storm water discharges from the installation pass through a silt trap and oil separator in advance, of discharge. The separator shall be a Class I full retention separator and the silt traps and separator shall be in accordance with I.S. EN 858-2:2003 (separator systems for light liquids)”.

Accordingly, a new (upgraded) Class I interceptor, with silt trap, will be fitted to the drainage system serving both the existing and the new car park areas, as shown in figure 10.5. In addition, a new interceptor with silt trap will be fitted to the portion of the storm water drainage network draining any yard areas.



The construction phase residual impact of the proposed Janssen Sciences BioCork2 expansion in terms of effluent/wastewater and storm water run-off will be negligible and temporary.


Operational residual impact from the proposed BioCork2 development in terms of effluent / wastewater emissions will be neutral and long term.

There will be a negligible residual impact from the proposed BioCork2 development works in terms of storm water emissions.

10.10 Flood Risk

With respect to flooding, the Carrigaline Area Local Area Plan 2nd Edition 2015 indicates within the Ringaskiddy Zoning map that there are no areas on site zoned as “Susceptible to Flooding‟. In addition site records since operations commenced in 2008 further substantiate this.

In the context of this development on an established industrial site, the potential sources of flooding that should be considered are;

1. River Flooding

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-12

2. Estuarial or Tidal Flooding

3. Groundwater Flooding

4. Overland Flow

5. Flooding from Site Drainage System

In terms of historical records, a summary OPW local area report has been generated for the subject development site and its surrounding area, and this is shown in Figure 10.7. The summary report shows no record of flooding events on or in the vicinity of the site. The Janssen Sciences site has been a developed industrial site for 10 years with no record of past flooding.

The relevant settlement map for the Ringaskiddy area within the Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Area Plan (2015) has also been referenced. The map indicates the development site being over 500m from the nearest point of a designated Zone A or B (area susceptible to flooding), this being the northern reaches of Loughbeg to the south east.

Figure 10.7 OPW Summary Local Area Report

An assessment of flood risk from each of the five potential sources, due to the proposed development, is outlined below.

10.10.1 River Flooding

There are no rivers or other drainage features on or in proximity to the site that could pose a potential flood risk to the site, or be impacted upon by this development.

10.10.2 Estuarial or Tidal Flooding

Given the elevation of the development site, being 45m above ordnance datum, there is no potential for flooding on the site due to estuarial or tidal influences.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-13

10.10.3 Groundwater Flooding

Groundwater flooding occurs when the water table rises to the level of the ground surface. There is no history of this occurring on the site and the historical groundwater monitoring records for the site (ref. Chapter 7) indicate that the natural elevation of the developed site at 45m AOD, dictate that there is little or no risk of groundwater flooding arising.

10.10.4 Overland Flow

Overland flow occurs when rainfall intensity exceeds the infiltration capacity of the ground. Excess water that cannot infiltrate the ground flows overland to the nearest water course or piped drainage system. Excess overland flow will typically flow from higher ground to lower ground, and from newly formed cut embankments. In the context of the Janssen Sciences site in Barnahely, the following is noted;

- There is no record of flooding arising from overland flow since the site was initially developed in 2005.

The natural elevation of the site means there is very little land at an elevation higher than the developed site from which excess run-off can enter the site.

- As outlined in section 10.7.1 above, to mitigate against any potential excess run-off from the newly formed cut embankment on the western site of the development site, a new French drain is being installed around the base perimeter of the embankment during the current permitted Site Development Works project.

As such, it is concluded that there is no particular risk of flooding from overland flow as a result of either the existing site status or the proposed site development works.

10.10.5 Flooding from Site Drainage System

As with any new development, flooding could occur due to the inadequate design of the storm water drainage network serving the internal site and / or the network providing off-site disposal of storm water. In relation to the existing Janssen Sciences site, and the proposed programme of site development works, the following is noted;

- There is no record of either on-site or off-site flooding arising due to the capacity or operation of the on-site or off-site storm water networks serving the site.

- The existing on-site storm water drainage system within the Janssen Sciences property was originally design to cater for the long-term development of the site. At present the site is deemed to be only approximately 50% developed.

- As outlined in 10.7 above, for off-site conveyance of storm water run-off, the Janssen Sciences site is served by a dedicated 1000mm nominal diameter storm water pipe which was installed by IDA Ireland in 2005 prior to the original development of the Janssen Sciences facility. This pipeline was designed and installed to convey storm water run-off from the Upper Barnahely industrial lands to the Loughbeg inlet to the south, and to cater for the long term development of the industrial zoned lands in upper Barnahely, covering a potential development area of over 40 hectares. To date, these lands have only been developed to the extent of approximately 20 hectares (by Janssen Sciences) and as such, significant residual capacity (calculated to be in the order of 70%) remains in the pipeline for the further expansion of the site.

- A programme for the inspection and maintenance of the storm water drainage pipeline, and its associated flap valve outfall to Loughbeg, is being implemented as part of Janssen Sciences site Environmental Management Programme. This programme will help ensure the on-going efficient operation of the outfall and continued safe release of storm water from the Janssen Sciences site to Loughbeg without risk of off-site flooding.

Based on the above, it is concluded that there is no particular risk of flooding of the site, or indeed lands downstream of the site, as a result of either the existing site status or the proposed BioCork2 development works.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 10-14

10.10.6 Conclusion

Based on the assessment of flood risk detailed above, it is concluded that there is no particular flood risk at the site or increased risk downstream of the site due to the proposed BioCork2 development.

10.11 Firewater Run Off

As part of the planning and design of the original Janssen facility a risk assessment was carried out to establish the technical requirement or otherwise for on-site emergency firewater retention i.e., for the prevention of potentially contaminated firewater run-off (or storm water run-off) from the site reaching the environment. The risk assessment methodology was based on the inventory of potentially polluting materials within the site and the risk of that material being released to the environment in an emergency event such as a fire. Because the current manufacturing process at the Janssen Sciences site is primarily a water-based activity, the inventory of chemical material potentially stored on site is (and remains) small, and does not exceed any of the recognised guideline thresholds for firewater retention. Furthermore, storage of all potentially polluting materials on the site is within bunded or other double contained systems.

Notwithstanding this conclusion, Janssen took the decision to install a 3,600m3 capacity Firewater Retention Pond on the site as a safeguard measure, and to mitigate even the lowest risk of potentially polluted run-off being released to the environment.

A review of the planned increase in inventory of potentially polluting materials associated with the proposed BioCork2 expansion has concluded that the future maximum inventories again will not exceed any of the current guideline thresholds for firewater retention. And as with current site policy and practice, all future materials with potentially polluting properties will be stored in bunded or double contained systems. In addition, the new surface water run-off drainage system serving the areas of the new expansion where materials are to be stored, will be linked into the existing network that drains to the existing Fire Water Retention Pond. As such, all parts of the site, both existing and proposed, with potential for contaminated run-off to arise in an emergency situation such as a fire, will be afforded the protection of the existing 3,600m3 capacity Firewater Retention Pond.

The risk of contaminated firewater reaching the environment as a result the development as proposed, is considered to be low or negligible.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-1

11 Air Quality and Climate

11.1 Introduction

This chapter has been prepared for the purpose of assessing the likely air quality and odour impacts associated with the construction and operational phases of the proposed development. This chapter should be read in conjunction with Chapter 2 (Description of the Proposed Development), Chapter 4 (Population and Human Health), Chapter 6 (Traffic and Transport), Chapter 7 (Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology) and Chapter 9 (Noise and Vibration).


11.2.1 Relevant Guidance

The assessment was carried out using procedures described in the EPA EIA Guidelines and the following:

- EPA (2010), Air Dispersion Modelling from Industrial Installations Guidance Note (AG4)

- Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) (formerly NRA) (2011), Guidelines for the Treatment of Air Quality During the Planning and construction of National Road Schemes

- UK Highway Agency (2007), Volume 11 – Environmental Assessment, Section 3, Part 1, HA 207/07

- Institute of Air Quality Management (2014), Guidance on the assessment of dust from demolition and construction

11.2.2 Assessment

The first step in assessing the likely air quality impacts was determining the appropriate ambient air quality standards against which any potential emissions to air would be compared against, i.e. criteria for rating of air quality impacts. Based upon the ambient air quality standards and the relevant guidance referenced above the significance of any potential impacts were assessed. Prediction of the potential impact on air quality due to the operation of the proposed development has been carried out using air dispersion modelling software (AERMOD 7.12) in terms of nitrogen dioxides (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO) and particulates.

11.2.3 Ambient Air Quality Standards

Air Quality Standards (AQSs) for the protection of human health and the environment have been developed at European level and implemented into Irish legislation for a number of atmospheric pollutants. AQSs set limit values for Ground Level Concentrations (GLCs) of certain pollutants for both the short term (hourly, daily) and long term (annual averages) averaging periods. Limit values are often expressed as percentiles e.g. 98 percentile of mean hourly values which means that only 2% of the results obtained during the monitoring period can exceed the stated limit value.

The following ambient air quality legislation is currently implemented in Ireland:

- Arsenic, Cadmium, Mercury, Nickel and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Ambient Air Regulations 2009 (S.I. No. 58/2009) which implement EU Directive 2004/107/EC. These regulations set target values in ambient air to be attained, from 31 December 2012, for concentrations of arsenic, cadmium, nickel and benzo(a)pyrene (a measurable indicator of the level of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) and also specify monitoring requirements for mercury and other polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

- Air Quality Standards Regulations 2011 (S.I. No. 180/2011) which implement EU Directive 2008/50/EC on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe. This Directive merges most of the existing directives (Directives 96/62/EC, 1999/30/EC, 2000/69/EC and 2002/3/EC) into a

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-2

single directive. The regulations set ambient air quality limit values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, benzene, lead and particulate matter (PM10/ PM2.5).

Emissions to the atmosphere from the proposed development works will potentially include some of the pollutants addressed in the above air quality legislation. Therefore the relevant air quality standards for this air quality assessment are detailed in Appendix F.1 (Table F.1).

11.2.4 Air Dispersion Modelling

The methodology adopted for the air dispersion modelling is described in detail in Section 3 of the Air Dispersion Modelling Report contained in Appendix F.2. The methodology relates to the AERMOD air dispersion model. This model is a steady-state Gaussian plume model developed by the US EPA to assess pollutant concentrations associated with industrial sources in both flat and complex terrain.



The duration of the construction phase will be approximately 24 months. Emissions to air during this phase will arise from construction machinery and from the following activities:

- Excavation and earthmoving activities

- Rock breaking and piling

- Temporary stockpiling of excavated materials

- Construction Traffic

From TII Guidelines (TII 2008), “If construction traffic leads to a significant change (>10%) in AADT (annual average daily traffic) flows near to sensitive locations, then concentrations of nitrogen dioxide, PM10 and PM2.5 should be predicted”. The worst case traffic junctions in terms of sensitive receptors are shown in Figure 11.1. Of these two junctions, the worst case in terms of construction traffic is the Shanbally Village roundabout. For the proposed development the AADT at this roundabout is not predicted to increase by more than 10% (refer to Chapter 6 Traffic and Transportation).

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-3

Figure 11.1 Worst case traffic junctions in terms of location to sensitive receptors for air traffic emissions


Potential emissions to atmosphere from the proposed development when operational are considered under the following headings:

Boilers

There is no requirement for an additional boiler as a result of the proposed development and hence no new boiler emission point to atmosphere. The additional heating requirement for: Clean Utilities equipment; CIP skids heat exchangers; process support equipment; biowaste inactivation equipment and the HVAC (Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning) system will be provided by the existing boilers. The average annual usage of the existing boilers is expected to approximately double with the proposed development, however this is to be confirmed during detailed design.

The existing Industrial Emissions (IE) licence for the site (IE Licence No. P0778-01) regulates emissions to atmosphere from the following boilers:

- 2 No. 8.5 MW (net thermal input) Boilers (currently natural gas fired but also licenced to be biodiesel fuelled)

- 1 No. 2.47 MW (net thermal input) Biomass Boiler

Emergency Generator

An additional emergency diesel-fuelled generator will be installed to supplement the current existing emergency diesel generators. The anticipated maximum size of the generator is 2.25 MVA but the exact size will be confirmed during detailed design. The generators will only be used for emergency cover. Under normal circumstances, they will be run for short periods, estimated to be 30 minutes each per week, for the purpose of maintenance testing. The emissions point from this new generator is already included in the site’s IE Licence atmospheric emissions register. As an emergency emission, the emergency diesel generators are not included in the Air Dispersion Modelling assessment.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-4

New Production Building and Laboratory Building VOC Emissions

Organic solvents will only be used in relatively small quantities at the new production building. The process is water-based so no large volume solvents are used. Acetic acid will be used in the makeup of buffer solutions. Therefore the vent lines from these vessels may contain trace quantities of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) during the makeup process. There will be decanting of 20% ethanol solution from column resins (transport medium) (approximately 200L on a monthly basis) which may give rise to fugitive emissions. Benzyl alcohol, which is less volatile than 20% ethanol solution, will be used to regenerate the column resins, resulting in reduced fugitive emission that would be the case if the ethanol solution was used for this operation. Small quantities of Iso propyl alcohol (IPA) will be used to check the integrity of various filters and also as a sanitising agent for surfaces.

It is expected that small quantities of solvent will be used in the laboratories within the new Lab/Admin Building. VOC emissions from the laboratory fumehoods, as a result of these activities, are expected to be minor.

Vents from Systems/Equipment containing GMM Cells

The GMM Cells used in the manufacturing process are classified a Class 1 Biological Agent, which corresponds to the lowest level of biological risk classification. Vents from manufacturing equipment such as bioreactors, harvest equipment, biosafety cabinets will be fitted with a sterilising filter.

Powder/Dust Emissions

Powdered raw material will be used in dispensing operations and buffer and media makeup. Dispensing operations occur within the new Warehouse extension in HEPA filtered downflow booths with 100% recirculation, i.e. no exhaust to the atmosphere. The powders are added to media and buffer preparations vessel through closed addition and the vent lines from these vessels will be filtered.

Extract Air Vents from HVAC system

There will be extract air vents located throughout the new buildings which will emit spent fresh air which has been utilised in the building(s) HVAC system. It may intermittently contain trace quantities of fugitive IPA emissions from sanitising operations, as discussed above under the production building and lab building VOC emissions.

Waste Water Treatment Area Expansion Emissions

The existing WWTP is being upgraded and expanded to cater for the increased effluent load that will arise from the new production building. The vent lines from the following new equipment will be directed to an odour removal system:

- Manufacturing waste water inlet sump

- Equalisation tanks

- Carbon dioxide contact tank

- Phosphorous removal clarifiers

- Inlet screen

- Secondary treatment equipment

- Centrifuge

- Sludge building (new equipment additions)

A biological filter is currently proposed for the odour removal system; however this will be confirmed during detailed design.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-5


11.4.1 Air Quality Zones and Ambient Air Quality

The EPA manages the national ambient air quality network. The Air Framework Directive deals with each EU member state in terms of “Zones”. The Air Quality Standards Regulations 2011 state “The Agency shall establish zones and agglomerations throughout the territory of the State for the purpose of air quality assessment and air quality management”. The zones and agglomerations are defined as follows:

- Zone A: Dublin Conurbation

- Zone B: Cork Conurbation

- Zone C: Other large cities and towns comprising Galway, Limerick, Waterford, Clonmel, Kilkenny, Sligo, Drogheda, Wexford, Athlone, Ennis, Bray, Naas, Carlow, Tralee, Dundalk, Navan, Letterkenny, Celbridge, Newbridge, Mullingar, Balbriggan, Portlaoise, Leixlip and Greystones.

- Zone D: Rural Ireland, i.e. the remainder of the State excluding Zones A, B and C

The Janssen Sciences site at Barnahely, Ringaskiddy is located within Air Quality Zone B: Cork Conurbation (refer to EPA Air Zone map available at http://gis.epa.ie/Envision ). The EPA produces an annual report on air quality38, which details the results from monitoring stations throughout the various Air Quality Zones within Ireland. The maximum readings obtained over the latest three year period (2013 to 2015) for Zone B, were used as the background concentrations.

Annual mean ambient NO2, NOx, CO, PM10 and PM2.5 data from the monitoring stations within Zone B (South Link road, Heatherton Park and Old Station Road (discontinued as a monitoring station after 2013)) is summarised in Table F.2 of Appendix F.1. Note that when readings were available from both monitoring sites the maximum value was taken, which was only the case for the PM10 annual mean ambient concentration.

The air quality monitoring results indicate reasonably good air quality.

11.4.2 Sensitive Receptors

Figure 11.2 illustrates the sensitive receptors regarding air emissions from the proposed development. The sensitive receptors shown include residential properties, a school and church, Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and proposed National Heritage Areas (pNHAs).

38 The latest issued EPA report is Air Quality in Ireland 2015 Key Indicators of Ambient Air Quality

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-6

Figure 11.2 Sensitive Receptors for air emissions – surrounding the site

11.4.3 Meteorological Data

Cork Airport meteorological station was selected as the most appropriate station to provide meteorological data for the air dispersion modelling. Its selection satisfies the requirement of the EPA AG4 Guidance Note. The weather station is located approximately 20km north west of the existing facility. The meteorological data used for the air dispersion modelling covers the years 2012 to 2016.

11.4.4 Climate

The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) recommends that climate averages are averaged over a 30 year period. Table 11.1 summarises some key weather conditions at Cork Airport for the period 1981-2010, which is the latest 30 year data period available from Met Éireann online database39.

Table 11.1 Summary of Main Weather Conditions at Cork Airport Meteorological Station (1981-2010)

Cork Airport Meteorological Station

Average Maximum Daily Temperature 12.9 °C

Average Minimum Daily Temperature 6.9 °C

Mean Annual Rainfall Total 1228 mm

Average Daily Mean Wind Speed 5.4 m/s

Mean daily Sunshine Duration (hours) 3.9

39 Met Eireann Climate: 30-year Averages, available at: http://www.met.ie/climate-ireland/30year-averages.asp (accessed Mar 2017)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-7

Climate Change

The temperature in Ireland has risen by approximately 0.8°C over the period 1900 to 2012. Impacts of this change on the Irish climate are already visible in the decrease in the number of days with frost and increase in the number of warmer days over the last decade.

Ireland is a party to both the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto protocol. Also Ireland, through its membership of the EU, has signed up to the most recent international legal framework limiting the emissions of greenhouse gases known as the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement came into force in November 2016 and commits the EU as a whole, to achieve a reduction of at least 40% in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.

Ireland is obliged to reduce its GHG emissions in line with the EU Climate and Energy policy. The 2030 Climate and Energy Framework require member states by 2030, to contribute towards: 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (compared to 1990 levels); 27% of energy from renewable sources and 27% improvement in energy efficiency.



Construction Activities

The various construction activities discussed in Section 11.3.1 could result in the generation of dust which could negatively impact ambient air quality.

It is probable that the majority of dust generated will be deposited within or close to the site boundary. A number of factors will affect the extent of dust generation and potential impacts on air quality including wind speed and direction, the dryness of the soil, and the proximity of sensitive receptors to the site.

There is also the probability of the transfer of mud/soil from the wheels of construction traffic onto surrounding roads.

The operation of construction equipment, mobile plant and the movement of vehicular traffic associated with site construction staff will result in exhaust emissions which could potentially impact on ambient air quality. These emissions, typical of all motorised vehicles and equipment, will include NO2, CO, PM10, VOCs and Benzene, along with limited quantities of SO2 from the use of diesel fuel.

Therefore, in the absence of adequate management and mitigation measures, the construction phase of the development could have a short-term, slight-negative impact on ambient air quality as result of dust generation and vehicle emissions.

Construction Traffic

As the construction traffic for the proposed development is not predicted to result in a significant increase in traffic (AADT > 10% at sensitive receptors) the impact from construction traffic emissions are consider temporary, Imperceptible-Negative.


The potential impacts from air emissions during the operational phase of the proposed development are assessed under the following headings:

Boilers

As previously discussed in Section 11.3.2, the proposed development will not result in any additional boiler or main emission points to atmosphere but will increase the annual average usage of the existing boilers by approximately 100%.

In 2006, as part of the then Integrated Pollution Prevent and Control (IPPC) Licence application, air dispersion modelling was performed which demonstrated that emissions to atmosphere from the

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-8

facility did not result in ground level concentrations of relevant pollutants exceeding the applicable air quality standard limit values. As this was over 10 years ago and air dispersion models and best practice has evolved since that time, updated air dispersion modelling was performed for the existing IE Licenced boiler emission points.

The 2.47 MW biomass boiler was taken off-line in April 2010, and has not been in operation since that time. Hence the following two modelling scenarios were assessed in the Air Dispersion Modelling Report (PM Group Document Number IE0311854-22-RP-0005) contained in Appendix F.2:

1. 2 No. 8.5 MW boilers and 1 No. 2.47 MW biomass boiler in operation at full capacity - IE emission limit values used except for the biomass boiler volumetric flowrate where the maximum expected volumetric hourly discharge flowrate, as outlined above, was used. CO emission concentration of 100 mg/m3 used for the 8.5 MW boilers and 200 mg/m3 used for the biomass boilers.

2. 2 No. 8.5 MW boilers in operation at full capacity – IE emission limit values used for the 8.5 MW boilers, along with a CO emission concentration of 100 mg/m3. This scenario represents the worst case in terms of the current operation.

In the Air Dispersion Modelling Report the maximum predicted ground level concentrations (GLCs) have been compared against the relevant AQS limit values to assess the impact of atmospheric emissions from the proposed facility on ambient air quality, human health and the environment. Table 11.2 summarises these results with the predicted pollutant emissions (including background values) expressed as a percentage of the AQS. These results show that atmospheric emissions from the facility do not result in ground level concentrations of NO2, CO, PM10 or PM2.5 which exceed the relevant AQSs for the protection of human health and the environment.

Therefore it is predicted that the impact to ambient air quality and climate change from the proposed expansion will be negative, long-term imperceptible.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-9

Table 11.2 Scenario 1 – Air Dispersion Modelling Results

Pollutant Description

Predicted Concentration

(Facility Contribution)

(µg/m3

Background Conc. (µg/m

3)

PEC*:

Background + Predicted

(µg/m3)

Air Quality Standards/ Limit Value

(µg/m3)

Predicted Result as

Percentage of Limit

Scenario 1

Nitrogen Dioxide

1 hr NO2 (99.8th

percentile) 35.9 54 89.9 200 45%

Annual NO2

(Human Health

Protection)

2.2 27 29.2 40 73%

Carbon Monoxide 8 hr CO 16.6 800 816.6 10,000 8%

PM10

Daily PM10 (90.4th

percentile) 2.0 19 21 50 42%

Annual PM10 0.7 19 19.7 40 49%

PM2.5 Annual PM2.5 0.7 11 11.7 20 58%

Scenario 2

Nitrogen Dioxide

1 hr NO2 (99.8th

percentile) 28.5 54 82.5 200 41%

Annual NO2

(Human Health

Protection)

1.8 27 28.8 40 72%

Carbon Monoxide 8 hr CO 13.2 800 813.2 10,000 8%

PM10

Daily PM10 (90.4th

percentile) 1.8 19 20.8 50 41%

Annual PM10 0.6 19 19.6 40 49%

PM2.5 Annual PM2.5 0.6 11 11.6 20 58%

*PEC = Predicted Environmental Concentration

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-10

Emergency Generator Emissions

When operational, the emergency generator will emit combustion exhaust gases containing NOx/NO2, CO, SO2 and particulates to atmosphere. Low sulphur diesel (maximum 0.2% by mass) will be used as the fuel for the generator. As the unit will only be run for short periods of time (maintenance testing purposes and/or in the event of a power loss) the impact from the emissions will be imperceptible.

New Production Building and Lab VOC Emissions

Given the expected small quantities of VOCs, the impact will be imperceptible.

Powder/Dust Emissions

No emissions of media and buffer preparation powders or dusts to the atmosphere are anticipated.

Vents from Systems/Equipment containing GMM Cells

There is very low potential for the release of GMM cells into the atmosphere from the proposed development, which are classified at the lowest level of biological risk. The existing facility currently has a permit from the EPA for the use of Class 1 GMM (GMO Register No. 217) and will be updated to include for the new equipment/areas As part of the conditions of this permit, a Risk Assessment will be performed for the new Class 1 GMM cells to confirm there is no potential for release to the environment.

Extract Air Vents from HVAC system

As discussed, the HVAC extract will emit clean air and intermittently may contain trace quantities of fugitive IPA emissions. The impact therefore will be imperceptible.

Waste Water Treatment Area Expansion Emissions

If the exhaust gases from the various WWTP equipment listed in Section 11.3.2 are not treated for odour abatement, there is the potential for odour causing a nuisance beyond the site boundary. Therefore without mitigation the odour impact could give rise to negative-slight effects.

Climatic Impact

There are two types of sources that will result in additional greenhouse gases being emitted from the proposed development.

Firstly, the increase in activity by the boilers and additional emergency generator will result in additional greenhouse gases (CO2) being emitted. The Janssen Sciences site falls under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and therefore operates under an EPA issued GHG permit (Permit No. IE-GHG151-10420-2). From the verified ETS annual emissions report for 2016, the site emitted 4,181 tonnes of CO2 (equivalent) during that year. With the proposed development, the annual averaged boiler activity is expected to approximately double with an equivalent approximate doubling of the annual CO2 emissions when the proposed development is fully operational. However, under the EU ETS Scheme there is an incentive to limit the CO2 emissions from the site therefore this doubling figure may be a worst case estimate.

The second type of activity that will result in additional greenhouse gas emissions is from increased electricity usage. However this will be offset to a significant extent by the renewable electricity currently being generated onsite from a wind turbine. During 2016 the site electricity consumption was 12,775 MWh with the renewable energy generated onsite during the same year at 8,643 MWh. The intent of the project is to achieve the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Certified status for the new Production and Lab/Administration Buildings, which will commit the project to energy efficient design principles and therefore minimise operational energy usage and related greenhouse gas emissions.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-11

Therefore based on the above discussion and that the greenhouse gas emissions from the development will be insignificant in terms of Ireland’s GHG reduction commitments, the impact of the proposed development on climate will be negative, long-term but imperceptible.

Traffic Emissions

The NRA guidance note (NRA 2011) indicates that the UK Highways Agency’s Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) screening model method is to be used for predicting pollutant concentrations arising from traffic. This screening method begins with a scoping step where if affected roads do not meet various criteria then the impact can be “considered to be neutral in terms of local air quality and no further work is needed”. For the proposed development the relevant qualifying criteria are that:

- Daily traffic flows will change by 1,000 AADT (annual average daily traffic) or more; or

- Heavy Duty Vehicle (HDV) flows will change by 200 AADT or more;

For the proposed development, the above criteria will not be met at the junctions indicated in Figure 11.1 (refer to Chapter 6 Traffic and Transportation Chapter) hence the operational traffic impact will be long term, negative but imperceptible.


Construction Phase

A review of relevant planning applications and developments was undertaken as part of this environmental impact assessment report. The nearest developments with the greatest potential to cumulatively add to the potential emissions associated with the construction phase of this development are:

• GE Healthcare BioPark (ca. 0.3 km south of the site) – The enabling works have been granted planning permission while the main development is in planning

• Port of Cork Redevelopment (ca. 0.5 km east of the site)

• Materials Extraction and Transportation Project to East Tip, Haulbowline Island (ca. 1.4 km east of the site)

• Indaver Waste to Energy Facility (ca. 1.7 km east of the site) (in planning)

The M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Motorway Scheme is going through the planning process and, the project’s EIS is with An Bord Pleanála in May 2017. Therefore the construction period of this project if approved, is not expected to overlap with the construction works of the proposed development.

The projects listed above have outlined in their planning documentation mitigation measures to minimise emissions to air during their construction phases and/or have planning conditions stipulated that will achieve this objective. Taken together with the mitigation measures proposed in Section 11.6, no cumulative impacts to the environment are anticipated.

Operational Phase

As there are no new main or boiler emission points associated with the proposed development no new operational cumulative impacts are anticipated.



In order to effectively manage all potential environmental impacts during the construction phase, a CEMP will be implemented. The CEMP will set out the responsibilities, environmental standards and requirements for the duration of the construction phase of the project. This will include the

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 11-12

necessary environmental controls and mitigation measure to prevent/mitigate any potential impact on ambient air quality.

As part of the CEMP, the following specific mitigation measures will be put in place to minimise any dust generation and thus prevent any significant impact on air quality:

- Good housekeeping and site management including the proper storage of spoil / loose materials on site

- Hard surfaced roads will be swept to remove mud and aggregate materials from their surface. Any un-surfaced roads will be restricted to essential site traffic only with speed restrictions

- Damping of site roads as necessary

- Suitable facilities will be provided on site for vehicle cleaning to prevent the carriage of mud and other wastes onto public roads, i.e. wheel wash facility

- Public roads outside the site will be regularly inspected and cleaned as necessary

- Provision of an adequate water supply for effective dust/particular matter suppression/mitigation

- All vehicles and equipment used in relation to the site will be: mechanically sound; operated and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations and switched off when not in use

- All dust and air quality complaints are to be recorded. For any such complaints the cause(s) will be identified, appropriate measures will be taken to reduce emissions in a timely manner and the measures taken recorded. The complaints log will be readily available to the local authority if requested

- Any exceptional incidents that cause dust or air quality issues, either on- or off-site and the action taken to resolve the situation will be recorded in a log book

- Regular inspections will be carried out to confirm compliance with the mitigation measures outlined herein. The frequency of inspections will increase when activities with a high potential to produce dust are being carried out and during prolonged dry or windy conditions 6


An odour abatement system will be installed for treating potentially odorous exhausts from relevant WWTP equipment. This will ensure there is no potential for odour causing a nuisance beyond the site boundary.

Outside of this measure no further specific mitigation measures are proposed. As described in Section 11.5.2, the operational emissions from the development are not predicted to have any significant adverse impact upon ambient air quality. As required by the site’s IE Licence, the proposed development will be designed in accordance with Best Available Technology (BAT) thus ensuring that atmospheric emissions from the facility will not result in an impact to human health or the environment. Also as required by the site’s GMM permit a risk assessment will be performed to ensure there is no potential for the release of GMM material to the atmosphere.


As construction phase impacts will be temporary in nature there will be no residual impact resulting from the construction phase post mitigation.

Furthermore, given the fact that there are no significant impacts predicted for the operational phase of the proposed development, there are no predicted significant residual impacts as a result.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 12-1

12 Waste Management

12.1 Introduction

This chapter describes the anticipated types and quantities of wastes that will be generated from the proposed expansion development during both the construction and operational phases and also outlines the waste management policies, practices and programmes that are employed on the existing IE Licenced facility which will also apply to the proposed development. This chapter should be read in conjunction with Chapter 2 (Description of the Proposed Development), Chapter 7 (Soils, Geology & Hydrogeology) and Chapter 10 (Water & Wastewater) of this EIAR.


The assessment of the impacts of the proposed development arising from the generation of waste materials was carried out taking account of the methodology specified in the EPA Guidelines and Advice notes.

A review of the current operational wastes types generated from the existing facility was undertaken. This data was used to estimate waste types that will be generated from the construction and operational phases of the proposed development. A document review was completed to assist in identifying current and future requirements for waste management , this included Concept and Basis of Design documentation for the proposed development, IE Licence Requirements and BAT Conclusions.

In addition cognisance is taken of National Waste Policies and Strategies, Codes of Practice and Guidelines, Southern Regional Management Plan and Cork County Development Plan in relation to construction and operational waste management requirements.

12.3 Existing Environment

EU and national legislation is in place governing the treatment and disposal of waste nationally. The Southern Region Waste Management Plan 2015 – 2021 promotes prevention, minimisation, re-use and recycling of waste in accordance with the waste hierarchy and in association with industries, businesses, other statutory and non-statutory Agencies.

The 2010 IED seeks to minimise pollution from industrial sources such as the Janssen Sciences site, and it requires affected operators to obtain an integrated authorisation. Under IED BAT conclusions are the reference for setting permit conditions and emission levels associated with BAT conclusion generally become the legally binding limits in licences.

One of the advantages of using biotechnological processes for the production of pharmaceutical products is the relatively small quantity of hazardous waste produced when compared to facilities using synthetic chemical processes. The latter can produce many thousands of tonnes per annum whereas the existing Janssen Sciences facility produces hazardous waste in the order of 100 to 150 tonnes per annum. Hazardous wastes include laboratory wastes, off-specification raw materials in addition to miscellaneous sources such as waste oils, UV and fluorescent tubes etc. Segregation is carried out at source with wastes sent for recovery or recycling under licensed contract where possible e.g. fluorescent tubes, batteries and waste oils etc.

Janssen Sciences Ireland UC as an EPA IE Licenced facility (P0778-01) is subject to the waste management requirements of Conditions 8.1 to 8.8 of the Licence with regards to materials handling and the associated IED amendment Condition 2D which states that:

“The licensee shall ensure that waste generated in the carrying on of the activity shall be prepared for re-use, recycling or recovery or, where that is not technically or economically possible, disposed of in a manner which will prevent or minimise any impact on the environment.”

Janssen Sciences operate a “Zero waste to landfill” policy on site. Furthermore, Conditions 2.2 and 7.4 of the IE Licence obliges the site to review operations for opportunities to minimise wastes. A hierarchy of waste management favouring elimination of wastes over minimisation and disposal

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 12-2

is practiced at Janssen Sciences. Waste Management Procedure DS-SOP-5430 applies to the management of all hazardous and non-hazardous wastes generated at the existing facility.

Janssen Sciences EHS Department is responsible for the management of waste documentation. This includes waste container tracking forms, waste inventory data and waste shipment documentation.

At an operations level, Janssen Sciences employ the services of a dedicated waste management contractor who is responsible for the compliant management of all wastes requiring collection from site areas, for the maintenance of documentation pertaining to the tracking, consolidation, treatment, disposal and shipment of wastes generated at Janssen Sciences.

Current Waste Management Logistics and Profile Solid waste from the existing manufacturing areas are collected from designated points within the buildings and moved in dedicated bins to the central waste room located in the northwest corner of the existing warehouse. All solid waste from the facility is routed through this area for sorting prior to being sent off-site for recovery and disposal.

Currently within the existing facility there is a designated waste yard located adjacent to the waste room of the warehouse building, both the waste yard and waste room are at capacity and would benefit from additional space to enhance waste segregation capabilities. The waste yard is a fenced area with a large canopy over a series of compactors, balers and waste chemical storage cabinets. This yard also houses used timber pallets from the shipping and receiving areas.

Composting receptacles and recycling skips are located in the kitchen yard area located to the south of the existing Lab/Admin Building for composting off site and the recovery of recyclable materials such as paper, plastic, aluminium cans and glass.

A range of non-hazardous wastes are generated on site, including:

- Mixed and plastic packaging waste

- Paper and cardboard packaging

- Autoclaved production bags, tubing, filters, GMP gowns, etc. i.e. “bulky waste” accounting for 59.10% of the 2016 non hazardous waste figure in Table 12.1

- WWTP sludge (accounting for 25.89% of the 2016 non hazardous waste figure in Table 12.1)

- General non-hazardous waste (e.g. paper, cardboard, wooden pallets, scrap metal, etc.)

- Biodegradable canteen and kitchen waste

- Mixed municipal/residual waste

- Printer toners

Waste produced on site is segregated at source in accordance with current Janssen Sciences site waste management procedures. Janssen Sciences waste management practices and procedures are further enhanced by the site’s accreditation to ISO 14001 EMS. The site’s Environmental Management Programme (EMP) ensures that improvements in environmental performance are encouraged in the EMP by setting a series of objectives and targets commonly associated with reducing and minimising resource/material use and waste production generally. A summary of these objective and targets are submitted to the EPA annually within the site’s Annual Environmental Report (AER).

In accordance with their IE Licence requirements, Janssen Sciences provide a summary of all waste movements from site during the previous year and the method of re-use, recycling, recovery or disposal within the site’s AER. The following table is a summary of the waste data from the site from 2015 to 2016.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 12-3

Table 12.1 Janssen Sciences - Waste Summary 2015 to 2016

Year Total (T) Landfill (T)

Incineration wth Heat

Recovery (T)

Recovery(T)

2016 Hazardous 132.11 0 130.267 1.839

2016 Non-Hazardous

830.93 (includes 215.1 WWTP Sludge)

0 0.745 830.184

2015 Hazardous 138 0 133.0 5.0

2015 Non-Hazardous

558

(includes 234 WWTP Sludge)

0 238.0 320.0

Production volumes increased on site from 2015 figures by c. 20% during 2016. Waste generation on site also increased on the previous year with additional wastes being generated due to changing manufacturing techniques.


The characteristics of the proposed development with regards to the management of waste are outlined as follows:

12.4.1 Construction Activities

The overall construction phase will take place over a period of approximately 24 month and will typically result in the generation of a range of waste materials including excavated material, rubble, steel, metal decking, cladding, insulation materials, timber, plastics, cardboard packaging, office waste, canteen waste, and small quantities of hazardous waste (e.g. resins, adhesives, waste oils and paint containers). To allow for structural tie-ins to the warehouse, laboratory and administration building and canteen extensions, demolition works for building access penetration will include removal of concrete yard slabs, walls and foundations, cladding, insulation, plasterboard , glass and curtain walls, in addition to the removal of a steel canopy at the existing warehouse.

It has been established that approximately 20,000 m3 of excavated material will be generated and will be reused on site within the proposed new landscaped berm (refer to Chapter 5 for further details on landscaping strategy and Chapter 7 Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology,).

A site specific CEMP will be implemented for the proposed development and will include a Construction & Demolition Waste Management Plan (C&D WMP) in accordance with the C&D Waste Management Guidelines. The CEMP will be implemented by the Construction Management Team (CMT) for the entirety of the construction activities. The C&D WMP will include specific detail on waste segregation and management. The Plan will be a live document and will be subject to revision throughout the course of the construction phase. The plan will include specific details on the projected waste types and subsequent management in accordance with Janssen Sciences IE Licence requirements.

Provisions will be put in place for designated contained concrete wash out areas and a contained waste area, details of which will be provided within the CEMP. The CMT will ensure that all construction waste generated onsite shall be segregated where possible. Each contractor company will be required to provide suitable waste receptacles for the nature of work being undertaken and resulting waste. Contractors are required to segregate waste prior to placing into waste skips for removal off site.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 12-4

Throughout the construction period Janssen Sciences will continue to provide annual updates on waste quantities including construction waste data and recovery/disposal routes to the EPA as part of the AER and IE Licencing requirements.

12.4.2 Operational Activities

Production and associated activities at the proposed development will unavoidably generate a range of both non hazardous and hazardous waste. As outlined in Section 12.3, Janssen Sciences operates and maintains a well developed waste management, minimisation and auditing strategy within the existing facility and this will be rolled out to include for the proposed development.

A programme of non-hazardous waste segregation and recycling forms an integral part of the overall on-site waste management strategy.

Anticipated non-hazardous wastes are similar to the existing facility as outlined in Section 12.3 and will include a range of wastes such as mixed and plastic packaging , paper and cardboard packaging, WWTP sludge, biodegradable canteen and kitchen waste, autoclaved production bags, tubing, spent filters and filter cartridges, GMP gowns etc. general non-hazardous waste (e.g. wooden pallets, scrap metal, etc.),mixed municipal waste and printer toners. Where possible these wastes will be sent off site for re-use, recycling or recovery. The proposed development will produce non hazardous waste in the order of an additional 1,200 tonnes per annum excluding WWTP sludge. Similarly an additional 1,200 tonnes of WWTP sludge is anticipated from the proposed development, the primary reasons to the increase in WWTP sludge include increase throughput, increased phosphorus removal to comply with BAT resulting in additional sludge and a proposed change to the sludge dewatering technology.

Similar to the existing facility, anticipated hazardous wastes from the proposed development will include laboratory wastes, empty material drums, off-specification raw materials in addition to miscellaneous sources such as waste oils, UV and fluorescent tubes. Again, segregation will be carried out at source with wastes sent for recovery or recycling under licensed contract where possible e.g. fluorescent tubes, batteries and waste oils etc. Laboratory waste chemicals will be segregated where possible and stored in a designated chemical store in suitable labelled containers. The proposed development will produce hazardous waste in the order of an additional 300 tonnes per annum.

Proposed Waste Management Logistics

As part of the proposed development, the waste handling area will be relocated and significantly expanded to provide both for increasing level of waste materials and to provide for enhanced levels of segregation of materials.

Internal staging will be provided for segregated colour coded bins of Dry Mixed Recyclables (DMR), general wastes and hazardous wastes. Wastes will be collected from manufacturing stage areas in large green and black bins along with hazardous wastes in red medium size bins. Bins will also be provided for drop off by the general site population for DMR, wastes and paper materials.

As this warehouse area will be operated on a 5 day basis, provision will also be made for a drop area outside of the waste stage room over weekends. The drop off can be provided with empty replacement bins and allow the parking of full waste bins should the need arise over weekends.

Within the waste stage area, locations will be provided for a waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) cage, glass bin, fluorescent lighting coffin and a fume hood for placing of liquid wastes by manufacturing. A stage location will also be provided for plastics for recycle (from dispensing and manufacturing). Storage will be provided for consumables bags and new bins for provision to manufacturing.

Access will be provided from an external platform elevated over the yard to compactor units parked against the platform for general wastes and DMR materials. Access will also be provided to a document shredder provided for bagged confidential documents.

Hazardous waste materials will be bagged and tagged at points of generation and collected in red bins. These will be brought to the waste handling area where they will be staged in large red bins

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 12-5

by type before loading into drum press into 200 litre steel drums by type and lidded, strapped into pallets and moved to environmental drum yard before removal from site via approved waste contractor.

A covered waste staging area will be provided for drums in the yard. Empty metal and plastic drums will also be staged under the covered area. A metal skip will be located in the yard along with Chemstore units for hazardous laboratory liquid wastes.


The potential impacts to waste management from the proposed development are considered in this section.


Table 12.2 lists the potential impacts of the construction related activities in the absence of mitigation measures and the associated magnitude, significance and duration in accordance with the relevant guidelines.

Table 12.2 Potential Impacts During the Construction Phase

Activity Potential Impacts Quality Significance Duration

Waste Management

Targets outlined in the Southern Region Waste Management Plan 2015-2021 will not be achieved.

Negative Slight Short-term

The use of unlicensed or non permitted waste contractors could give rise to inappropriate management of waste and result in environmental impacts/pollution.

If waste is not managed and stored correctly, this may lead to litter or pollution issues on the site or adjacent sites.


Table 12.3 lists the potential impacts of the operational related activities and the associated magnitude, significance and duration in accordance with the relevant guidelines. It is noted these impacts duration apart are the same as the construction phase.

Table 12.3 Potential Impacts During the Operational Phase

Activity Potential Impacts Quality Significance Duration

Waste Management

Targets outlined in the Southern Region Waste Management Plan 2015-2021 will not be achieved.

Negative Slight Long-term

The use of unlicensed or non permitted waste contractors could give rise to inappropriate management of waste and result in environmental impacts/pollution.

If waste is not managed and stored correctly, this may lead to litter or pollution issues on the site or adjacent sites.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 12-6


The cumulative impact of all known developments in the vicinity of the proposed development has been considered. These developments would be likely to have similar impacts arising from the generation of waste materials (i.e. neutral and imperceptible) provided all appropriate mitigation measures are implemented.


Proposed mitigation measures for both the construction phase and the operational phase are outlined in the following sections.


In order to minimise the potential impacts identified in Table 12.2, the following mitigation measures will be implemented.

A site specific CEMP for the construction phase of the proposed development will be prepared to ensure effective waste management and recycling of waste generated at the site. Mitigation measures that will be implemented during the construction phase are summarised as follows and will be described in more detail within the CEMP:

- The construction contractor to oversee and take ownership of the waste programme to ensure compliance with the CEMP.

- On-site segregation of all non-hazardous and hazardous waste materials into appropriate categories and receptacles within designated storage areas.

- All hazardous waste will be packaged in appropriate UN approved receptacles and stored in dedicated hazardous waste storage areas pending transportation off site.

- All waste storage areas will be audited regularly to ensure the wastes are being segregated and stored in accordance with CEMP and IE Licence requirements.

- If any potentially contaminated soil is encountered during the construction works, it will be segregated from all other soils, tested to confirm the classification of the soil for disposal purposes and will be collected and disposed of by a permitted waste contractor to a suitably licenced landfill.

- All waste leaving site will be recycled, recovered or reused where possible, with the exception of those waste streams where appropriate facilities are currently not available.

- All waste leaving the site will be taken by suitable permitted contractors and transported to suitably licensed or permitted facilities in full compliance with the site’s IE Licence requirements.

- Quantities of waste leaving the site will be recorded and copies of relevant documentation maintained onsite, construction waste from the proposed development will be reported in Janssen Sciences’ AER.

All subcontractors will be advised of the above requirements at the tender stage and again at pre-appointment meetings. As a condition of appointment, all contractors will be obliged to comply with the site’s CEMP and the IE Licence waste management requirements.


As outlined in Section 1.5, Janssen Sciences will be applying for a review of the site’s existing Industrial Emissions Licence (No. P0778-01). Under the auspices of the existing IE Licence, Janssen Sciences operate and maintain a well developed waste management strategy. The IE Licence sets out a series of requirements / conditions with respect to waste in terms of recording, reporting and waste contractor requirements. A hierarchy of waste management favouring elimination of wastes over minimisation and disposal is and will continue to be practiced at Janssen Sciences following implementation of the proposed development.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 12-7

As outlined in Section 12.3, Janssen Sciences as an EPA IE Licenced facility ( P0778-01) is subject to the waste management requirements of Condition 8.1 to 8.8 of the Licence and the associated IED amendment Condition 2D which states that:

“The licensee shall ensure that waste generated in the carrying on of the activity shall be prepared for re-use, recycling or recovery or, where that is not technically or economically possible, disposed of in a manner which will prevent or minimise any impact on the environment.”

Furthermore, Conditions 2.2 and 7.4 of the IE Licence obliges the site to review operations for opportunities to minimise wastes.

A hierarchy of waste management favouring elimination of wastes over minimisation and disposal is practiced at Janssen Sciences. Waste Management Procedure DS-SOP-5430 applies to the management of all hazardous and non-hazardous wastes generated at Janssen Sciences..

Janssen Sciences EHS Department is responsible for maintenance of all waste management documentation. This includes waste container tracking forms, waste inventory data and waste shipment documentation.

In order to minimise the potential impacts identified in Table 12.3, the mitigation measures outlined as follows will be implemented. The EHS manager will be the point of contact for all matters relating to the characterisation and management of waste. The primary responsibilities include:

- All wastes will be managed in accordance with IE Licence conditions e.g. EMS and Waste Management Procedures. These would be subject to audits (both corporate and regulatory) thereafter.

- Ensure that personnel involved in the management of waste are qualified and trained to perform job specific duties

- Liaise with personnel, contractors and regulators on all waste /certification matters

- Ensure that waste is properly segregated, packaged, labelled and the waste being shipped meets the appropriate waste acceptance criteria.

- Ensure that waste is disposed of in a manner compliant with all regulations and standards of practice.

- Ensure that copies of licenses for all approved disposal locations used by the waste contractor are on file.

- The waste contractor shall be subject to audits by Jansen personnel to verify compliance with regulations and standards.


The mitigation measures detailed in Section 12.6 will ensure the waste arising from the proposed expansion will be managed in compliance with the provisions of the Waste Management Act (as amended), and associated Regulations, the Litter Act and the Southern Region Waste Management Plan 2015-2021 as well as Janssen Sciences’ IE licence requirements and achieve optimum levels of waste prevention, reduction, re-use and recycling. The predicted residual impact will be long term- imperceptible-negative.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 12-8


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 13-1

13 Material Assets

13.1 Introduction

Material assets comprise the physical resources in the environment, which may be of human or natural origin that are valued and intrinsic to specific places. The objective of the assessment is to ensure that these assets are used in a sustainable manner with respect to the proposed development.

The material assets, which have been identified as being within and adjacent to the Janssen Sciences site and which may be directly affected by the proposed development, are addressed below in terms of existing environment, potential impacts of the proposed development and mitigation measures. Any material assets addressed elsewhere in this EIAR are listed below for cross referencing purposes.

Information already gathered from the planning, design, construction and operation of the existing facility has been incorporated and updated to inform the extent of services and the consideration of potential impacts on material assets from the proposed development.

Material assets of natural origin which have been considered elsewhere in this EIAR include:

- Geological Resource – Refer to Chapter 7 (Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology) and Chapter 12 (Waste Management)

- Undeveloped Land Resource – Refer to Chapter 4 (Population and Human Health)

- Natural Amenities – Refer to Chapter 4 (Population and Human Health)

- Designated Areas – Refer to Chapter 5 (Landscape and Visual) and Chapter 8 (Biodiversity)

- Scenic routes – Refer to Chapter 5 (Landscape and Visual)

- Material assets of human origin which have been considered elsewhere in this EIAR include:

- Public Utilities – Refer to Chapter 2 (Description of the Proposed Development) and Chapter 10 (Water and Wastewater)

- Transport Infrastructure – Refer to Chapter 6 (Traffic and Transportation)

- Land Use, Property, Recreational Facilities and Amenities – Refer to Chapter 4 (Population and Human Health)

- Cultural Heritage – Refer to Chapter 14 (Archaeology, Architecture and Cultural Heritage)


The assessment was carried out according to the methodologies specified in EPA guidance documents. A desk study was carried out on the existing material assets associated with the site of the proposed development.


13.3.1 Public Utilities and Natural Resources

Electricity

There is an existing 3 MW Wind Turbine on the Janssen Sciences Ringaskiddy site. The current Maximum Electrical Demand is approximately 1.6 MW. The new expansion works planned under the BioCork2 proposed development will utilise the excess green power that is currently being produced by the Wind Turbine.

The following power distribution was selected for the proposed development:

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 13-2

- Use the spare capacity within the existing MV infrastructure. The existing MV Power is distributed from an MV Room in the Central Utilities Building (CUB). The wind turbine MV will be re-routed to the northern end of the site and brought back to the MV sub-station.

- Provide a new LV Distribution System for the new Production Facility.

- Use the existing Main Electrical Board for LV power supplies to the new Laboratory and Administration Building.

- Use the new LV Main Distribution Board in the new Production Building for the Warehouse expansion.

Natural Gas

The site has an existing natural gas main. No new natural gas mains are required.

Water

Details in relation to water resources available at the proposed site are provided in Chapter 10, (Water and Wastewater) of this EIAR.

Telecommunications

The proposed site is currently well serviced with respect to telecommunications lines for telephone and broadband services.


In consultation with all the relevant utility providers it has been confirmed that there are sufficient supplies of electricity, natural gas, telecommunications, water, and sewerage services available to serve the requirements of the construction and operational phases of the proposed development.


There will be minimal use of natural resources during the construction phase. There will be no requirement to import any soil. Resources consumed will include the use of aggregates and clean fill and the use of fuels for construction related machinery. There will be a minimal use of water resources during the construction phase. As a result the potential impact of the proposed development on public utilities and natural resources during the construction phase is considered to be short-term and imperceptible.


During the operational phase there will be resource requirements for the production process in particular natural gas, electricity and potable water. Energy efficiency and water conservation measures will be incorporated into the detailed design of the facility. This is a continuation of what was proposed as part of the existing facility and is a very positive environmental aspect of the project.

There is a potential impact on natural resources i.e. water, soils, air and the built environment if mitigation measures associated with the proposed development are not implemented. These potential impacts are discussed within the relevant chapters of this EIAR.

In relation to the operational phase, the potential impact of the proposed BioCork2 development on Material Assets is considered to be Long-term and Slight-Negative.


Mitigation measures associated with material assets assessed in other chapters are described in the respective chapters.

There will need to be consultation with the ESB, Gas Networks Ireland (GNI), Cork County Council,

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 13-3

Eir, Irish Water and other relevant service providers within the locality prior to the construction phase of the project to ensure construction proceeds without disruption to the local and business community.

The following requirements are likely to arise from the consultations:

- Attention will need to be paid to the safety and other requirements outlined in the GNI Safety Document: Guidelines for Designers/Builders (2010).

- The exact locations of known local underground services will be confirmed. No overhead line relocations are required.

In relation to the use of natural resources there will be comparatively low use of fuel, electricity, natural gas and potable water during the construction phase. Resources consumed will mainly include use of fuels for construction related machinery, electricity to light the construction site and power construction tools and gas to heat the buildings. On-site segregation of all waste materials will take place; see Chapter 12 (Waste Management). It will be a priority to source materials from locations close to the site, where possible, in order to reduce transport distances. Site lighting will be on a timer / photovoltaic / sensor system and on low lux for after hours.

During the operational phase there will be resource requirements for manufacturing, principally electricity, natural gas and potable water. In this regard the proposed development is being designed to incorporate energy efficiency and sustainable measures. An overview of sustainable measures is presented in Chapter 2, Section 2.8.


The existing site and the proposed development in keeping with the site masterplan have been designed for, and the infrastructure provided for, a development of this nature and scale. The mitigation measures outlined in this chapter and throughout the EIAR will be implemented as part of the site’s CEMP and IEL.

The overall predicted impact of the proposed development on material assets is considered to be long-term neutral.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 13-4


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-1

14 Archaeology, Architecture and Cultural Heritage

14.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the results of an archaeological, architectural and cultural heritage impact assessment for the proposed development. The assessment reviews the known archaeological, architectural and cultural heritage resources and assesses the impact the proposed development is likely to have on known and potential archaeological sites and makes recommendations in terms of mitigation against any perceived impacts. There are no recorded archaeological sites within the boundaries of the proposed development and no buildings of architectural merit are listed in the Record of Protected Structures and the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage. The proposed development site is located however in an area of Cork Harbour that would have been easily accessible to prehistoric settlers and archaeological sites of this date have been found during previous development projects in the Ringaskiddy area.


14.2.1 General

The assessment of the potential impact of the proposed development works on Archaeological, Architectural and Cultural Heritage was carried out according to the methodologies specified in EPA guidance documents.

The TII criteria for rating the magnitude and significance of impacts at EIA stage on cultural heritage sites are also relevant in determining impact assessment and are presented in Table 14.1. This table provides the baseline criteria used to describe the impacts that potential developments can have on cultural heritage sites.

Table 14.1: Criteria Used to Determine Impacts on Cultural Heritage Sites

Magnitude of Impact

Direct Indirect

Severe

Cultural Heritage site is within a proposed development area. Construction work will entail the removal or part of the entire cultural heritage.

Cultural Heritage site is within a proposed development area. Construction works will entail the destruction of the visual context of the site or isolate it from associated groups or features.

Potentially Severe

Cultural Heritage site is adjacent to a proposed development area. There is potential for related remains being affected by development works.

Cultural Heritage site is adjacent to a proposed development area. Construction works will greatly injure the visual context of the site or isolate it from associated groups or features.

Moderate

Existing access to a cultural heritage site will be severed. Development works will affect the context of a cultural heritage site.

N/A

No predicted The proposed development will have no predicted impact. N/A

14.2.2 Legislative framework

Ireland has committed to the protection of its archaeological and architectural heritage by being a signatory to two international conventions:

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-2

- The 1985 European Convention on the Protection of Architectural Heritage (The Granada Convention), which aims to make provision for the protection of monuments, groups of buildings and sites that are of ‘historical, archaeological, artistic, scientific, social or technical interest’

- The 1992 European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (The Valetta Convention), which aims to ‘protect the archaeological heritage as a source of the European collective memory and an instrument for historical and scientific study’

Provisions made in these conventions have been written into Irish Law via the National Monuments (Amendments) Acts 1930-2004, the Heritage Act 1995, the Cultural Institutions Act 1997, the Architectural Heritage (National Inventory) and Historic Monuments (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1999 and the various Planning and Developments Acts 2000-2015. The policy of the Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs in relation to the protection of archaeological and architectural heritage is set out in the Frameworks and Principals for the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Government Publication 1999) which may be downloaded from the departmental website www.archaeology.ie.

14.2.3 Desktop Study

This is a document and cartographic survey utilising a number of sources in order to identify all known archaeological sites and other monuments of historical interest within the area to be affected by the proposed development. The principal sources used for identifying archaeological monuments are listed below.

- Record of Monuments and Places for Co. Cork (RMP)

- Sites and Monuments Record for Co. Cork (SMR)

- National Museum of Ireland Topographical Files

- Townland search of the annual Excavations bulletin.

- All three editions of the OS 6” scale sheets

- Down Survey map for Cork

- Cork County Development Plan 2014-2020

- Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Area Plan 2015

- National Inventory of Architectural Heritage (NIAH)

- Aerial photographs (Ordnance Survey of Ireland (www.osi.ie))

- Previous archaeological reports for the proposed development site

Previous archaeological reports for the proposed development site

The proposed development lands were the subject of two archaeological impact assessments in February 2003. These were commissioned by IDA Ireland in advance of the construction of a 1.2km roadway along the southern boundary to the development site (Gleeson 2003; O’Donnell 2003). A programme of pre-development archaeological testing (04E1246) was carried out in the following year along the route of the new roadway and no features or finds of archaeological merit were exposed (Cleary 2004). Subsequent archaeological monitoring during the construction of the road in November 2004 did not reveal any sites of archaeological significance.

An archaeological impact assessment for the 40.5ha landbank was also carried out in December 2004 as part of the EIS for the Centocor Facility (Cleary 2004). This consisted of a desk-based study and site inspection. While the field survey did not reveal any above ground sites of potential archaeological significance the overall density of recorded sites in the environs of the proposed development suggested that features of archaeological merit may be exposed during topsoil removal prior to the construction of the Centocor Facility.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-3

The Archaeological Services Unit of UCC monitored the removal of topsoil on the footprint of the original Centocor building in the summer of 2005. This revealed a previously unknown fulacht fiadh with associated rubbish pits and water troughs filled with heat shattered stones (Cleary 2005). Subsequent archaeological impact assessments for the site were compiled in 2005 and 2006 (Cleary 2005; Cleary 2006).

Lane-Purcell Archaeology, Consultant Archaeologists, carried out an archaeological impact assessment prior to the erection of the wind turbine located to the immediate west of the existing facility. No mitigation was deemed necessary as the area had been previously disturbed (Lane Purcell 2011).

Margaret McCarthy carried out an archaeological test excavation in the northwest corner of the development site in February 2017 where site development works involving mounding to create an earthen berm were due to be carried out (Planning Ref. 16/7150). The test excavation exposed two shallow pits containing charcoal and cremated human remains. In addition to the test excavation archaeological monitoring was undertaken during the removal of topsoil from the footprint of the bulk dig and the foot print of the earthen berm.

14.2.4 Field Survey

The primary objective of the field survey was to inspect the lands subject to the proposed development for previously unrecorded visible archaeological monuments and features of cultural heritage interest. The entire area of the proposed development was inspected. The conditions for field survey were good in that there was little vegetation cover which allowed for easy recognition of any surviving above ground archaeological features. The 1st and 2nd editions (1842 and 1902) of the Ordnance Survey maps for the study area shows a farming landscape with significantly more field boundaries than what is in existence today. The area then consisted of a large number of fields that would have formed part of the Ballybricken House and Prospect Villa demesnes. Most of the field boundaries are no longer in existence and much of the area has been disturbed during the construction of the existing Janssen Sciences facility in the southeast corner of the development site as well as during the more recent construction of the wind turbine to the west.

Figure 14.1: Site location (red dots indicate Recorded Archaeological Monuments (RMPs))

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:13


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-4


The proposed production building is located to the west of the existing CUB building.To the immediate south and east it is proposed to construct a warehouse and a concrete yard in a grassy area that was clearly disturbed and reseeded during the construction of the original Centocor plant. A modern tarred road forms the southern limit to the development site and it is proposed to construct additional access roads from this road. The lands between the tarred road and the southern side of the existing pharmaceutical buildings are also proposed for development. To the north of the existing CUB building and car park, it is proposed to provide additional car parking spaces. Two of these are in level grassy areas to the immediate north and west of the existing car park and the third is located in an area of undisturbed agricultural land to the north. The WWTP is located to the southeast of the existing Janssen Sciences building and car park and it is proposed to expand this facility northwards into an area of overgrown disturbed ground. Short sections of ivy clad walls representing the outbuildings of Ballybricken House survive to the immedicate north of the existing Water Treatment Plant (Figures 14.2 and 14.3).

14.3.1 General archaeological and historical summary

The location of the Ringaskiddy area, to the west of Cork Harbour was easily accessible to early colonists. These early settlers or Mesolithic peoples are known to have arrived about 9000 years ago. The coastal area along Cork Harbour has several shell middens40 including sites listed as CO087-054 and CO087-055 to the southeast of the proposed development. Many of the excavated middens in Cork are believed to be medieval in date but the unexcavated examples in the harbour may date to the Mesolithic period. An unexcavated shell midden (CO087-120) was exposed, though not excavated, during monitoring of road works in 2004 c. 900m southeast of the subject lands (Cleary 2005). Two other shell middens (CO087053 & CO087055) are located to the southeast of the site in Ringaskiddy and Currabinny.

The advent of the First Farmers or Neolithic people in Ireland was around 6000 years ago. The visible remains of these early populations are the burial sites, which are frequently large stone built structures or megalithic tombs. The less obvious settlement sites of this period may exist beneath the current ground level in the proposed development site and may be uncovered in those areas scheduled for the removal of topsoil and regarding excavation works.

The Bronze Age in Ireland began around 2500BC when metal became common for use in tool and weapon production and the currency of wealth. The Bronze Age period is probably best known for delicate gold artefacts and elaborate pottery styles, many of which have been recovered through ploughing and other ground disturbance. Monumental stones were erected by Bronze Age people and these standing stones may have served as territorial markers, prehistoric signposts or some other function unknown to modern man. Some excavated examples have produced token deposits of cremated human bone from the socket of the stones. A standing stone (C087-045) is located c. 1km to the southwest of the proposed development site in Coolmore townland. There is a record of two standing stones (CO087-096) being present in Raheens townland but these are no longer visible. An archaeological test excavation carried out by the writer in the northwest corner of the development site in February 2017 exposed two shallow pits containing cremated human remains.

One of the most frequent monuments of the Bronze Age period is a site type known as a fulacht fiadh. These archaeological features are most commonly interpreted as ancient cooking-sites, which usually survive as small horseshoe-shaped mounds of charcoal-enriched soil packed with fragments of heat-shattered stones. Numerous fulachta fiadh are recorded in the Record of Monuments and Places for Co. Cork and a number of these are located close to the proposed development lands. Archaeological monitoring during construction of the Centocor facility (formerly Janssen Biologics and now Janssen Sciences Ireland UC) uncovered traces of a burnt mound and a series of pits filled with heat-shattered stones (Cleary 2005). A previously unknown fulacht fiadh (CO087-145) was exposed during archaeological testing to the south of the proposed development site in 2004 (Cummins 2004). Another fulacht fiadh (CO099-074) is present in Coolmore townland to the south. In addition, excavations in Barnahely townland over the last number of years have

40 A mound or deposit containing shells, animal bones, and other refuse that indicates the site of a human settlement.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-5

exposed two pits (CO087132 (O’Donovan 2004); CO087-148 (Hanley 2004) and a series of enclosures (CO087-155 (Rossaveare and Rossaveare 2004) have been interpreted as Bronze Age in date.

With the advent of Christianity, written documents record various historic events and people and information on the Early Medieval period. The most common site type of this period is the ringfort which is one of the most widespread archaeological field monuments in Ireland.

There are several ring forts in the wider environs of the study area two of which have been excavated. These (CO087-046 and CO087-047) were discovered during monitoring of topsoil during the construction of the Novartis plant in Raheens townland to the north of the development site. The sites proved to be Early Medieval in date and exposed a series of domestic buildings enclosed by a bank and ditch (Lennon 1993 and 1994). Excavations within one of the ringfort exposed three souterrains (CO087:102-104). Another possible souterrain (CO087-044) was discovered during agricultural activity in Coolmore townland to the west of the development site. Souterrains are underground man-made structures composed of a chamber or series of chambers linked by creepways and entered from ground level by a narrow opening, usually concealed (Power et al 1994).

The classification ‘possible souterrain’ is used when it is not possible to verify the presence of a souterrain, for example if it is only known from local folk knowledge. A well preserved ringfort (CO087-148) survives on the landscape in Barnahely townland c. 510m east of the study area. Recent excavations around this ringfort exposed a fulacht fiadh (CO087-145), a corn-drying kiln (CO087-146) and a possible corn-drying kiln (CO087-156).

There are a number of early and possible early church sites in the vicinity of the study area. It is possible that an early ecclesiastical enclosure (CO087-061) may have existed in Ballintaggart townland to the north of the study area on the site of the Pfizer pharmaceutical facility. In addition, documentary evidence suggests the former presence of a church (CO087-049) in Ballybricken townland to the northeast of the study area in an area now also occupied by the Pfizer facility. The graveyard (CO087-05201) to the immediate southeast of the existing facility is in Barnahely townland and is reputed to be on the site of an older parish church, which probably dated to the fourteenth/fifteenth century. Nothing of this original building survives above ground and the graveyard itself is enclosed by stone walls and contains inscribed grave markers dating to the early eighteenth century, but may include older burials.

Barnahely Castle (CO087052:01-03) to the immediate southeast of the proposed development site was built by a descendant of the twelfth century Anglo-Norman invaders, Richard de Cogan in 1536. The original castle was subsequently developed into a country house known as ‘Castle Warren’ in the eighteenth century but the remains of the original tower house and bawn wall are still visible. Castle Warren is a recorded structure (RPS No. 01260) and is listed in the Record of Protected Structures (RPS) in the Cork County Development Plan 20124-2020. A castle is also shown in Coolmore townland on the Down Survey map and while it is not recorded in the Record of Monuments and Places, it is mentioned in the Cork Archaeological Survey (Power et al 1992) that traces of the castle can be identified in the front lawn of Coolmore House (CO087043) on a bright dry day.

In the 18th and 19th centuries, the Ringaskiddy area was favoured by the aristocracy for the construction of large country houses and demesnes due to its proximity to Cork City and the rich lands surrounding the harbour. These demesnes are shown very clearly on the first and second editions of the Ordnance maps and features such as gate lodges, lime kilns, ice houses, ornamental towers, stable blocks, landscaped gardens and woodlands, tree-lined avenues and walls are all detailed. Two former demesne houses are located within the proposed development site, Ballybricken House and Prospect Villa, both located to the east of the existing facility (Figures14.2 and 14.3). Prospect Villa (CO087-011) is listed in the Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) and was demolished in 1981. Brickenhead House seems to have been a larger estate but no trace of the original country house and its outbuildings survive. It is listed in the National Inventory of Architectural Survey (Garden Survey) though no traces of the original gardens now survive. The house is recorded by Bence Jones as an eighteenth century country

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-6

residence (1978). The demesnes of Ballybricken House and Prospect Villa both extended westwards into the boundary of the existing facility but aside from a number of field boundaries and a section of a stone wall to the immediate north of the wind turbine no other features associated with the estate lands survive.

14.3.2 Cartographic Evidence

One of the earliest maps for the area is Candell’s map dated to 1587 and this shows Barnahely castle on Ringaskiddy peninsula as Berneyele. Coolmore Castle is also indicated. The Down Survey map (1654-1659) for the lower harbour shows the townland of Barnahely as Bernehery parish and the castle (CO087-05201) is also indicated. The first edition (1842) of the Ordnance Survey map for the study area shows a landscape with considerably more field boundaries than what is in existence today (Figure 14.2). The demesnes of Ballybricken House and Prospect Villa are clearly detailed on this map. The first edition map shows a concentration of small fields in the southwest corner of the proposed development site that had been removed by the time the second edition map was compiled some 60 years later (Figure 14.3). With the exception of the southwest corner of the study area, the second edition map shows that the field enclosure system remained largely unchanged. The map also shows a tree lined field boundary in the central area of the proposed development site and traces perhaps of a track providing a rear access to Ballybricken House. A stone wall which survives in the central area of the site is also shown on the first and second editions of the maps.

Figure 14.2 1st

Edition OS (1837) map showing field boundaries within the area proposed for development

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-7

Figure 14.3 2nd

Edition (1908) OS map showing tree lined avenue in north central area of site providing access to Ballybricken House demesne

14.3.3 Place name evidence

The proposed development lands are located entirely within the townland of Barnahely. The generic element of the name (barna) is considered to originate from the Irish ‘barr’ meaning ‘top’ and related to a high ridge of ground at the northern end of the townland (O’Leary 1918). The derivation of the element (hely) is unknown.

14.3.4 Aerial Photography

No features of potential archaeological significance were identified through an examination of the aerial photograph for the subject lands.

14.3.5 Recorded archaeological sites (RMP) in the vicinity of the proposed development area

There are no recorded archaeological monuments within the lands proposed for development. A distinctive cluster of sites survive in the southeast corner of the study area including a possible prehistoric burnt pit (CO087132), a castle and its associated features (CO087052:01-03), a church and graveyard (CO087051:01-02) and a gate lodge (CO087-050002). A full list of all of the recorded archaeological monuments in the townland of Barnahely is provided in Table 14.2. The density of archaeological monuments in the townland is significant and suggests that other previously unknown features and/or finds of archaeological merit may be exposed during topsoil removal and regarding works at the proposed site.

Table 14.2: List of recorded archaeological monuments in the vicinity of the study area

RMP No. Townland Description

CO087-048 Barnahely Ringfort

CO087-05002 Barnahely Gate lodge

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-8


CO087-05101 Barnahely Graveyard

CO087-05102 Barnahely Church

CO087-05201 Barnahely Tower house

CO087-05202 Barnahely Design landscape

CO087-05203 Barnahely Bawn

CO087-060 Barnahely One-storey vernacular house

CO087-106 Barnahely Enclosure

CO087-111 Barnahely Country House

CO087-120 Barnahely Midden

CO087-132 Barnahely Burnt pit

CO087-143 Barnahely Settlement cluster

CO087-145 Barnahely Burnt spread

CO087-146 Barnahely Corn-drying kiln

CO087-147 Barnahely Misc. Excavation

CO087-148 Barnahely Pit

CO087-155 Barnahely Settlement cluster

CO087-156 Barnahely Possible corn drying

CO087-04201 Coolmore Building

CO087-04202 Coolmore Icehouse

CO087-043 Coolmore Country House

CO087-044 Coolmore Possible souterrain

CO087-045 Coolmore Standing stone

CO087-064 Coolmore Redundant record

CO087-095 Coolmore Enclosure

CO087-101 Coolmore Enclosure possible

CO087-046 Raheens Ringfort

CO087-047 Raheens Ringfort

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-9


CO087-102 Raheens Souterrain



14.3.6 Record of Protected Structures

The list of protected structures in the Cork County Development Plan does not list any buildings of architectural merit within the area proposed for development. Two buildings are currently listed on the Record of Protected Structures in the County Development Plan and the Carrigaline Electoral Area Local Area Plan and include the Martello town visible in the distance to the southeast and Castle Warren to the immediate southeast (Table 14.3).

Table 14.3: Record of Protected Structures for Ringaskiddy

RPS No. Townland Description

1260 Barnahely Castlewarren/Stronghouse

00575 Ringaskiddy Martello Tower

14.3.7 National Inventory of Architectural Heritage

No buildings within or in the vicinity of the proposed development lands are listed in the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage. The demesne lands of Ballybricken House are listed in the NIAH Garden Survey but it is recorded that no trace of the original landscape and ornamental gardens now survive.



The proposed development site does not include any archaeological sites recorded in the RMP for Co. Cork and the site inspection did not detect any surface indications of previously unrecorded sites. Most of the proposed works are in and around the existing production buildings and there will be no impact on the archaeological, architectural and cultural heritage resource in these areas. Neither is it anticipated that there will be any impact at the proposed location for an extension to the WWTP as this area was clearly disturbed during the construction of the existing facility. The only predicated impact on potential buried archaeological features is in the area proposed for car parking to the north of the existing CUB building and car park. This proposed car park is located in an agricultural field to the immediate east of the field where enabling works are currently being undertaken (Planning Ref. 16/7150). Given that some archaeological features were exposed during the test excavation carried out here in February 2017, there is a potential risk that further groundworks here could expose previously unknown archaeological features or finds. Of less risk is the proposed car park areas to the immediate west of the existing car park to the north of the CUB building. The ground here, while currently under grass, would appear to have been stripped and levelled during the construction of the original production facility and the existing car park.

Although there are no recorded archaeological monuments within the proposed development lands, it is possible that hitherto unknown sites will be uncovered during the initial phase of construction in those areas of the site that have not previously been disturbed. Without specific mitigation strategies for these greenfield areas, such subsurface archaeological remains which might exist would be disturbed and destroyed resulting in a significant impact. The desk-top study has highlighted the potential for undisturbed areas of the site to contain sub-surface archaeological

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-10

features. This potential is due to the exposure of numerous archaeological features in Barnahely townland during construction work in the last ten years as well as the more recent discovery of archaeological remains in the field where the enabling works are currently being undertaken.

Indirect impacts can be described as the potential impact a development will have on the overall character and setting of an archaeological monument and its surrounding landscape. The proposed development cannot be regarded as a discordant feature in the landscape as it is located within the boundary of the existing facility in an industrial region of the lower harbour where a number of biopharmaceutical facilities and other businesses are already present.


Adverse impacts on archaeological, architectural and cultural heritage are not predicted during the operational phase of the development.


The proposed development is for site development works involving the construction of a new production facility, new warehouse extension, new laboratory extension, car park areas and an extension to the existing WWTP. The works will involve internal site excavations to the south and west of the existing buildings and the stripping of topsoil in greenfield areas to the north to facilitate the construction of car parking areas. It is considered that no significant cumulative effects will arise from these proposed site development works. In the event of further development at the site however, a cumulative effect would be predicted to arise due to the potential risk of exposing further previously unknown archaeological sites.


The following mitigation measures are recommended in the interest of safeguarding the archaeological and architectural heritage of the lands proposed for development.

14.5.1 Pre Construction Phase

The only predicted significant impact on exposing potential buried archaeological remains is an area of agricultural land to the north of the existing car parks where it is proposed to construct an additional car park. It is recommended that a programme of pre-development archaeological testing be undertaken at the location for this proposed car park as outlined in Chapter 2, Figures 2.1 and 2.2. The test excavation will be carried out under licence prior to the commencement of any development works at the site and the results should be submitted to the National Monuments Service, Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, and the National Museum of Ireland for review. The developer willallow between three to four weeks for the test excavation licence to be processed.


The proposed development is mostly around the existing operational buildings and there will be no impact on the archaeological, architectural and cultural heritage resource in these areas. The greatest potential impact on the archaeological resource will be during the removal of topsoil and there is a risk that buried archaeological features may exist below ground level where it is proposed to construct the car parking areas to the north of the CUB building. It is recommended that all topsoil removal operations in these areas be fully monitored by a qualified archaeologist. The archaeologist will require an excavation licence for this work to be issued by The National Monuments Service, Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and approved by the National Museum of Ireland. The developer will allow the archaeologist sufficient time, usually four weeks, to obtain an archaeological licence prior to the commencement of construction works. The time-scale for the construction phase should be made available to the archaeologist at an early stage with information on where and when topsoil stripping will take place.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-11

The ivy clad remnants of an outbuilding or a section of the walled garden of Ballybricken House survive to the immediate north of the existing Water Treatment Plant. It is recommended that this be fully exposed prior to any ground works being undertaken in this area and that the wall be fully photographed and recorded before demolition. Sections of others walls are also likely to survive beneath the heavy undergrowth and it is recommended that an archaeologist monitor all groundworks in this area of the site prior to construction work.

The monitoring archaeologist is entitled to halt the development if buried archaeological features or finds are uncovered. If archaeological remains are encountered, these sites become an archaeological site and are protected by the National Monuments legislation. Further work on the site will require consultation with the archaeological staff of The National Monuments Service, Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs.

Provision, including financial and time, shall be made to facilitate any excavation or recording of archaeological material that may be uncovered during the developmental works. The excavations will be undertaken in compliance with any measures that the National Monuments Service and the National Museum of Ireland deem appropriate. Following completion of monitoring, and other possible archaeological investigations, the archaeologist will submit a report to the National Monuments Service, the National Museum and Cork County Council.


No remedial measures are required to take place in relation to archaeology, architectural and cultural heritage during the operational phase of the proposed development.


The greatest potential impact of the proposed development on the archaeological heritage of the area is to hitherto unknown archaeological features and finds. Pre-development archaeological testing and subsequent archaeological monitoring of all topsoil removal will ensure the full recognition and recording of any buried finds or features. It is envisaged therefore that there will be no residual impacts on the archaeological, architectural and cultural heritage resource of the area.

For in

spec

tion p

urpo

ses o

nly.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 14-12


For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 15-1

15 Interaction and Cumulative Impacts

15.1 Introduction

An important aspect of assessing the environmental impacts associated with any development is to consider how impacts identified under each of the subject headings might interact to cause a cumulative effect. Similarly, consideration must also be given to the cumulative effects arising from the interaction of the project with impacts arising from current and known future developments in the area.

This chapter considers the impacts which occur as a result of cumulative or indirect impacts or through the interaction of impacts.

The examination of these impacts is important as an impact which directly affects one environmental medium may also have an indirect impact on other media (sometimes referred to as cross media impacts). This indirect effect can sometimes be more significant that the direct effect.

Cumulative impacts are impacts which occur as a result of incremental changes caused by other past, present or reasonably foreseeable actions together with this project.

Indirect impacts are impacts on the environment which are not a direct result of the project, produced some distance from the project or as a result of a complex pathway.

Impact inter-relationships or interactions are the reactions between impacts within a project and the inter-relationship between impacts identified under one environmental topic with impacts identified under another environmental topic.


This section of the EIAR has been prepared in accordance with the relevant EPA EIA guidance documents as outlined in Section 1.7.2 of Chapter 1.


Details of the existing Janssen Sciences site and the most recent site development works are outlined in Chapter 2, within Sections 2.1 and 2.7.1 respectively.

As previously outlined, Cork County Council granted planning permission to Janssen in March 2017 to undertake a programme of Site Development Works at the Barnahely site (planning reference 16/7150) to create a level platform of approximately 1.2 hectares of greenfield space within the central area of the site, adjacent to the existing manufacturing facility.

In addition to relieving some operational restrictions in the area, the creation of the level platform will also provide a level site of suitable scale for the development of the new Production Building now being proposed in line with the development masterplan for the overall site.

The programme of Site Development Works recently commenced (May 2017) and is scheduled to be substantially complete by October 2017. The completion of this work will thus enable the commencement of the proposed expansion of the Biomedicines Facility, pending Planning Permission, in Q4 2017.

In addition to the programme of Site Development Works underway at the Janssen Sciences site, there are a number of other known developments either currently under construction or in the planning process. Figure 15.1 provides a pictorial summary of current or proposed projects in the environs of the Janssen Sciences site on the Ringaskiddy Pensinsula.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 15-2

Figure 15.1 Other known projects (current & planned) in the environs of the Janssen Sciences site

From Figure 15.1 it can be seen that there are several existing and proposed developments identified in the surrounding area. The proposed developments surrounding the Janssen Sciences facility, arranged in order of distance from the site boundary are as follows:

M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy Motorway Scheme: (0 km south of the site)

It is expected the construction of the proposed M28 road project will take approximately 30-36 months, with an earliest possible construction start of 2021 and completion in 2023, subject to grant and planning permission and funding.

A Route Protection Corridor is currently in place in the area and in immediate proximity to the Janssen Sciences site for the proposed realignment and upgrade of the N28. The project, which is of strategic importance, is being progressed by Cork County Council and Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) (formerly NRA) and is at present in its design stage. The N28 national primary road connects Ringaskiddy with the Southern Ring Road (N40) c.10km to the north via the Bloom interchange at Rochestown. It terminates at the ferry port entrance on Ringaskiddy Main Street, opposite the junction with the Loughbeg Road (L6517).

The proposed upgrade includes realignment whereby a strip of undeveloped land between the Novartis and Janssen Sciences facility, immediately south of and parallel to the local access road to Janssen Sciences, is to be utilised for the new thoroughfare. In addition a Service Area is proposed on the northern side of the L2545 at Ringaskiddy en route to Haulbowline. The EIS and Motorway Order were published in Q2 2017.

Pfizer Ireland Ringaskiddy Facility: (ca. 0.15 km north of the site)

In March 2017 Pfizer was granted planning permission by Cork County Council (PA Ref 16/6937) for the construction of a two storey extension at ground level to an existing Laboratory Building at their production facility in Ringaskiddy with a combined floor area of 207m2. This small scale facility currently under construction.

In January 2017, planning permission was granted for a one storey extension to an existing Organic Synthesis Production Building (PA Ref. 16/6500). Planning permission was also granted

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 15-3

in August 2016 for the extension at ground, first, second, third and plant room floor levels to the same existing Organic Synthesis Production Building (PA Ref. 16/4784).

Biomarin Manufacturing Building Extension: (ca. 0.25 km north-west of the site)

Permission was granted by Cork County Council in August 2016 (PA Ref. 156909) for the construction of a 4 storey extension to an existing manufacturing building, along with associated site development works. The duration of construction (to structure completion) was estimated at 8 months and the project as of May 2017 is nearing completion. The submitted mobility management plan for the extension indicates that no additional new staff will arise due to the extension.

GE Healthcare Facility: (ca. 0.3 km south of the site)

Planning permission is currently being sought from Cork County Council (Ref No. 16/6365) by GE Healthcare Life Sciences BioPark Limited for a large BioPark and all ancillary site development works to be located in lands immediately south of the R613 in Barnahely. Enabling works planning permission (PA Ref 16/05658) was granted in September 2016 while the building works are currently in appeal stage with An Bord Pleanála (PL04 .248154) with the case due to be decided in July 2017. The proposal is to include 4 No. 2-storey bio manufacturing buildings, 4 No. 2-storey administration/laboratory buildings, a 2-storey warehouse building with 6 storey storage tower, a 2 storey hydration facility building, a 2 storey utilities building along with a 2 storey canteen/admin. Building. Primary access will be from the R613.

Subject to the ABP Appeal, construction duration is estimated at 18 months following completion of the enabling works.

Novartis Ringaskiddy

Single Storey Extension: (ca. 0.4 km south of the site)

Permission was granted by Cork County Council in September 2016 for the construction of a single storey extension to an existing production building with a floor area of 62m2.

Wind Turbine: (ca. 0.2km south of the site)

In 2012 planning permission was granted by An Bord Pleanála for four c.150m high wind turbines for a number of the existing pharmaceutical plants in Ringaskiddy. Three of these have been built to date: Janssen Sciences Ireland UC at Barnahely, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) at Curraghbinny, and DePuy at Loughbeg and have been operational since 2014. The fourth wind turbine at the Novartis site (at Barnahely/Raheens) has yet to be installed (PL04.240330). The turbine is to be located to the north of the site towards the L6474.

Port of Cork Redevelopment: (ca. 0.5km east of the site)

The Ringaskiddy Port Redevelopment project received planning permission in May 2015. The project was submitted to An Bord Pleanála as a Strategic Infrastructure Application (PL04.PA00035). The project will allow larger vessels to come to Cork and it is envisioned that Phase 1 (which includes a 200m long berth and new container yard operational) will be operational in 2018, with main works having commenced Oct/Nov 2016. The proposals have been in the public domain since the Port’s 2010 Strategic Development Plan.

Four key areas for development were submitted in the planning application; however three areas are now being progressed by the Port of Cork. These include a new container terminal with an initial 360m berth at Ringaskiddy East, internal road improvements and improvements to the external road entrance into the existing Deepwater Berth and the construction of a new amenity area, including a new public pier and slipway at Paddy’s Point. A second amendment to the initial permission is currently in progress (Ref PM00010) with a decision to be made by An Bord Pleanála in May 2017.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 15-4

Cork Lower Harbour Main Drainage Scheme: (ca. 0.7km east of the site)

Commenced August 2015 and due to be fully complete in 2019.

The Cork Lower Harbour Main Drainage Scheme consists of: a new waste water treatment plant at Shanbally, approximately 2km west of Ringaskiddy; 14 new pumping stations; approximately 30km of new sewers and a drilled crossing under the Cork Harbour estuary. In terms of specific relevance to the Ringaskiddy area, the project involves in addition to the new WWTP at Shanbally minor pumping stations at Ringaskiddy Village, Coolmore and Coolbawn along with associated sewer pipework.

The EIS for the project was approved by An Bord Pleanála (Ref YA0050) in June 2009, along with two subsequent amendments (Ref YM0001 & YM0003) with the most recent one approved in March 2017. The Shanbally waste water treatment plant was operational at the end of December 2016 treating wastewater from Carrigaline, Crosshaven and Shanbally with construction underway for the sewer network contracts on the southern side of harbour with sewer laying works ongoing including along the N28.

Haulbowline Island Rehabilitation: (ca. 1.4 km east of the site)

Due to commence Q2 2017 for a duration of approximately 18 to 24 months.

Permission has been granted by Cork County Council (PA Ref. 16/6219) for an application by the Minister of Agriculture, Food and the Marine for the extraction of c.134,000m3 of materials from the southern portion of the Ringaskiddy ridgeline on lands immediately south of the Martello Tower. The materials are to comprise of topsoil and subsoil from an area of c.9.3ha within an overall site area of 12.1ha with works to include the screening and crushing of some excavated material, as well as the remediation, reprofiling and landscaping of site with retained material post extraction.

The purpose of the works is to serve the Haulbowline Island Rehabilitation scheme, and as a result the proposal includes for the transport of c. 114,000m3 of material off site to East Tip, Haulbowline Island. The development will also comprise a new vehicular site entrance at the location of an existing agricultural entrance to the L6517, internal site access road, and associated drainage features.

Indaver Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre: (ca. 1.7 km east of the site)

Subject to ABP decision, construction and commissioning of the Resource Recovery Centre is expected to commence 2017/2018 for a duration of approximately 31 months. The number of construction workers employed at peak is estimated at 320.

Planning permission is currently being sought by Indaver from An Bord Pleanála for the proposed Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre, which is to be located in lands immediately south of the L2545 and the National Maritime College site. The proposal, which was submitted to the Bord as a Strategic Infrastructure Development (PL04.PA0045), includes the main waste-to-energy facility of the Ringaskiddy Resource Recovery Centre, the upgrade of the L2545 local road along the frontage of the site, coastal protection works at Gobby Strand, and connection to the national electricity grid.

The case is due to be decided by An Bord Pleanála in August 2017.

DePuy Wind Turbine: (ca. 2.2 km south-east of the site)

An application was granted by Cork County Council (PA Ref 15/6967) in August 2016 for a second c.150m wind turbine to be erected on the site of DePuy Synthes (Ireland) healthcare facility. The site has an existing 150m high wind turbine, operational since 2014.

At the date of issue of this EIAR, there are no other known projects in the vicinity of the Janssen Sciences site, although it is not entirely possible to ascertain the timing or scale of all future development as this is largely dependent on private sector initiatives. Accordingly, it is considered that the assessment of impacts associated with the proposed expansion has taken full account of the prevailing environmental effects associated with all other existing, planned and reasonably

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 15-5

foreseeable activities in the area. Similarly, the proposed measures for the mitigation of impacts and the quantification of residual impacts take due regard of all other impacts arising from local sources.



The potential cumulative impacts between the various environmental media examined during the EIA and the different stages of both the construction and the operational phases have been examined where relevant in the individual chapters of this EIAR. In general, a ‘worst case scenario’ has been assumed whereby all potential projects identified above in section 15.3 are assumed will progress and will potentially coincide with the construction of the BioCork2 project, and ultimately go into long term operation in tandem with the Janssen Sciences expansion.

Chapters 4-14 of the EIAR contain specific sections on the cumulative impacts associated with each environmental topic. The key potential cumulative impacts, and associated mitigation measures, can be summarised as follows;

- The assessment of cumulative impacts in relation to landscape character and the visual environment as a result of the proposed expansion are discussed within Chapter 5, Section 5.11.6, in support of this assessment is a set of photomontages included in Volume 2 of the EIAR. Mitigation measures such as the landscape master plan site planting and landscaping as outlined in Section 5.12 serve to ameliorate the cumulative impact in relation to landscape character and the visual environment.

- The cumulative construction and operational impact assessments in relation to Traffic and Transportation are discussed within Chapter 6, Sections 6.5.2 and 6.5.3 respectively. As a result of the cumulative impact assessments, mitigation measures proposed for e.g. the construction phase, will include restrictions that will be written into the construction contracts whereby all construction staff arrival and departure times from the site must be outside the peak periods of 7.00 a.m. to 9.15 a.m. and 4.30 p.m. to 6.15 p.m. unless arriving in a high occupancy contractor shuttle service subject to CCC approval.

- The cumulative construction and operational impact assessments in relation to Air Quality and Climate are discussed within Chapter 11, Section 11.5.3. The nearest developments with the greatest potential to cumulatively add to the potential emissions associated with the construction phase of the proposed Janssen Sciences expansion have outlined mitigation measures in their respective planning documentation to minimise emissions to air during the respective construction phases. No potential cumulative impacts to the environment are anticipated as a result of these mitigation measures taken together with the mitigation measures outlined in Section 11.6 of Chapter 11.

- The assessment of cumulative impacts in relation noise as a result of the proposed expansion is discussed within Sections 9.5.2 and 9.5.3 of Chapter 9.

- The cumulative noise impact assessment of the construction phase assumes a worst case scenario that all developments as outlined in Section 9.5.3 are granted planning and are developed. The noise sensitive location for this project that is most susceptible to cumulative noise during the construction phase is the graveyard to the east of the Janssen Sciences site. The overall cumulative construction noise level (including a rating for impulsive noise) is 65 dBA. This is the accumulation of four worst case noise levels and under the assumption that the construction activity peaks of each project occurs simiultaneously, in all likelihood the predicted level will not occur. The cumulative level complies with both the Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) guidelines for maximum potential noise levels at the facade of dwellings during construction of 70 dB LAeq and the BS 5228-1 Category A threshold limit value of 65 dB LAeq. Regular construction monitoring is recommended in Section 9.7.1 and a location such as the graveyard (i.e. Noise Sensitive

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 15-6

Location 3 (NSL3)) should be included to consider the impact of cumulative noise from other sites.

- Operational phase cumulative noise impact - the maximum cumulative noise level increase from the operational phase of the proposed expansion is 2 dBA, of which only 1dBA is as a result of the proposed expansion project. Noise level changes of 2 dBA or less are generally not perceivable by a human receptor, it can be inferred that since the predicted levels from operation of the proposed expansion will not objectively increase the existing noise levels at sensitive locations by greater than 2 dBA, the increase in noise will not be perceptible and therefore will not cause a perceived impact. Additionally, the cumulative levels are compliant with the WHO Community Noise daytime guideline limit of 50 dB LAeq (for prevention of moderate annoyance) and night-time limit of 45 dB LAeq for prevention of sleep disturbance.

- The main cumulative impact of the proposed development on the local population as per outlined in Section 4.4.6 of Chapter 4 will be a significant positive economic and employment effect, contributing to the local economy. The cumulative impact in terms of traffic, noise and air quality on population and human health are as per those outlined above.

15.4.2 Indirect Impacts

A number of indirect cumulative impacts are likely to arise, including;

• The proposed expansion will lead to a number of indirect spin-off employment opportunities through local contractors, service providers and suppliers.

• Off-site treatment and disposal of the wastes could have a potential indirect impact on air, soil, surface water, and groundwater quality at the off-site treatment/disposal sites. However, as discussed in the relevant chapters of the EIAR these activities will be carried out by licensed operators and contractors in accordance with regulatory requirements and therefore will have an imperceptible negative impact only.

15.4.3 Interaction of Impacts

This section addresses potential interactions between the various impacts identified in the individual chapters of the EIAR. Table 15.1 shows a matrix of the environmental disciplines and where potential interactions can occur. These potential interactions between environmental topics have been examined within the individual Chapter headings of the EIAR.

The introduction section of each chapter in the EIAR highlights the interactions with the other chapters such as the interaction of traffic with noise or air quality or the excavation and movement of soil and interaction with biodiversity and surface water environment. It is concluded that there are no significant interactive impacts identified for any environmental media. This conclusion is based on the nature of the proposed expansion project and the successful implementation of all construction and operational mitigation measures detailed within each chapter of the EIAR.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 15-7

Table 15.1 Matrix of Environmental Disciplines & Interactions

Interaction Population &

Human Health

Landscape & Visual

Traffic & Transportation

Soils, Geology &

Hydrogeology

Biodiversity

Noise & Vibration

Water & Wastewa

ter

Air Quality & Climate

Waste Managem

ent

Material Assets

Archaeology & Cultural Heritage

Population & Human Health � � � � � � � �

Landscape & Visual

� � � �

Traffic & Transportation

� � � �

Soils, Geology & Hydrogeology � � �

Biodiversity � � � � � �

Noise & Vibration

� � �

Water & Wastewater

� � � � �

Air Quality & Climate

� � � �

Waste Management

� � �

Material Assets � � �

Archaeology & Cultural Heritage

� �

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14


IE0311854-22-RP-0004, Issue A June 2017

Chapter 15-8


Chapters 4 to 14 have identified mitigation measures relevant to the various assessment topics. The majority of potential impacts arising from the proposed expansion and other known projects, both on and off-site relate to the construction phase. Key to the successful management of all environmental mitigation measures identified is an overall plan, namely a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) to ensure all measures are implemented in a co-ordinated manner and no one measure is unduly prioritised over another. A CEMP has been prepared as part of this planning application.

Prior to the commencement of construction activities the CEMP will be updated for the proposed expansion to incorporate all mitigation measures identified within this EIAR and any subsequent planning requirements. A suitably qualified senior member of the Construction Management Team will be assigned responsibility for its execution, maintenance and on-going review. The appointed Principal Contractor and all sub-contractors will have important roles to ensure compliance with the CEMP.

The CEMP will include plans for dust, waste, water, traffic and noise management and set out the necessary measures to ensure protection of the environment during the construction phase. The CEMP will form part of the overall Construction Management Plan for the proposed BioCork2 expansion. This will include detailed arrangements and plans for traffic and site logistics.

Communications will be maintained with CCC through the construction phase of the development to ensure any new development proposals brought forward can be considered for potential cumulative impacts.

The CEMP will be maintained as a ‘live’ document which can respond to external influences outside of the control of the site construction management team. In particular, potential cumulative impacts arising from other projects commencing construction in parallel with the proposed BioCork2 works, will need to be considered in the context of interaction with the BioCork2 development, and the need, if any, to modify the CEMP to respond to these interactions will be considered by the construction management team, in consultation with Cork County Council and other relevant local stakeholders.


Based on the implementation of the CEMP and all mitigation measures outlined in the EIAR, there are no significant residual impacts foreseen.

The potential for cumulative impacts as a result of emissions during the operational phase of the proposed expansion and other development proposals has been assessed. No significant impacts are considered likely to occur.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 08-12-2017:04:03:14

Janssen Sciences Ireland UC · Janssen Sciences Ireland UC BioCork 2 EIAR IE0311854-22-RP-0004,...

Documents

Transcript of Janssen Sciences Ireland UC · Janssen Sciences Ireland UC BioCork 2 EIAR IE0311854-22-RP-0004,...