Comhairle Chontae na Gaillimhe

Galway County Council

Strategic Environmental Assessment

Statement of Athenry Local Area Plan

2012 – 2018

J u l y 2 0 1 2

MINOGUE & ASSOCIATES

ENVIRONMENTAL & HERITAGE CONSULTANTS

www.minogueandassociates.com

SEA Statement of Athenry Local Area Plan 2012 – 2018 Table ofContentsSection PageSection 1 Introduction 1Section 2 How Environmental Considerationshave been integrated into the Athenry LocalArea Plan

3

Section 3 Reasons for choosing therecommended LAP in the light of otherreasonable alternatives considered

12

Section 4 Frequency of Monitoring andReport

14

1

1 Strategic Environmental Assessment Statement

1.1 Introduction

This is the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Statement of the Athenry Local AreaPlan (LAP) 2012 -2018, adopted by Galway County Council on 25th June 2012. Thisstatement forms the final part of the requirements for the SEA of the Athenry LAP.

SEA is a key process that promotes sustainable development and highlights significantenvironmental issues within the planning regime. The purpose of SEA is to formally andsystematically evaluate the likely significant effects of implementing a plan or programme, inthis instance the new Athenry LAP.

EU Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmeson the environment were transposed into Irish law under:

The European Communities (Environmental Assessment of Certain Plans and Programmes) Regulations 2004 (S.I. No. 435 of 2004) and The Planning and Development (Strategic Environmental Assessment) Regulations

2004 (S.I. No. 436 of 2004) Planning and Development (Strategic Environmental Assessment )(Amendment)

Regulations 2011 (S.I. No. 201 of 2011), and Planning and Development (Environmental Assessment of Certain Plans and

Programmes) (S.I No 200 of 2011).

This SEA Statement is a requirement of S.I. No. 436 of 2004 (as amended). TheseRegulations detail the information to be included in a SEA Statement. These requirementsare discussed in the following section.

1.1.1 Purpose of SEA Statement

The main purpose of the SEA Statement is to provide information on the decision-makingprocess and to document how environmental considerations, the views of statutoryconsultees and other submissions received during consultation and the recommendations ofthe Environmental Report have been taken into account in the adopted Athenry LAP and thearrangements put in place for monitoring.

The SEA Statement is available to the public, along with the Environmental Report and theadopted LAP. The SEA Statement includes the following information:

Summary of how environmental considerations have been integrated into theLAP;(Section Two)

Summary of how submissions received during consultation have been taken into accountin the LAP (Section Two);

Reasons for choosing the recommended strategy, in the light of other reasonablealternatives considered (Section Three);

Measures that are to be undertaken to monitor the significant environmental effects ofimplementing the Plan (Section Four).

2

1.1.2 Implications of SEA for the Athenry LAP Process.

As a result of the above legislation, the Athenry LAP 2012 to 2018 was required to undergoSEA. The findings of SEA were presented in the Environmental Report which was submittedto the Elected Members alongside the Draft LAP. The purpose of the report was to provide aclear understanding of the likely environmental consequences of decisions regarding thefuture development of Athenry over the lifetime of the plan.

Amendments were made to the Draft LAP at each stage of the process and these wereevaluated for their environmental consequences. In turn this evaluation was presented to theElected Members in the form of an Addendum Report. These addendum reports assessedwhether the proposed material amendments would require full SEA or Habitats DirectiveAssessment, these were assessed against the Environmental Protection Objectives (EPOs).For both material amendment processes, it was determined that full SEA was not required.

On adoption of the Draft LAP, these Addenda were used to update the original EnvironmentalReport into a final Environmental Report (ER) which accompanies the adopted Plan. In theFinal ER, additional text is included in bold and italic font with a footnote to highlight who orwhat agency provided the submission. The SEA Screening Reports prepared for eachMaterial Amendment is also provided as an Annex to the Final ER

At each stage of the process the Elected Members were required by the legislation to takeinto account the Environmental Report -including the Addenda - before the adoption of theLAP.

3

2 How Environmental Considerations have beenintegrated into the Athenry LAP.

2.1 Introduction

The strategic environmental assessment process took place in tandem with the preparationof the Athenry LAP. The SEA and Habitats Directive consultants were appointed inSeptember 2012 and commenced the SEA scoping process immediately. This iterativeprocess ensured that the SEA and the preparation of the LAP were integrated. The followingsection outlines the different consultation stages during the preparation of the LAP, andhighlights the key environmental issues that rose during this process. Further detailedinformation on submissions received, issues raised and how they were addressed in the SEAand Natura Impact Statement (NIS) as appropriate are provided in Chapter Two Section 2.3Tables 2a to 2b of the SEA ER. Annex C of the ER also provides the SEA Screening reportsfor the Material Amendments.

The following section summarises key environmental issues raised through the consultationprocess carried out as part of the LAP preparation process. These are shown through aseries of tables that highlight the key environmental issue and are accompanied by adescription/comment of where or how this was addressed in the final plan.

2.1.1 Pre-Draft Consultation with External StakeholdersA Background Issues Paper was prepared in May 2011 with the aim to promote discussionand consultation on issues affecting the sustainable development of Athenry. A notice waspublished on 30th May providing information on the preparation of the LAP and requestingsubmissions until 1st July. Eleven submissions were received including those from statutoryagencies and local residents. Key environmental issues raised through this consultation arepresented in Table 2a below:

Table 2a: Pre-draft Consultation – Key Environmental Issues Raised

Environmental IssueRaised

Addressed in Final Athenry Local AreaPlan

SEA Objectives

Support of vernacularfeatures whenrenovating houses.

Built Heritage and Cultural HeritageObjectives including:Objective HC6 Vernacular Architecture.

CH 1, CH 2, CH 3.

Support for range ofguidelines relating totransport andsustainable transport.

Sustainable Transport Objectives includingObjective TI2 Sustainable Transportation.In addition a number of other crossreferencing objectives and policies such asPolicy DS1 Development Strategy, PolicyRD1 Residential Development and PolicyTI1 Sustainable Transport, Walking andCycling.

Pop 1, AQ 1, AQ 2 andMat 7.

Provision of wastewaterinfrastructure forAthenry.

Water Supply, Wastewater and SurfaceWater Policies and Objectives, includingPolicy UI1 Water Supply, Wastewater andSurface Water Infrastructure, Objective UI2Wastewater Disposal, Objective UI5Maintenance and Improvement of WaterServices Infrastructure.

Mat 4.

4

Environmental issuesarising from urbangenerating rural housing

Housing outside the LAP boundary isprincipally addressed through the CountyGalway Development Plan 2009 -2015.However LAP addresses phaseddevelopment and requirements of corestrategy through a range of policies andobjectives including:Objective DS6 Residential DevelopmentPhasing, LU13 Residential Densities.

Pop 1, Pop 2, Mat 7, Soil1.

Various requestsregarding retention ofcurrent zoning or newzoning.

All landuse zonings in the draft plan wereassessed through the SEA and HDAprocess and informed by the StrategicFlood Risk Assessment (SFRA).

All zonings in the FinalPlan and zoning requestssubmitted through thestatutory consultationperiod were assessedagainst all EPOs.

Requirements of CoreStrategy, current overzoning, need for serviceled development andlegal requirementsunder legislation.

A number of objectives, policies and thenew Environmental Management Zoningaim to address these issues.

Policies and Objectives can be foundprincipally in Objective DS2 Consistencywith the Core Strategy, Objective DS5Service Led Development amongst others.Regarding legislative requirements keyobjectives/policies includeObjective DS3 Natura 2000 Network andHabitats Directive Assessment, ObjectiveDS7 Flood Risk Management andAssessment, Objective LU11 Flood RiskAreas and Land Use Zones.

In addition, a number of lands have beenrezoned from residential to residentialPhase 2 or other land use zonings in light ofthe Core Strategy Requirements and theSFRA.

Pop 1, Pop 2Water EPOs and MaterialAssets EPOs in particular.

Requirements ofHabitats DirectiveAssessment.

Principally addressed through DS3 Natura2000 Network and Habitats DirectiveAssessment, Objective NH5 Biodiversityand Ecological Networks and ObjectiveNH7 Environmental Management Buffer.

Bio 1, Bio 2, Bio 3,Bio 4,Bio 5 and Bio 6.

Educationalrequirements.

Addressed through land use zoningsprimarily Community Facilities andObjective LU7 Community Facilities.

Pop 1.

2.2 SEA Scoping and Consultation

Following the screening process, a scoping exercise was undertaken by Minogue andAssociates. This established the scope and extent of the Environmental Report andfacilitated consultation with the designated statutory consultees. One submission wasreceived on the scope of the SEA; this was received from the Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA), a statutory consultee. Again the following table shows the key environmental

5

issues for Athenry highlighted by the EPA and is accompanied by a summary of where andhow in the plan these issues are addressed.

Table 2b: SEA Scoping – Key Environmental Issues Raised.

EnvironmentalIssue Raised

Addressed in Final Athenry Local Area Plan Relevant EnvironmentalProtection Objective

Flood Risk The SFRA was not available during the initialplan preparation, however it became availableprior to the second display period and a numberof rezonings took place in light of the SFRAdata. The approach was to zone undevelopedlands identified as Flood Risk A or B as OpenSpace/Recreation and Amenity.

In addition to the rezonings, a range of otherpolicies, objectives and developmentmanagement guidelines were included in theFinal Plan. These include:

Objective LU11 Flood Risk Areas and

Land Use Zones

Policy UI4 and Objective UI11 Flood

Risk Management and Assessment, and

Objective UI12 Flood Zones and

Appropriate Land Uses

DM Guideline UI1 Flood Zones and AppropriateLand Uses is another additional developmentmanagement guideline in the LAP.

Material Assets EPOnamelyMat 1 and Population andHuman Health EPO Pop 2.

WastewaterTreatmentCapacity/Adequacy

Water Supply, Wastewater and Surface WaterPolicies and Objectives, including

Policy UI1 Water Supply, Wastewater

and Surface Water Infrastructure

Objective UI2 Wastewater Disposal

Objective UI5 Maintenance and

Improvement of Water Services

Infrastructure.

In addition, a defined buffer zone of 100maround the Wastewater Treatment Plant was arefinement from the previous LAP 2005 -2011.

Water EPOS namelyWat 1, Wat 2, Wat 3 andMaterial Asset EPOSincludingMat 2, Mat 4

GroundwaterVulnerability

Water Quality Objectives and specificallyObjective UI6 Western River Basin DistrictManagement Plan and Protection of Waterssupport all measures within the managementplan including groundwater.Objective UI7 Groundwater and Aquifer makesspecific reference to protecting the RegionallyImportant Aquifer.

Wat 3 and Mat 4

Bad/Poor StatusSurface WaterQuality

As outlined above, in addition, Objective UI6Western River Basin District Management Planand Protection of Waters states that

Wat 1 and Wat 2

6

‘Galway County Council is statutorily obligedto prevent any further deterioration in thequality status of the waters in Athenry (ClarinRiver and the Clare River Drainage Area) andto ensure good quality status by 2021.’

Associated with this issue is a range ofsupporting and relating policies and objectivesaddressing wastewater capacity andinfrastructure, a 10m buffer for the RiverClarin and Flood Risk Management policiesand Objectives.

Protection of areasof significantlandscape character

Policy UD1 Urban Design and Place-makingreferences landscape context in an urbansetting.Objective UD4 Green Network and Landscaperefers to landscape features such as hedgerowsand rivers.

Land 1, Land 2 and Land 3

Protection ofbiodiversity

Addressed through a range of policies andobjectives, including

Policy NH1 Natural Heritage, Landscape

and Environment

Objective NH1 Natura 2000 Network

and Habitats Directive Assessment and

supporting objectives.

Bio 1, Bio 2, Bio 3, Bio 4,Bio 5, Bio 6, Wat 1, Wat 2.

Adherence tolegislativerequirements

Section 1.4.1 Plan Informants outlines thestatutory context to the LAP.In addition, a range of Objectives reference keylegislative requirements such as the WaterFramework Directive, Habitats DirectiveAssessment, EIA Directive, GroundwaterDirective, SEA Directive etc.

All EPOs

2.2.1 Public Submissions on the Draft LAP, SEA ER and NIR

The draft LAP, SEA ER and Natura Impact Screening Report were put on public display inDecember 2011. A total of 28 submissions were received during the statutory consultationperiod. The 28 submissions include submissions from statutory bodies, service providers,the general public and other stakeholders. A Manager’s Report was prepared whichsummarised the issues raised in each of the written submissions received, together with theManager’s opinion on the issues raised and recommendations in relation to the proposedlocal area plan, whilst taking account of the proper planning and sustainable development ofthe area, the statutory obligations of any local authority in the area, and any relevant policiesor objectives for the time being of the Government or of any Minister of the Government.Environmental considerations were integrated into the Manager’s Opinions through the SEAand HDA processes.

Table 2c below summarise the key environmental issues raised in this submissions andagain, shows where in the plan and how amendments were made to further enhanceenvironmental protection in the Final Plan.

7

Table 2c: Submissions made on the draft LAP, SEA or NIR – Key Environmental IssuesRaised.

EnvironmentalIssue Raised

Included in Final LAP Relevant EnvironmentalProtection Objective

Zoning and floodrisk.

Business andTechnology Zoning

The SFRA was not available during the initial planpreparation, however it became available prior to thesecond display period and a number of rezoningstook place in light of the SFRA data. The approachwas to zone undeveloped lands identified as FloodRisk A or B as Open Space/Recreation and Amenity.

In addition to the rezonings, a range of other policies,objectives and development management guidelineswere included in the Final Plan. These include:

Objective LU11 Flood Risk Areas and Land

Use Zones

Policy UI4 and Objective UI11 Flood Risk

Management and Assessment, and

Objective UI12 Flood Zones and Appropriate

Land Uses.

DM Guideline UI1 Flood Zones and Appropriate LandUses is another additional development managementguideline in the Final LAP.

Amendment made to ED2 Business and TechnologyPark Development in relation to Business andTechnology Zoning. This included the recommendedSEA Mitigation Measure as follows:The overarching Master Plan for this zoning willbe subject to a Strategic EnvironmentalAssessment (SEA) and EU Habitats DirectiveAssessment (HDA). The Master Plan shall beundertaken in consultation with relevantstakeholders.

Mat 1

This mitigation measure willassist in promoting anumber of EPOs namelyBio 1, Bio 2, Wat 2, Pop1,2, Mat 1 and Mat 7.

8

Architecturalheritage.

Archaeologicalheritage.

Nature Conservationincludingrecommendedchanges topolicies/objectives,comments on NIR,and Business andTechnology zoningsand in combinationeffect.

Amendment made to Objective HC4 Development/Works relating to Protected Structures andArchitectural Conservation Area.

Amendments to Objective HC9 Monuments andPlaces.

All amendments made to Objective DS3 Natura 2000Network and Habitats Directive Assessment andObjective NH1 Natura 2000 Network and HabitatsDirective Assessment as per submission of DAHG.Exception was that the word ‘significant’ was notomitted as Article 6(3) of the EU Habitats Directivecontains the phase “....likely to have a significanteffect thereon...” The word “significant” in ObjectiveDS 3 is intended to reflect the meaning of this wordas used in Article 6(3). Furthermore, Section 2.1 ofthe NIR defines the term “significant” to mean nottrivial or inconsequential but an effect that ispotentially relevant to the site’s conservationobjectives. This definition follows English Nature’sHabitat Regulations Guidance Note No. 3, 1999.

Amendments made to Objective NH4 ImpactAssessment and LU8 Open Spaces/Recreation andAmenity on foot of this submission.

SEA ER also updated.

CH1, CH 2 and Land 2.

CH 1, CH 2 and Land 2.

Bio 1, Bio 2 and Wat 1 inparticular.

Bio 4, Bio 5, Bio 6, Pop 1,Pop 2 in particular.

Alien and InvasiveSpecies

A new Objective NH9 Control of Invasive and AlienInvasive Species was included in the Final LAP.

Bio 4 in particular.

NTS :It is recommendedthat explanatory textfrom S.4.2Biodiversity, Floraand Fauna underparagraph 3 of theSEA Report isincluded within S.3.9.1 NaturalHeritage andBiodiversity of thePlan underEcological Networks.

NTS updated in line with recommendation. This makes the discussionon Biodiversity, Flora andFauna more accessible andassists in explaining theimportance of ecologicalnetworks in the NTS.

RecommendChange to ObjectiveTI 23

SEA considers amendments to Policy NH1 NaturalHeritage, Landscape and Environment and NH4Impact Assessment will provide sufficient protectionfor Objective TI 23 Bridges over the Railway Lines.

Bio 1, Bio 2, Mat 7.

Water Quality NIR recommended the following amendment toObjective UI4 Surface Water Drainage andSustainable Drainage Systems as follows:Surface water runoff from development sites willbe limited to pre-development levels and

Bio 5, Bio 6, Wat 1, Wat 2,Wat 3 and Mat 1.

9

planning applications for new developments willbe required to provide details of surface waterdrainage and Sustainable Drainage Systemsproposals.This was included in the Final LAP.

Flood RiskAssessment andadditional text

Additional text provided and amendments toObjectives UI 11 Flood Risk Management andAssessment, UI 12 Flood Zones and AppropriateLand uses and UI 13 Water Bodies andWatercourses.

New Objectives DS 7 Flood Risk Management andAssessment and LU 11 Flood Risk Areas and LandUse Zones were also inserted on foot of asubmission from the statutory authorities.

In addition, the following mitigation measure wasinserted for Objective UI11 as follows. Thesemitigation measures were inserted on foot of the NIRassessment.UI11 Flood Risk Management and Assessment:

4. Where certain measures proposed to mitigateor manage the risk of flooding associated withnew developments are likely to result insignificant effects to the environment or Natura2000 Sites downstream, such measures willundergo appropriate environmental and HabitatsDirective assessments.

A range of EPOS but thefollowing in particular:Pop 2, Bio 5, Bio 6, Wat 1and Mat 1.

Detailed submissionon SEA ER.

Comments on NTS,Monitoring,Mitigation andreporting.

In addition,recommendVisual ImpactAssessment.

Addressinginfrastructural deficitand water quality.

See SEA Screening for detailed response butincluded in Final SEA ER.

Noted and NTS and Monitoring and Mitigationcomments addressed in SEA ER and NTS.

New Objective NH10 Visual Impact Assessment

Require Visual Impact Assessment for developmentswith potential to impact on areas of significantlandscape character and should include urban andnatural features and historic buildings as appropriate.

In the adopted Plan, reference to Esker Riada is nowwithin NH5 Biodiversity and Ecological Networks.NH10 Visual Impact Assessment refers to naturalfeatures. SEA Screening did not recommend theremoval of reference to Esker Riada (see ScreeningReport of 2.5.2012).

Water Supply, Wastewater and Surface WaterPolicies and Objectives, including

Policy UI1 Water Supply, Wastewater and

Surface Water Infrastructure

Land 1 and Land 3 inparticular.

Bio 5, Bio 6, Wat 1, Wat 2,and Wat 3 and Mat 4 inparticular.

10

Potential Impacts onEuropean Sites

Objective UI2 Wastewater Disposal

Objective UI5 Maintenance and Improvement

of Water Services Infrastructure.

In addition, a defined buffer zone of 100m around theWastewater Treatment Plant was a refinement fromthe previous LAP 2005 -2011.

Principally addressed through Objectives DS3 andNH1 Natura 2000 Network and Habitats DirectiveAssessment and a range of interrelated andsupporting policies and objectives.

Bio 1, Bio 2, Bio 3, Bio 4,Bio 5 and Bio 6.

Consultation withenvironmentalstatutory authorities.

A new Objective NH11 was included in the Final LAPas follows:

Objective NH11 Consultation with EnvironmentalAuthorities.Ensure that all development proposals are screenedto determine whether they are likely to have asignificant direct, indirect or cumulative effect on theintegrity or conservation objectives of any Natura2000 site and, where significant effects are likely oruncertain, there will be a requirement for consultationwith the relevant environmental authorities as part ofany Habitats Directive Assessment that may berequired.

Bio 1 to 6 and Wat 1 to 3,Soil 3.

Increase area zonedopen space.

Amendment tozoning plan tofacilitate Tidy Townsinitiative(Community/Amenityzoning)

Sli na Slaintewalking routehighlighted in plan.

EnvironmentalManagement Bufferzone increased to30m in all areas andfacilitate access toall ManagementBuffer Zones.

River to be promotedin town.

Traffic Management.

The SFRA influenced the zoning for Open Space inaddition to providing sufficient open space zoningassociated with residential areas.

Tidy Towns Initiative not an appropriate land usezoning.

A number of Objectives and Policies recognise andpromote the River and Walkways such as ObjectiveNH5 Biodiversity and Ecological Networks, ObjectiveNH6 Water Resources, Objective NH7 EnvironmentalManagement Buffer, Objective TI 25 Walkways.Not feasible to increase buffer to 30m forEnvironmental Management.

Objective NH 6 Water Resources, Objective NH7Environmental Management Buffer and Objective TI25 Walkways all reference and promote water qualityand access around River Clarin.

A suite of policies and objectives are included in theFinal LAP to address traffic management namely,Objective SI 2 Universal Access, Policy TI 2 Roads,

Pop 1, Pop 2 and Mat 1.

Not applicable.

Bio 1, Bio 5, Bio 6, Wat 1,Pop 1 and Land 1.

Wat 4, Wat 5, Land 1, Pop1.

Pop 1 and Mat 8 inparticular.

11

Streets and Parking and TI 13 Transport NetworkImprovements.

During the meeting of Galway County Council on, a number of material amendments not in accordance withthe Manager’s Report and Recommendations were proposed by elected members on the draft AthenryLAP. The SEA recommended a number of mitigation measures as follows for a number of these materialamendments:Material Amendment1 (to Industrial)

Material Amendment8 (to Industrial)Material Amendment13 (to Industrial)Material Amendment15B (to Industrial)

Material Amendment28 (to Industrial).

1. Habitat survey to be undertaken inadvance of any planning application;

2. Application of Objective TI 14 – RoadSafety Audits, Traffic Impact Assessment

3. Application of Objective UI11 Flood RiskManagement and Assessment will apply.

Potential cumulative and in combination impactson material assets, principally transport, andimpacts on biodiversity will be assessed inrelation to development applications for areaszoned industrial on the periphery of the plan areaover the lifetime of the plan 2012 to 2018.

To capture these potential environmental issuesarising from extending the LAP boundary and zoningfor Industrial, the Final LAP included the followingmitigation measure within LU 4 Industrial:

Proposals on Industrial lands will be subject torequirements in the Plan in relation to avoidingunacceptable transport, environmental and waterquality impacts and where necessary shall berequired to submit a Traffic Impact Assessmentand/or a Transport Assessment.

The mitigation measures asproposed and incorporated(though worded differently)aim to address potential incombination/cumulativeimpacts particularly onwater quality, habitats andtransport in light of thematerial amendments

MA 28 and MA15B These were zoned as Industrial and included withinthe LAP Boundary against the recommendations ofthe Manager’s Report at the Galway County CouncilMeeting of 25

thJune 2012. The SEA recommended

mitigation measures as shown in the preceding rowfor these material amendments. The Amendment toLU 4 Industrial as detailed above aims to addressthese environmental issues.

12

3 Reasons for choosing the recommended LAP in the lightof other reasonable alternatives considered

3.1 Introduction

This section describes the alternatives considered in the development of the LAP. Theconsideration of alternatives and the evaluation of their likely environmental impacts is a keyfunction of the SEA process. Each alternative was assessed against the EnvironmentalProtection Objectives. In addition to the broad alternative scenarios, objectives, policies andzonings were also subject to refinement as the SEA and HDA processes identified potentialsignificant impacts, these areas in turn were avoided or mitigation measures advanced. Thefollowing presents an outline of the alternatives considered during the SEA process.

Table 3a: Outline of Alternatives Considered

Development Option Comment on environmental implication of DevelopmentOption

Development Option 1 –Continuation of the ExistingPlan 2005- 2011: This optionwould see a continuation of theexpansion of Athenry as per theprevious Plan (2005-2011) withcontinued pressure in a numberof areas, particularly in relation toundeveloped residential lands atperipheral/un-serviced locations.

This development option does not consider recent changes innational legislation/guidelines and EU Directives. In particularthis option would conflict with the West Regional PlanningGuidelines 2010-2022 and with the County Development Plan2009-2015. Given the current level of undeveloped residentialzoning available (123.76 Ha), this option would not complywith the County Core Strategy residential land allocation of32.36Ha for Athenry and would result in the Plan beinginconsistent with both the Regional Planning Guidelines andwith the County Development Plan.In particular, this scenario could result in a number ofinterrelated or cumulative environmental impacts includinggroundwater pollution arising from poorly serviced lands andinadequate wastewater treatment.

Development Option 2 –Consolidation of ExistingUrban Structure: This optionwould seek to retain the existingtown centre/ urban fabric andrestrict all future residentialdevelopment not contained withinproposed Residential (Phase 1)zoning areas. The objectivewould be to permit developmentonly at locations closest to theexisting town centre and railstation.

No new zonings would be proposed and existing uses maynot be consistent with the existing zoning objectives, inparticular industrial use on lands identified as a potentiallocation for an integrated transportation hub. In addition thisapproach would see increased pressure for developmentwithin the medieval historic town core with a potentialconsequential loss of views and historic fabric.

This option would be unlikely to facilitate infrastructureimprovements within town centre development such as waterimprovements infrastructure. In addition, this option mayessentially freeze the town centre and work againstpromoting a vibrant intensive urban centre with supportingservices.

Development Option 3 –Sequential Development: Thisoption would promote

Under this scenario all lands may not come forward fordevelopment in a sequential manner, while other servicedand non-sequential lands may but under this option may not

13

development from the towncentre outwards in order toensure that higher order facilitiesand higher density developmentare located on the most centrallands. The town centre focusremains.

be considered during the lifetime of the Plan. Problems ofland assembly pose a threat to town centre retaildevelopment. Frequently sites are held in multiple ownershipsand which may delay/hinder development proposals. Inaddition significant development potential within new zoningobjectives particularly the new Business/ Technology Parklocated on the western periphery of the Plan boundary (asamended) would be restricted and dependant on town centreexpansion and service provision. The viability andsustainability of the town may not be promoted or affordedadequate protection in this Scenario.In turn revenue and projects to help maintain and enhancethe town centre may be lost and development proposed islikely to be piecemeal.

Development Option 4 –Managed PhasedDevelopment: This option wouldseek the consolidation andexpansion of the town centre viachanges to existing zoningobjectives specifically regardingchanges of Town Centre zoningto Town Centre/Commercial (C1)and Commercial/Mixed Use (C2)zoning objectives. Thesechanges provide for amanaged/phased approach fortown centre development whileretaining/enhancing the existingmedieval fabric of the historiccore of Athenry and providingflexibility for future proposals.

Undeveloped ResidentialLands are also to be phased fordevelopment: Residential Phase1 – phased for residentialdevelopment within the lifetime ofthe Plan (32.17 Ha);Residential Phase 2 – generally,not developable during thelifetime of this Plan (91.59 Haapproximately).

This development option would promote a managed and co-ordinated approach on a case by case basis to town centre &residential type developments from the centre outwards,based on infrastructure /service provision but in a moreflexible manner than Option 3. This scenario would alsoencourage managed and co-ordinated development withinother proposed zoning objectives particularly Business &Technology (BT) zoning to the west..The phased approach is critical in order to help address waterquality concerns for Athenry and environs and strategicallymanage the protection of existing environmental resourceswhilst facilitating a vibrant town centre that also takesadvantage of Athenry’s strategic road and rail position. Thisapproach is evaluated to be the most sustainable for the longterm development of Athenry.

14

4 Frequency of Monitoring and Reporting

4.1 Introduction

It is proposed, in accordance with the Directive, to base monitoring on a series of indicatorswhich measure changes in the environment, especially changes which are critical in terms ofenvironmental quality, for example water quality. Monitoring will focus on the aspects of theenvironment that are likely to be significantly impacted upon by the implementation of theAthenry LAP. The targets and indicators are derived from the Environmental ProtectionObjectives (SEO) discussed in Chapter Five of the SEA ER. The target underpins theobjective whilst the indictors are used to track the progress of the objective and targets interms of monitoring of impacts.

The monitoring programme will consist of an assessment of the relevant indicators andtargets against the data relating to each environmental component. Similarly, monitoring willbe carried out frequently to ensure that any changes to the environment can be identified.

4.1.1 Frequency of Monitoring and Reporting

It is proposed that the SEA monitoring reporting should go parallel with the reviewing of thedraft LAP. However, in some cases as data becomes available, the Planning Authority mayprepare an additional SEA Monitoring Report. In particular, should new data or the followingoccur, additional monitoring will be required:

Significant unauthorised development (either large scale or cumulative small scale) Illegal waste activity Water pollution incidents (not resulting from oil spills).

In turn this list below is subject to review to reflect new data. Should the monitoring regimeidentify significant impacts (such as impacts on designated sites) early on in the LAPimplementation, this should trigger a review of the Draft LAP and monitoring regime. Inaddition, the identification of positive impacts from monitoring should also be reported as thiswill assist in determining successful environmental policies.

It is recommended that data arising from planning applications, particularly in terms ofenvironmental constraints mapping and Environmental Impact Statements be integrated intothe GIS and monitoring system. This will assist in assessing cumulative impacts also, inparticular ecology and water quality.

Finally, it is recommended that the monitoring report be made available to the public upon itscompletion. It is recommended that this data be shared with neighbouring local authorities toassist in monitoring cross county effects should they arise.

15

Table 4a: Monitoring Table

Topic and SEAObjective

Indicators Targets Data sources ResponsibleBody

BiodiversityBio 1: Protect,conserve and avoidloss of the diversity andrange of habitats,species and wildlifecorridors.

Habitat Loss. No net habitatloss .

NPWS/GalwayCountyCouncil(GCC)

NPWS/GCC

Bio 2: Protectdesignated sitesincluding Natura 2000(SACs and SPAs)under Article 6 of theHabitats Directive.Conserve and protect,or maintain and restoreNatura 2000 sites andthe Natura 2000network.

Habitat loss. Total area ofdesignatedsites (Natura2000 andpNHA’s)Total area ofConservationAreas.

NPWS/GCC NPWS/GCC

Bio 4:Promote theprotection of habitats(terrestrial and aquatic)from invasive species.

Spread of invasivespecies.

Survey andmonitor extentanddistribution ofinvasivespecies.

NPWS/GCC NPWS/GCC

Bio 5: Protect theinland aquaticenvironment.

Biotic QualityRating (Q Values)and Riskassessment.

Improve Qvalue statusfor River Clarinand associatedtributaries.Aim to achieveQ4 value inline with WaterFrameworkrequirementsby 2021.No reductionsin Q values inrelevantwatercourses.

EPA/NPWS/GCC

EPA/NPWS/GCC

16

Water Indicators Targets Data Sources ResponsibleBody

Wat 1:Protect andenhance the status ofaquatic ecosystemsand with regard to theirwater needs, terrestrialecosystems andwetlands directlydepending on theaquatic ecosystem(quality, level, flow) .

Biotic QualityRating (Q Values)and Riskassessment

Improve Qvalue statusfor River Clarinand associatedtributaries.Aim to achieveQ4 value inline with WaterFrameworkrequirementsby 2021.No reductionsin Q values inrelevantwatercourses.

EPA/ GCC/WRBD

WRBD/EPA/GCC

Wat 2: Maintain orimprove the quality ofsurface water(including estuarine) tostatus objectives as setout in the WaterFramework Directive,WRBM and POMS.

Biotic QualityRating (Q Values)and Riskassessment.

No severepollutionincidentUpgrade ofWWTP.

EPA/GCC/WRBD

EPA/GCC/WRBD

Wat 3: Preventpollution andcontamination ofgroundwater byadhering to aquiferprotection plans.

Risk Assessment No change orimprovementin groundwaterqualityassociatedwithdevelopment.

EPA / WRBD GCC/WRBD

Geology and Soil

Soil 1: Encourage theuse of derelict, disusedand infill sites ratherthan Greenfield siteswhere appropriate.

Number ofdevelopmentsgranted forbrownfield sites(or area)

Infilldevelopmentson brownfieldsites overlifetime of theplan.

GCC GCC

Soil 2:Protect, improveand maintain thequality of soils.

Specific soilmanagementplans largedevelopments aspart ofconstructionmanagementplans.

No recordedsoilcontaminationincidents

No invasivespecies due topoor soilmanagementor topsoil

EPA and GCC GCC

17

Soil 3: Conserve,protect and avoid lossof diversity andintegrity of designatedhabitats, geologicalfeatures, species ortheir sustainingresources indesignated ecologicalsites.

Impacts todesignatedgeological sitesand theirsustainingresources.

No impacts onsuch sitesassociatedwith theimplementation of the LAP.

GCC/GSI/NPWS

GCC./GSI/NPWS

Population andhuman health

Indicators Targets Data sources ResponsibleAuthority

Pop 1: Protect,enhance and improvepeople’s quality of lifebased on high qualityresidential, community,working andrecreationalenvironments and onsustainable travelpatterns.

Drinking WaterSources tocomply with theEuropeanCommunities(Drinking Water)(No.2)Regulations, 2007andEuropeanCommunities(Quality of SurfaceWaterIntended for theAbstraction ofDrinking Water)Regulations,1989All water bodies toachievegood status, ormaintain highstatus, by 2021 asrequired bythe EU FrameworkDirective(WFD)2000/60/ECIncreasepopulation andaverage netdensities in newresidential /mixed-useschemes. Whilealso promoting

Status ofdrinking waterand drinkingwater sources

Ecologicalstatus of waterbodies

Averagedensity of newresidentialdevelopment

Average ofdensities innewdevelopments

Live registerfigures

Implementation of SocialInclusionmeasures asproposed inNational Anti-PovertyStrategyCensus data /PopulationfiguresEducation

GCC/HealthServiceExecutive/EPA

GCC andHealth ServiceExecutive

GCCHSEEPA

GCC/HSE

18

employmentopportunities andthe developmentof the Athenry inline with CoreStrategyReduce socialexclusion.

Increaseparticipation andaccessibility ofeducation to alllevels of society.

participationrates

Crime rates

Pop 2: To protecthuman health fromrisks or nuisancesarising from exposureto incompatible landuses/developments.

Number ofcomplaints relatingto noise, odour,water quality andvisual issues.

Promotecompatibleland usewherepossible.

GCC/ HSA GCC/HSA

Cultural heritage

CH 1: Protect andenhance the culturalheritage including thebuilt environment andsettings; archaeological(recorded and recordedmonuments),architectural (protectedstructures, architecturalconservation areas,vernacular buildings,materials and urbanfabric) and manmadelandscape features(e.g.: field walls,footpaths, gate piersetc.).

Percentage ofProtectedStructures ‘at risk’Number ofArchitecturalConservationAreas (ACAs)Number ofarchaeologicalsites investigated.

Ensure thatthe culturalheritage of thetown ismaintainedand protectedfromdamage anddeterioration.

GCC/DAHG GCC/DAHG

CH2: Conserve historicfabric of urban andrural settlementsparticularly the townwalled network.

Percentage ofProtectedStructures ‘at risk’.

Ensure thatthe culturalheritage of thetown ismaintainedand protectedfromdamage anddeterioration.

GCC/IrishWalled TownNetwork(ITWN)

GCC/ITWN

CH3 To ensure therestoration and reuse

Number ofbuildings restored

To ensure apositive

GCC GCC

19

of existing uninhabitedand derelict structureswhere possible, asopposed to demolitionand new build.

over lifetime of theplan.

increase insuchdevelopmentover lifetime ofLAP.

Landscape Indicators Targets Data Sources ResponsibleAuthority

Land 1: Protectdesignated landscapesand scenic views,routes and landscapefeatures of local value.

Developmentsimpacting onscenic views androutes.

Promote,enhancelandscapecharacterthrough policyimplementation.

GCC GCC

Land 2: Conserve andprotect culturallandscapes includingarchaeological andarchitecturallandscapes.

Number ofdevelopmentsrequiringlandscape impactassessment.

Maintainculturallandscapesassociatedwith Athenry.

GCC GCC

Land 3: Minimise visualimpacts throughappropriate design,assessment and siting.

Number ofdevelopmentsrequiring a visualimpactassessment.

Minimalnegative visualimpacts fromnewdevelopments.

GCC GCC

Air Quality andClimate

Indicators Targets Data sources ResponsibleBody

AQ1 Seek to avoid airpollution andmaintain/improveambient air quality.

Maintenance of airquality standardsand values.

No decline inoverall airquality.

GCC/EPA GCC/EPA

AQ 2:Minimiseemissions ofgreenhouse gasesthrough energyefficiency andpromotion of renewableenergy.

Average energyconsumption ofnew residentialhousing stockTonnes of CO2/capita/year.

DecreaseGreenhousegas emissionsin line with2020commitments.

EPA, GCC,SEAI

GCC/EPA/SEAI

Topic and SEAObjectiveMaterial Assets

Indicators Targets Data sources ResponsibleBody

Mat 1: Reduce risk offlooding throughavoidance ofdevelopment in floodplains or in areas atrisk of flooding and

Number ofplanningpermissionscompliant with theFloods Directiveand OPW /

Compliancewith the FloodsDirective andwith OPW /DoEHLG‘Flood Risk

GCC/OPW GCC

20

manage the risk offlooding.

DoEHLG’s ‘FloodRisk Managementin the PlanningProcess’standardsNumber ofplanningpermissionsincorporating floodrisk assessmentand conditionsrequiringappropriate floodresilient measuresfor newdevelopmentsNumber ofSustainable UrbanDrainage Systemsand flood defencefeatures requiredin new planningapplications.

Managementin the PlanningProcess’standardsFlood RiskAssessmentbe carried outfor all newDevelopmentswithin floodrisk zonesIdentifySustainableUrbanDrainageSystems (andfeatures whichare identifiedas having aflood defencefunction) in allnewdevelopments.

Mat 2: Ensure thatdrinking water suppliesare free fromcontamination.

% compliance inpotable waterquality monitoring% compliance inwastewaterdischarges frommunicipaltreatment.

100%compliancewith waterqualitymonitoring.

GCC /EPA GCC

Mat 3 Improveefficiency in distributionof potable water topopulation.

% wastage ofpotable waterthrough poorinfrastructure.

% of potablewater lost dueto leaks.

GCC GCC

Mat 4 Ensure that allzoned lands aresufficiently serviced inadvance to ensureappropriate treatmentof wastewater prior todischarge.

% compliance inwastewaterdischarges frommunicipaltreatment.

Improved %compliance.

GCC GCC

Mat 5 Implement thewaste pyramid andencouragereuse/recycling ofmaterial wherever

% of wasterecycledTonne of wasteper capita per yearTonnes of

% recyclingfrom regionalwaste strategy.

GCC GCC

21

possible. (methaneproducing) organicwaste divertedfrom landfillLandfill gascapture rates.

Mat 6 Reduce waste ofenergy, promote use ofrenewable energysources and supportenergy conservationinitiatives.

Average energyconsumption ofnew residentialhousing stockTonnes of CO2/capita/year.

DecreaseGreenhousegas emissionsin line with2020commitments.

EPA, GCC,SEAI

GCC

Mat 7 Maximisesustainable modes oftransport and providefor east of movementfor all road users andto promotedevelopment patternsthat protect andenhance road safety.

% change inmodal split.

Extension andimprovementofthe cycling andwalkingnetwork.

GCC GCC

4.1.1 Conclusion

The Athenry LAP sets out an overall strategy, policies and objectives for the period 2012 to2018 which seeks to provide for the long term planning and overall benefit of the town. ThisSEA Statement summarises how environmental considerations have been addressed in theLAP preparation process. Consultation was undertaken at predraft stage, SEA ScopingStage and through submissions on the draft LAP and material amendments. Policies,objectives and land use zonings were assessed in terms of the impacts on the environmentand mitigation measures proposed through rewording of the policies/objectives or rezoningwhere necessary. The mitigation measures proposed for the policies/objectives through theSEA and HDA process have been incorporated into the Final LAP.

The SEA and HDA has been undertaken in line with the Planning and Development(Strategic Environmental Assessment) Regulations 2004 to 2011 (as amended) and theEuropean Communities (Natural Habitats) Regulations 2011. Subject to the full andproper implementation of the mitigation measures and adherence to policies,objectives and landuse zonings contained in the Athenry LAP 2012 to 2018, includingappropriate site level investigations, it is considered that significant adverse impactson the environment will be avoided.