Councillors informed only court challenge remains if Umma More windfarm approved for Ballymore, Moyvoughley and Drumraney area

Eilís Ryan

If An Bord Pleanála gives the green light for the nine-turbine Umma More windfarm proposed to stretch from Moyvoughley to Drumraney, the only remaining option to challenge the proposal would have to be through the courts, councillors were informed at a special meeting of Westmeath County Council held on Monday.

Presented at the meeting was a report on the development drawn up by Westmeath CEO Pat Gallagher and a team of three senior officials. It stated that the council does not recommend approval for the project, on the basis that it contravenes the Westmeath County Development Plan measure that says windfarms should be directed to cutaway peatlands.

This document, together with the comments expressed by councillors at Monday’s meeting, goes now to An Bord Pleanála where it is meant to inform the decision on the windfarm. The decision is in the hands of An Bord Pleanála because the development is considered to be strategic infrastructure.

Of the councillors who spoke at Monday’s meeting, just one - Green Party member Hazel Smyth - spoke positively of the project.

The turbines on the windfarm, which is to take in the townlands of Ballynafearagh, Raheen, Baskin High, Baskin Low, Lissanode, Umma Beg or Moneynamanagh and Umma More - all near Ballymore - are to be 185m in height.

The fact that the turbines are - by the developers' own admission - likely to be visible from the top of the Hill of Uisneach was an issue of concern to Cllr Vinny McCormack who also noted that the developers admitted there may be difficulty connecting to the grid at Mullingar, and are proposing over 30kms of cabling to connect to the grid at Tullamore as a preferred option. He remarked that there is no talk of planning permission for the substantial cabling and substation which would be required to supply energy to the grid.

The Fianna Fáil man also raised concerns over the setback distances, noise issues and shadow flicker, and the fact that the development was planned for agricultural land and in close proximity to residential homes.

Cllr Andrew Duncan was also completely opposed to the development, describing it as "a rogue application.

"And when you have a developer-led process, which is what the wind industry has been for so long, you're going to get rogue applications," he said.

Cllr Duncan rubbished claims that the development would not have an impact on property values in the area stating that the approximately 150-odd houses in the catchment are going to fall in value

“ It's not ‘will they/won't they’,” he warned, stating that the question was the extent of that devaluation, and that it was going to be significant.

Cllr Duncan also pointed out that while elements of the Westmeath County Development Plan relating to wind energy had been removed at departmental level, one that wasn't was the one instructing that they be "strictly" directed to cutaway bogs - and that "strictly" left no room for ambiguity, he stated.

He was particularly opposed to its location near Uisneach.

Cllr Tom Farrell raised the issue of the 750m setback, which, he said, was meant to be from the boundary of an individual’s land and not merely from a dwelling.

Cllr Farrell was also concerned about the potential impact on the Hill of Uisneach, a site that is likely to get UNESCO status in years to come. He also said there is concern over the possible impact on the health of autistic children in the area: "I'm completely against this and we should stick to the Country Development Plan, as agreed by everybody heretofore," he said.

Speaking both on behalf of himself and party colleague Johnny Penrose, Cllr Denis Leonard also expressed opposition: "It is absolutely insane that one of the flattest countries in Ireland with one of the highest densities of rural housing, with the lowest wind speeds in the country, is being considered for a development of this scale," he said.

Like Cllr McCormack, he was particularly incensed at the wind company’s suggestion that the seventy homes likely to be affected by shadow flicker install blinds or screening

He said too that no new developments should take place until the wind energy guidelines review has been undertaken, as the current guidelines, which date from 2006, were written at a time when wind turbines were 50-60 metres tall, whereas these are to be 185 metres.

Cllr Leonard went on to say that there needs to be a balance in renewable energy development in this county: "So that's biogas; that's hydro; that's geothermal; that's hydrogen; that's solar; that's anaerobic digestion," he said, going on to claim that the reason these were not being pursued were because "the wind companies got in early, they are profit driven" as evidenced by figures released just last week that showed they were making "unprecedented" profits.

Cllr Hazel Smyth was a lone voice in not opposing the project: “I'm actually really concerned about the level of scaremongering that's happening here today at this meeting - and the needless worry and panic some my fellow councillors are sharing in terms of these wind turbines is really absurd,” she stated.

Cllr Smyth said it was not a fact that the council had agreed that wind turbines should be kept to peatlands.

“And actually, in fact, that is a nonsensical idea,” she said, arguing that peatlands are carbon stores which are important in terms of their contribution to carbon sequestration, not to mention the damaging impacts that wind turbines could potentially have in such a peatlands area.

“So to just confine them to those areas, actually doesn't make any sense,” she said.

Cllr Smyth said there should be an onus on the company to ensure that the local residents are not adversely impacted, and this is something that they have said they will work towards.

She also threw cold water on claims that having a home near a windfarm devalues the property: “It's just not true. To be honest, it's just a complete lie,” she said, citing a Scottish study that found no impact on property prices.

Cllr Smyth said that road safety and community engagement were the two issues about which the local community was most concerned, and she believed these could both be addressed.

She felt the company’s willingness to help with retrofitting and energy bills for residents was to be welcomed and also the company’s willingness to contribute to local schools and clubs.

Cllr Smyth said she wanted to debunk any idea that there were potential negative health impacts: “There is peer-reviewed scientific research that has been done to show that there are no negative health impacts from wind turbines. And so again, I just really want to make sure that no false or untrue information is being spread,” she said.

County cathaoirleach, Aengus O’Rourke, rejected the claim that anyone present was scaremongering or misquoting anyone: he felt all were entitled to express their views. “I wouldn’t like this meeting to go off on a tangent, whereby people are being accused of scaremongering or spreading untruths,” he said, stating that all the contributions made had been useful and constructive.

Cllr Andrew Duncan was annoyed at Cllr Smyth’s use of the word “lie” to refute his warning that if the windfarm went ahead it would impact on property values: “You have no evidence to back that up whereas I do. Wind turbines cause property devaluation: do your research,” he said.

Cllr Smyth said there can be different schools of thought on this and research that goes both ways. She said she did not accuse anyone of lying but that there can be information that isn't entirely accurate.

Cllr Paul Hogan said that as he viewed it, windfarms need to be in the right location. He said planners need to be conscious of all of the issues raised by local communities, and he countered Cllr Smyth’s claim that it was not a fact that the council had agreed that wind turbines should be kept to peatlands, pointing out that it was in the county development plan.

Cllr Hogan went on to state that he was “skeptical” of the process on the basis that developments proposed by the same operator for sites in Donegal and Cork had been refused permission by the respective local authorities, but that An Bord Pleanála had gone on to grant permission.

A further concern raised by Cllr Hogan was that the company’s own environmental report on the site stated that the project could have “significant adverse effects” and that it could affect the water table in that area.

Both Cllrs Emily Wallace and Vinny McCormack questioned the depth of community engagement undertaken by the project proposer, and said it had been “just a box-ticking exercise”.

Cllr Wallace was concerned over ambient noise from turbines, and the way such development lead to sterilisation of land. Also of concern, she said, was the way turbines can affect people with epilepsy.

Cllr Wallace also said experience in other areas showed that the promised benefits to local schools and organisations don’t always materialize.

Cathaoirleach O’Rourke said he also opposes this development. “I think that as a local authority, we've been consistent for the last 10 years in terms of our views on wind farms and why would we change in terms of this development?” he said, adding that the structures being proposed now are “probably two to three times higher than they would have been 10 years ago”.

“These are mega structures. There's no doubt about it, but that they would totally dominate the skyline totally dominate the landscape and the local environment,” he said.