Action group feels ‘vindicated’ after further information sought on wind farm

170 submissions lodged during initial consultation period
Action group feels ‘vindicated’ after further information sought on wind farm

An AI generated image generated by a member of Ballyfeeney Action Group calibrated off the height off the mast and used to demonstrated the relative scale of the proposed turbines.

A request for further information by Roscommon County Council regarding a planning application for a wind farm in South Roscommon has been welcomed by the local action group saying it “largely vindicates the concerns being raised by the group and the community at large”.

Ballyfeeny Green Energy Limited is seeking planning permission to construct and operate a wind farm consisting of six wind turbines. The turbine specification is unconfirmed but will fall within the range outlined by Roscommon County Council. These options are: tip height of 160m, rotor diameter of 136m and hub height of 92m; tip height of 156m, rotor diameter of 133m and hub height of 90m; or tip height of 159m, rotor diameter of 138m and hub height of 90m.

The location comprises Tully, Ballyfeeney, Pollymount, Bellanamullia, Scramogue, Treanaceeve, Ballyhubert, and Tooreen.

The application is also seeking a permanent onsite 38kV electrical substation of one storey, and the installation of approximately 5.1km of permanent underground electrical cabling.

The Ballyfeeney Action Group hosted a public meeting last September to highlight local concerns regarding noise pollution, shadow flicker, infrasound and the impact such a development would have on tourism in an area classed as a high visual amenity.

At that meeting it was stated the proposed development would be “a disaster” for the areas and was a “scandal.” In a statement issued to the Roscommon Herald last week the group welcomed the request for further information.

Rory Doyle, secretary of the group, stated that “the request largely vindicates the concerns being raised by the group and the community at large”. Areas in which the council has requested further information include: impact on public roadways, risks to water, proximity to properties as well as particular concerns regarding protected bird species in the area.

Mr Doyle went on to highlight that within question number 27, of the 33 questions asked in total, the council has stated that “the site is dominated by high and extreme groundwater vulnerability” and echoed concerns of the many residents both himself and the rest of the action group has spoken to over the past number of months about the risk of the groundwater becoming polluted, particularly during the construction phase of the project, and that having a knock on effect to people’s drinking water supply. The area is largely served by a combination of a group water scheme and many private wells.

Commenting further, Conor Maher, chairman of the action group, said that “this is a good first step. We’ve been accused of NIMBYism by some and in disseminating misinformation by others, but the fact the local authority is now asking the questions we’ve been asking demonstrates that the concerns we are raising are valid, we are right in seeking answers and that the company has failed to put forward a proposal which address these concerns in full”.

The developer now has until June 23rd (or September 23rd should an extension be granted) to furnish answers to these questions and given the number of questions and depth of information being requested the action group is “calling on Roscommon County Council to deem the further information requested significant enough to open the matter back up for public scrutiny once answers have been supplied by the developed”.

The group also stated that 170 submissions were lodged during the initial consultation period with almost all being overwhelmingly against planning consent being granted.

More in this section