Kells solar farm plan setback after archaeological find

The developer of a proposed 405-acre solar farm on the outskirts of Kells is no longer proceeding with one of the land parcels earmarked for the project following the discovery of archaeological features during surveys.

Late last year, Fyanstown Solar Farm Limited lodged a planning application for a solar farm and energy storage compound with a total area of circa 164 hectares in the townlands of Fyanstown, Hurdlestown, Kilmainham, Rossmeen and Sedenrath, Kells, County Meath across three separate land parcels. Fyanstown Solar Farm Limited is a BayWa r.e company- a global renewable energy company with a presence in 34 countries.

The Fyanstown Solar Farm proposal was met by strong local objections and some 135 submissions were made against the plans, including a group one by the Blackwater Valley Conservation Group.

Meath County Council sought further information from the developer on the proposals in February and recently the company has indicated that it will not proceed with plans in relation to the parcel of land at Hurdlestown, Kells. The remainder of the project will proceed.

Writing to residents the company said: "Following feedback from local residents and the discovery of archaeological features during our recent geophysical survey, it has been decided that land adjacent to the L6832 at Hurdlestown will no longer form part of the proposed solar farm.

"An updated site layout reflecting these changes will be submitted to Meath County Council as part of the further information requested for the project.

"We remain committed to protecting the cultural and historical heritage of the area and to maintaining an open and positive dialogue with the local community."

Residents remain strongly opposed to the plans and objectors argue that it would be "an incongruous feature in the scenic rural landscape, would seriously injure the residential amenities of residential property in the vicinity, would be out of character with and seriously injure the visual amenities of the area, would conflict with multiple County Development Plan objectives to protect the environment, ecology, heritage and promote tourism and would set an undesirable precedent for similar proposals in the future."

The lack of a clear planning policy for solar farm developments, visual amenity, glint and glare, traffic concerns, heritage, ecology, hydrology, ecology, EIA, residential amenity, evaluation of properties, tourism, technology, solar planning guidance, loss of tillage land, AA, connector, flooding have all been cited as reasons for objecting.

The impact of noise from the substation on residents in the vicinity is also a big concern.

The Blackwater Valley Conservation Group totally rejects the claim that the proposed development “will result in a slight positive residual effect on local ecology and biodiversity” and they do not accept that a "development consisting of 960,000sqm of solar PV panels, 7100m x 3.5m wide of compacted gravel track and ancillary structures essentially covering a land area of 405 acres will not have serious consequences for the wildlife currently living on these lands such as buzzards, badgers, foxes, pine martins, kingfishers and bats."

Whooper swans also have a strong presence in the area.

Reacting to the latest news that the Hurdlestown land parcel is to be omitted, Kenneth Walsh of the Blackwater Valley Conservation Group said: "While this is excellent news for Hurdlestown residents and a big win, the impact on the other four town lands (Kilmainham, Rosmeen, Fyanstown and Sedenrath) will still be huge if this development goes ahead."

He said the archaeological find gives validity to their argument that the area is rich in heritage and archaeology.

Mr Walsh also says this latest development raises many further questions including what was found of such archaeological importance to exclude the Hurdlestown lands from the proposal. He also pointed out that there are further areas closer to the River Blackwater which are well known to have archaeological and environmental merit and believes the risk of archaeological and environmental damage is huge if the development proceeds.

Mr Walsh has also expressed disappointment with public representatives saying they have either ignored their pleas for help and have provided very little if any support.

Residents are now awaiting submission of the further information by the applicant so they can review it and will then have a chance to make submissions on this additional information.