5 Development of Preferred Route

5.2 Northern Assessment

The environmental and engineering impact of each of the route options has been assessed and is described in full in Chapters 8 to 16 of Volume 2 of this Report. The conclusions from each of these assessments are included in the paragraphs below. Full details can be found in the relevant chapter and supporting appendices, and the results are summarised in the Route Impact Matrices included as RSR2 figures 17.1 to 17.4.

Planning and Socio-Economic Impact.
The principal socio-economic benefit of all the route options is the enhancement of the connection between the Kilcullen - Waterford corridor and major centres within Ireland including the major ports and airports. The creation of a motorway / dual carriageway will improve the accessibility of all towns and industry served by the corridor.

In overall socio-economic terms, the preferred corridor combines the following sequence of Route Corridors A1, B2, C3 and D2 for the following reasons: -

• Services Athy well, reinforcing and supporting its role as a designated Secondary Development Centre in the Greater Dublin Area.
  
• Services Carlow with a choice of interchanges and provides links to Castledermot and Tullow. This corridor and associated interchanges will facilitate the possible expansion of existing industries and businesses on the east side as well as attracting new industries to Carlow.

Impacts on People
Each of the route corridor options was assessed in terms of their impact on people living or working near the corridors. These impacts were recorded under the following headings: -

• Noise and Air Environment
  
• Severance
  
• Community Facilities
  
• Number of Properties within the Route Corridor
  
• Planning Permissions Granted within Route Corridor
  

The number of properties within 300 metres of the route corridor centreline was relatively low in Sections A and B reflecting the rural nature of the study area. The routes closest to Athy affected more properties. In Section C the numbers of properties within 300 metres of the route corridors were larger especially on Route Corridors C3 and C5 close to the eastern side of Carlow Town. Again in Section D the number of properties within 300 metres was relatively low.
Communities close to each route option are listed in the tables. However the community severance is not severe on any of the route options as, in general, the existing road network will be maintained by the provision of overbridges or underbridges.

The impacts of each route corridor have been compared, and the preferred options for each section, in terms of their impact on people, are: -

• Route Corridor A5 (followed by Route Corridor A1)
  
• Route Corridor B4 (followed by Route Corridor B5)
  
• Route Corridor C6 (followed by Route Corridor C1)
  
• Route Corridor D1 (followed by Route Corridors D2 and D3).
  

Flora, Fauna and Fisheries
The route options pass through a broad band of mainly flat to gently undulating land in counties Kildare, Laois, Carlow and Kilkenny. Most of the land is used for agriculture and is under intensive pasture with a high proportion of arable land, most notably around Athy and Carlow. Comparatively few ecological sites are impacted by the route options and most of these have a scattered distribution and are limited in size. Hedgerows are found throughout the study area and many contain mature broadleaved trees. The route corridors cross numerous watercourses. Apart from a small area that occurs within the River Liffey catchment in the north-east, most of the impacted watercourses are part of the River Barrow system. All the main watercourses are important for salmonid fish.

There are no candidate Special Areas of Conservation (cSAC) or proposed Natural Heritage Areas (pNHAs) intersected by any of the route corridors. The southern end of Cloghristick Wood, a pNHA, is close to Route Corridor D2. The results from the analysis are that the impacts do not vary significantly between the route options, and the following are the preferred options based on their impacts on ecological sites and watercourses:
- Route Corridor A5
- Route Corridor B2
- Route Corridor C3
- Route Corridor D3

Archaeological and Cultural Heritage.
An area approximately 500 metres wide (250 metres each side of the route corridor centreline) was assessed on each route option. The assessment was based on a paper survey, identifying all recorded sites, followed by an aerial (helicopter) site inspection. The area is a particularly rich archaeological landscape. The vast majority of the total of 123 sites consisted of earthworks and enclosures, although a large number of fulachta fiadh and ringforts were also identified. Further sites included a cist site, a moated site, several mottes and a number of castles and tower houses were also recorded. One site classed as a Natural Monument, Site N2, is close to Route A1. There are no sites with Preservation Orders or Registered Sites and the vast majority of sites are listed in the Record of Historic Monuments and Places (RMP). 71 sites of Architectural Importance and 19 sites of Industrial Archaeology were also documented, together with historic towns and deserted settlements.
An assessment was made of each route corridor option and is summarised in the Impact Matrices, RSR2 Figures 17.1 to 17.4.

The impact took into account the following three factors: -

• the nature of the sites
  
• the number of sites impacted, and
  
• the proximity of the sites to the route.
  

Having considered these factors the following route corridor options were preferred as having the least impact on the recorded archaeology at the area: -
- Route Corridor A5
- Route Corridor B1
- Route Corridor C1
- Route Corridor D5

From an archaeological and cultural heritage point of view the preferred route should avoid direct impacts with the identified elements of the archaeological landscape wherever possible. Should this not be possible, a full programme of archaeological mitigation including aerial survey, topographical survey, geophysical survey and investigative excavation is recommended. This would be followed by full-scale excavation, should this be required.