HomeMy WebLinkAbout2660018 - F.I. Received Doc. - EIAR - Appendix 12.1 Glossary of Acoustic Terminology
AUGUST 2026
VOLUME III
APPENDICES TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
APPENDIX 12.1
GLOSSARY OF ACOUSTIC
TERMINOLOGY
Stream BioEnergy Ireland Limited
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
1
Table of Contents
APPENDIX 12.1 – GLOSSARY OF ACOUSTIC TERMINOLOGY ................................................................... 2
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
2
APPENDIX 12.1 – GLOSSARY OF ACOUTIC TERMINOLOGY
ambient noise The totally encompassing sound in a given situation at a given time, usually
composed of sound from many sources, near and far.
background noise The steady existing noise level present without contribution from any
intermittent sources. The A-weighted sound pressure level of the residual
noise at the assessment position that is exceeded for 90 per cent of a given
time interval, T (LAF90,T).
broadband Sounds that contain energy distributed across a wide range of frequencies.
dB Decibel - The scale in which sound pressure level is expressed. It is defined as
20 times the logarithm of the ratio between the RMS pressure of the sound
field and the reference pressure of 20 micro-pascals (20 μPa).
dB LpA An ‘A-weighted decibel’ - a measure of the overall noise level of sound across
the audible frequency range (20 Hz – 20 kHz) with A-frequency weighting (i.e.
‘A’–weighting) to compensate for the varying sensitivity of the human ear to
sound at different frequencies.
Hertz (Hz) The unit of sound frequency in cycles per second.
impulsive noise A noise that is of short duration (typically less than one second), the sound
pressure level of which is significantly higher than the background.
LAeq,T This is the equivalent continuous sound level. It is a type of average and is
used to describe a fluctuating noise in terms of a single noise level over the
sample period (T). The closer the LAeq value is to either the LAF10 or LAF90 value
indicates the relative impact of the intermittent sources and their
contribution. The relative spread between the values determines the impact
of intermittent sources such as traffic on the background.
LAFN The A-weighted noise level exceeded for N% of the sampling interval.
Measured using the “Fast” time weighting.
LAFmax is the instantaneous slow time weighted maximum sound level measured
during the sample period (usually referred to in relation to construction noise
levels).
LAr,T The Rated Noise Level, equal to the LAeq during a specified time interval (T),
plus specified adjustments for tonal character and impulsiveness of the
sound.
LAF90 Refers to those A-weighted noise levels in the lower 90 percentile of the
sampling interval; it is the level which is exceeded for 90% of the
measurement period. It will therefore exclude the intermittent features of
traffic and is used to estimate a background level. Measured using the “Fast”
time weighting.
LAT(DW) equivalent continuous downwind sound pressure level. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
3
LfT(DW) equivalent continuous downwind octave-band sound pressure level.
Lday Lday is the average noise level during the day time period of 07:00hrs to
19:00hrs
Lnight Lnight is the average noise level during the night-time period of 23:00hrs to
07:00hrs.
low frequency noise LFN - noise which is dominated by frequency components towards the lower
end of the frequency spectrum.
noise Any sound, that has the potential to cause disturbance, discomfort or
psychological stress to a person exposed to it, or any sound that could cause
actual physiological harm to a person exposed to it, or physical damage to any
structure exposed to it, is known as noise.
noise sensitive location NSL – Any dwelling house, hotel or hostel, health building, educational
establishment, place of worship or entertainment, or any other facility or
other area of high amenity which for its proper enjoyment requires the
absence of noise at nuisance levels.
octave band A frequency interval, the upper limit of which is twice that of the lower limit.
For example, the 1,000Hz octave band contains acoustical energy between
707Hz and 1,414Hz. The centre frequencies used for the designation of octave
bands are defined in ISO and ANSI standards.
rating level See LAr,T.
sound power level The logarithmic measure of sound power in comparison to a referenced
sound intensity level of one picowatt (1pW) per m2 where:
0
10 P
PLogLw= dB
Where: p is the rms value of sound power in pascals; and
P0 is 1 pW.
sound pressure level The sound pressure level at a point is defined as:
0
20 P
PLogLp= dB
specific noise level A component of the ambient noise which can be specifically identified by
acoustical means and may be associated with a specific source. In BS 4142,
there is a more precise definition as follows: ‘the equivalent continuous A-
weighted sound pressure level at the assessment position produced by the
specific noise source over a given reference time interval (LAeq, T)’. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
4
tonal Sounds which cover a range of only a few Hz which contains a clearly audible
tone i.e. distinguishable, discrete or continuous noise (whine, hiss, screech,
or hum etc.) are referred to as being ‘tonal’.
1/3 octave analysis Frequency analysis of sound such that the frequency spectrum is subdivided
into bands of one–third of an octave each.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
AUGUST 2026
VOLUME III
APPENDICES TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
APPENDIX 12.2
BASELINE NOISE SURVEY DATA
Stream BioEnergy Ireland Limited
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
1
Table of Contents
APPENDIX 12.2 – BASELINE NOISE DATA AT UN1 ................................................................................... 2
12.1 Measured Noise Levels at UN1 .................................................................................................. 2
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
2
APPENDIX 12.2 – BASELINE NOISE DATA AT UN1
12.1 Measured Noise Levels at UN1
The monitoring location was installed within the south western portion of the garden of residential
property to the south east of the site.
The results from the October 2024 survey are graphed in Figure 12.2.1 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
3
Figure 12.2.1 Graphed Survey Results for UN1 – October 2024 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
4
The results from the October 2025 survey are graphed in Figure 12.2.2
Figure 12.2.2 Graphed Survey Results for UN1 – October 2025 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
AUGUST 2026
VOLUME III
APPENDICES TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
APPENDIX 12.3
NOISE MODELLING DETAILS
Stream BioEnergy Ireland Limited
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
1
Table of Contents
APPENDIX 12.3 – NOISE MODELLING DATA............................................................................................ 2
Noise Modelling Parameters .................................................................................................................. 2
Noise Model Details and Assumptions ................................................................................................... 3
12.1.1 Noise Model ............................................................................................................................... 3
DGMR iNoise ........................................................................................................................................... 4
Overview of ISO 9613-2: 2024 ................................................................................................................ 4
Input Data and Assumptions ................................................................................................................... 5
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
2
APPENDIX 12.3 – NOISE MODELLING DATA
Noise Modelling Parameters
Prediction calculations for noise emissions have been conducted in accordance with ISO 9613:
Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors, Part 2: Engineering Method for the
prediction of sound pressure levels outdoors, 2024. The following are the main aspects that have been
considered in terms of the noise predictions presented in this instance.
Directivity Factor: The directivity factor (D) allows for an adjustment to be made where the
sound radiated in the direction of interest is higher than that for which the
sound power level is specified. In this case the sound power level is measures
in a down wind direction, corresponding to the worst case propagation
conditions and needs no further adjustment.
Ground Effect: Ground effect is the result of sound reflected by the ground interfering with
the sound propagating directly from source to receiver. The prediction of
ground effects is inherently complex and depend on source height receiver
height propagation height between the source and receiver and the ground
conditions. The ground conditions are described according to a variable
defined as G, which varies between 0.0 for hard ground (including paving, ice
concrete) and 1.0 for soft ground (includes ground covered by grass trees or
other vegetation) Our predictions have been carried out using various source
height specific to each plant item, a receiver heights of 1.6m for single storey
properties and 4m for double. An assumed ground factor of G = 0.8 has been
applied off site and a ground factor of 0 for the site area. Noise contours
presented in the assessment have been predicted to a height of 4m in all
instances.
Geometrical Divergence: This term relates to the spherical spreading in the free-field from a
point sound source resulting in attenuation depending on distance
according to the following equation:
Ageo = 20 x log(distance from source in meters) + 11
Atmospheric Absorption: Sound propagation through the atmosphere is attenuated by the
conversion of the sound energy into heat. This attenuation is
dependent on the temperature and relative humidity of the air
through which the sound is travelling and is frequency dependent
with increasing attenuation towards higher frequencies. In these
predictions a temperature of 10oC and a relative humidity of 70%
have been used, which give relativity low levels of atmosphere
attenuation and corresponding worst case noise predictions.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
3
Atmospheric Attenuation Assumed for Noise Calculations (dB per km)
Temp
(oC)
%
Humidity
Octave Band Centre Frequencies (Hz)
63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k
10 70 0.12 0.41 1.04 1.93 3.66 9.66 32.77 116.88
Barrier Attenuation: The effect of any barrier between the noise source and the receiver position
is that noise will be reduced according to the relative heights of the source,
receiver and barrier and the frequency spectrum of the noise.
Noise Model Details and Assumptions
12.1.1 Noise Model
A 3D computer-based prediction model has been prepared in order to quantify the noise level
associated with the proposed development . This section discusses the methodology behind the noise
modelling process. Figure 12.1 presents an image of the developed noise model.
Figure 12.1 Noise Model of Renewable Biogas Plant RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
4
DGMR iNoise
Proprietary noise calculation software has been used for the purposes of this modelling exercise. The
selected software, DGMR iNoise 2024.1, calculates noise levels in accordance with ISO 9613: Acoustics
– Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors, Part 2: Engineering Method for the prediction
of sound pressure levels outdoors, 2024.
DGMR iNoise is a proprietary noise calculation package for computing noise levels in the vicinity of
noise sources. iNoise calculates noise levels in different ways depending on the selected prediction
standard. In general, however, the resultant noise level is calculated taking into account a range of
factors affecting the propagation of sound, including:
• the magnitude of the noise source in terms of A weighted sound power levels (LWA);
• the distance between the source and receiver;
• the presence of obstacles such as screens or barriers in the propagation path;
• the presence of reflecting surfaces;
• the hardness of the ground between the source and receiver;
• Attenuation due to atmospheric absorption; and
Meteorological effects such as wind gradient, temperature gradient and humidity (these have
significant impact at distances greater than approximately 400 m).
Overview of ISO 9613-2: 2024
ISO9613-2:2024 calculates the noise level based on each of the factors discussed previously. However,
the effect of meteorological conditions is significantly simplified by calculating the average downwind
sound pressure level, LAT(DW), for the following conditions:
• wind direction at an angle of ±45° to the direction connecting the centre of the dominant
sound source and the centre of the specified receiver region with the wind blowing from
source to receiver, and;
• wind speed between approximately 1ms-1 and 5ms-1, measured at a height of 3 m to 11 m
above the ground.
The equations and calculations also hold for average propagation under a well-developed moderate
ground based temperature inversion, such as commonly occurs on clear calm nights.
The basic formula for calculating LAT(DW) from any point source at any receiver location is given by:
LfT(DW) = LW + Dc – A Eqn. A
Where:
LfT(DW) is an octave band centre frequency component of LAT(DW) in dB relative to 2x10 -
5Pa;
LW is the octave band sound power of the point source; RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
5
Dc is the directivity correction for the point source;
A is the octave band attenuation that occurs during propagation, namely attenuation due to
geometric divergence, atmospheric absorption, ground effect, barriers and miscellaneous
other effects.
The estimated accuracy associated with this methodology is shown in Table 0-1 below:
Table 0-1 – Estimated Accuracy for Broadband Noise of LAT(DW)
Height, h*
Distance, d†
0 < d < 100 100m < d < 1,000 m
0<h<5m ±3 dB ±3 dB
5m<h<30m ±1 dB ±3 dB
* h is the mean height of the source and receiver.
† d is the mean distance between the source and receiver.
N.B. These estimates have been made from situations where there are no effects due to reflections
or attenuation due to screening.
Input Data and Assumptions
The noise model has been constructed using data from various source as follows:
Site Layout The site layout has been obtained from the drawings forwarded by the design team
includes all site buildings and structures, boundaries and 3D site elevations
Local Area The location of noise sensitive locations has been obtained from a combination of site
drawings provided by the design team, review of Ordinance Survey Ireland mapping
(OSI), google earth imagery and site visits.
Heights The heights of buildings and structures (stacks, tanks etc) on site have been obtained
from site drawings provided by the design team. Off-site buildings have been
modelled ranging between 2 to 8 m high depending on the structure at hand.
Contours detailed site ground contours/heights have been obtained from drone topographical
studies for the site and extended area provided by the design team.
Noise Sources The final critical aspect of the noise model development is the inclusion of the various
plant noise sources. Details are presented in the following section.
Source Sound Power Data
The noise modelling completed indicates the following limits in relation to various items of plant
associated with the overall site development. Plant items will be selected in order to achieve the
stated noise levels and or appropriate attenuation will be incorporated into the design of the
plant/building in order that the plant noise emission levels are achieved on site (including any system
regenerated noise). RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
6
Table 0-1 – Sound Power Emissions from API Noise Sources
Source Ref Description / Area Source
Type
Unit Sound
Power (dB(A))
Note a
Notes
S1 Wheelwash #1 Point 85
S2 Weighbridge #1 Point 80
S3 Wheelwash #2 Point 85
S4 Weighbridge #2 Point 80
S5 Odour control fan 1 Point 85
S6 Odour control fan 2 Point 85
S7 Odour control fan 3 Point 85
S8 Odour control stack Point 80 Note b
S9 gas holder fan Point 83
S10 C02 Liquidification Area 93
S11 Biogas upgrade plant Area 96
S12 Desulphurisation plant Area 85
S13 Tank Agitator #1 Point 70
S13 Tank Agitator #2 Point 70
S13 Tank Agitator #4 Point 70
S13 Tank Agitator #3 Point 70
S13 Tank Agitator #5 Point 70
S13 Tank Agitator #6 Point 70
S14 Tank biomass pump #1 Point 80 Note c
S14 Tank biomass pump #2 Point 80 Note c
S14 Tank biomass pump #3 Point 80 Note c
S14 Tank biomass pump #4 Point 80 Note c
S14 Tank biomass pump #5 Point 80 Note c
S14 Tank biomass pump #6 Point 80 Note c
S15 Tank stirrers #1 Point 70
S15 Tank stirrers #2 Point 70
S15 Tank stirrers #3 Point 70
S15 Tank stirrers #4 Point 70
S15 Tank stirrers #5 Point 70
S15 Tank stirrers #6 Point 70
S16 Digestive Treatment system Point 83
S17 CHP Engine building exhaust - top of stack Point 81
S18 CHP Engine building boiler - top of stack Point 91
S19 dryer exhaust - top of stack Point 95 Note d
S20 Fan cooler #1 Point 85
S20 Fan cooler #2 Point 85
S20 Fan cooler #3 Point 85 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
7
Source Ref Description / Area Source
Type
Unit Sound
Power (dB(A))
Note a
Notes
S20 Fan cooler #4 Point 85
S21 Admin Building Area 70
S22 Dryer Building – Breakout walls Façade 49 Note e
S23 Dryer Building – Breakout roof Roof 49 Note e
S24 Dryer Building – Breakout roller shutter doors Façade 49 Note e
S25 Pellet Hall – Breakout walls Façade 49 Note f
S26 Pellet Hall – Breakout roof Roof 49 Note f
S27 Pellet Hall – Breakout roller shutter doors Façade 49 Note f
S28 Boiler House – Breakout walls Façade 78
S29 Boiler House – Breakout Roof Roof 75
S30 CHP – breakout walls Façade 49 Note g
S31 Process Building – breakout walls Façade 47 Note h
S32 Process Building – breakout Roof Roof 49 Note h
S33 Process Building – Breakout roller shutter doors Façade 47 Note h
S34 Gas grid entry walls Facade 78 Note i
S35 Substation Building Facade
Note a Noise sources modelled a mid-frequency sound power values at 500 Hz as per supplied data
Note b Includes silencer providing reduction of 10 dB(A)
Note c Includes silencer providing reduction of 5 dB(A)
Note d Includes silencer in exhaust stack to not exceed LW of 95 dB(A) at top of stack
Note e Dryer is housed in building with Sound Reduction Index of 56 dB Rw up to 4m (blockwork)
and 25 dB Rw for upper walls (Industrial panel system). Roller shutter doors modelled with
SRI of 25 dB Rw. Roof is modelled with an SRI of 25 dB Rw. Modelled noise level referenced
above relates to total Sound Power (Lw) per m2 of each surface taking account of internal
level and breakout noise assuming an internal façade noise level of 80 dB (A).
Note f Pellet Hall is modelled with an internal façade noise level of 80 dB (A). The building Sound
Reduction Index is 56 dB Rw up to 4m (blockwork) and 25 dB Rw for upper walls (Industrial
panel system). Roof is modelled with an SRI of 25 dB Rw. Roller shutter doors modelled with
SRI of 25 dB Rw. Modelled noise level referenced above relates to total Sound Power (Lw) per
m2 taking account of internal level and breakout noise.
Note g CHP building is modelled with an internal reverberant noise level of level of 80 dB (A) from
the CHP engine intake and outlet and building cooler. The building Sound Reduction Index is
56 dB Rw up to 4m (blockwork) and 25 dB Rw for upper walls (Industrial panel system). Roof
is modelled with an SRI of 25 dB Rw. Modelled noise level referenced above relates to total
Sound Power (Lw) per m2 taking account of internal level and breakout noise. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
8
Note h Process building is modelled with an internal reverberant noise level of level of 80 dB (A) from
various internal sources including conveyors, motors, pumps, fans, compressor and loader.
The building Sound Reduction Index is 56 dB Rw up to 4m (blockwork) and 25 dB Rw for upper
walls (Industrial panel system). Roof is modelled with an SRI of 25 dB Rw. Modelled noise level
referenced above relates to total Sound Power (Lw) per m2 taking account of internal level
and breakout noise.
Note i Modelled to achieve 60 dB at 1m from the façade.
On site vehicle movements have been modelled using the following sound power data.
Source
Ref
Octave Band Sound Power Data dB (A) Number
31.5 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k
Tota
l LW
(A)
S36 –
HGVs
on site
72.7 78 84 92 98 101 97 92 84 104 25
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
AUGUST 2026
VOLUME III
APPENDICES TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
APPENDIX 13.1
AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL
INFORMATION
Stream BioEnergy Ireland Limited
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
14-1
13.1 Air Quality Technical Information
13.1.1 Description of the AERMOD Model
The AERMOD dispersion model has been developed in part by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA) (EPA, 2020; USEPA, 1995; USEPA, 2005; USEPA, 2022). The model is a steady -state
Gaussian model used to assess pollutant concentrations associated with industrial sources. The model
is an enhancement on the Industrial Source Complex-Short Term 3 (ISCST3) model which has been
widely used for emissions from industrial sources.
Improvements over the ISCST3 model include the treatment of the vertical distribution of
concentration within the plume. ISCST3 assumes a Gaussian distribution in both the horizontal and
vertical direction under all weather conditions. AERMOD with PRIME, however, treats the vertical
distribution as non-Gaussian under convective (unstable) conditions while maintaining a Gaussian
distribution in both the horizontal and vertical direction during stable conditions. This treatment
reflects the fact that the plume is skewed upwards under convective conditions due to the greater
intensity of turbulence above the plume than below. The result is a more accurate portrayal of actual
conditions using the AERMOD model. AERMOD also enhances the turbulence of night-time urban
boundary layers thus simulating the influence of the urban heat island.
In contrast to ISCST3, AERMOD is widely applicable in all types of terrain. Differentiation of the simple
versus complex terrain is unnecessary with AERMOD. In complex terrain, AERMOD employs the
dividing-streamline concept in a simplified simulation of the effects of plume-terrain interactions. In
the dividing-streamline concept, flow below this height remains horizontal, and flow above this height
tends to rise up and over terrain. Extensive validation studies have found that AERMOD (precursor to
AERMOD with PRIME) performs better than ISCST3 for many applications and as well or better than
CTDMPLUS for several complex terrain data sets (USEPA, 1999).
Due to the proximity to surrounding buildings, the PRIME (Plume Rise Model Enhancements) building
downwash algorithm has been incorporated into the model to determine the influence (wake effects)
of these buildings on dispersion in each direction considered. The PRIME algorithm takes into account
the position of the stack relative to the building in calculating building downwash. In the absence of
the building, the plume from the stack will rise due to momentum and/or buoyancy forces. Wind
streamlines act on the plume leads to the bending over of the plume as it disperses. However, due to
the presence of the building, wind streamlines are disrupted leading to a lowering of the plume
centreline.
When there are multiple buildings, the building tier leading to the largest cavity height is used to
determine building downwash. The cavity height calculation is an empirical formula based on building
height, the length scale (which is a factor of building height & width) and the cavity length (which is
based on building width, length and height). As the direction of the wind will lead to the identification
of differing dominant tiers, calculations are carried out in intervals of 10 degrees. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
14-2
In PRIME, the nature of the wind streamline disruption as it passes over the dominant building tier is
a function of the exact dimensions of the building and the angle at which the wind approaches the
building. Once the streamline encounters the zone of influence of the building, two forces act on the
plume. Firstly, the disruption caused by the building leads to increased turbulence and enhances
horizontal and vertical dispersion. Secondly, the streamline descends in the lee of the building due to
the reduced pressure and drags the plume (or part of) nearer to the ground, leading to higher ground
level concentrations. The model calculates the descent of the plume as a function of the building shape
and, using a numerical plume rise model, calculates the change in the plume centreline location with
distance downwind.
The immediate zone in the lee of the building is termed the cavity or near wake and is characterised
by high intensity turbulence and an area of uniform low pressure. Plume mass captured by the cavity
region is re-emitted to the far wake as a ground-level volume source. The volume source is located at
the base of the lee wall of the building but is only evaluated near the end of the near wake and beyond.
In this region, the disruption caused by the building downwash gradually fades with distance to
ambient values downwind of the building.
AERMOD has made substantial improvements in the area of plume growth rates in comparison to
ISCST3 (USEPA, 1995; 1999). ISCST3 approximates turbulence using six Pasquill-Gifford-Turner Stability
Classes and bases the resulting dispersion curves upon surface release experiments. This treatment,
however, cannot explicitly account for turbulence in the formulation. AERMOD is based on the more
realistic modern planetary boundary layer (PBL) theory which allows turbulence to vary with height.
This use of turbulence-based plume growth with height leads to a substantial advancement over the
ISCST3 treatment.
Improvements have also been made in relation to mixing height (USEPA, 1995; 1999). The treatment
of mixing height by ISCST3 is based on a single morning upper air sounding each day. AERMOD,
however, calculates mixing height on an hourly basis based on the morning upper air sounding and
the surface energy balance, accounting for the solar radiation, cloud cover, reflectivity of the ground
and the latent heat due to evaporation from the ground cover. This more advanced formulation
provides a more realistic sequence of the diurnal mixing height changes.
AERMOD also has the capability of modelling both unstable (convective) conditions and stable
(inversion) conditions. The stability of the atmosphere is defined by the sign of the sensible heat flux.
Where the sensible heat flux is positive, the atmosphere is unstable whereas when the sensible heat
flux is negative the atmosphere is defined as stable. The sensible heat flux is dependent on the net
radiation and the available surface moisture (Bowen Ratio). Under stable (inversion) conditions,
AERMOD has specific algorithms to account for plume rise under stable conditions, mechanical mixing
heights under stable conditions and vertical and lateral dispersion in the stable boundary layer.
AERMOD also contains improved algorithms for dealing with low wind speed (near calm) conditions.
As a result, AERMOD can produce model estimates for conditions when the wind speed may be less
than 1 m/s, but still greater than the instrument threshold.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
14-3
14.1.1 Meteorological Data - AERMET
AERMOD incorporates a meteorological pre-processor AERMET (USEPA, 2018). AERMET allows
AERMOD to account for changes in the plume behaviour with height. AERMET calculates hourly
boundary layer parameters for use by AERMOD, including friction velocity, Monin-Obukhov length,
convective velocity scale, convective (CBL) and stable boundary layer (SBL) height and surface heat
flux. AERMOD uses this information to calculate concentrations in a manner that accounts for changes
in dispersion rate with height, allows for a non-Gaussian plume in convective conditions, and accounts
for a dispersion rate that is a continuous function of meteorology.
The AERMET meteorological preprocessor requires the input of surface characteristics, including
surface roughness (z0), Bowen Ratio and albedo by sector and season, as well as hourly observations
of wind speed, wind direction, cloud cover, and temperature. A morning sounding from a
representative upper air station, latitude, longitude, time zone, and wind speed threshold are also
required.
Two files are produced by AERMET for input to the AERMOD dispersion model. The surface file
contains observed and calculated surface variables, one record per hour. The profile file contains the
observations made at each level of a meteorological tower, if available, or the one-level observations
taken from other representative data, one record level per hour.
From the surface characteristics (i.e. surface roughness, albedo and amount of moisture available
(Bowen Ratio)) AERMET calculates several boundary layer parameters that are important in the
evolution of the boundary layer, which, in turn, influences the dispersion of pollutants. These
parameters include the surface friction velocity, which is a measure of the vertical transport of
horizontal momentum; the sensible heat flux, which is the vertical transport of heat to/from the
surface; the Monin-Obukhov length which is a stability parameter relating the surface friction velocity
to the sensible heat flux; the daytime mixed layer height; the nocturnal surface layer height and the
convective velocity scale which combines the daytime mixed layer height and the sensible heat flux.
These parameters all depend on the underlying surface.
The values of albedo, Bowen Ratio and surface roughness depend on land-use type (e.g., urban,
cultivated land etc) and vary with seasons and wind direction. The assessment of appropriate land-
use types was carried out in line with USEPA recommendations (USEPA, 2005) and using the detailed
methodology outlined by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC, 2008).
AERMET has also been updated to allow for an adjustment of the surface friction velocity (u*) for low
wind speed stable conditions based on the work of Qian and Venkatram. Previously, the model had a
tendency to over-predict concentrations produced by near-ground sources in stable conditions.
Surface roughness
Surface roughness length is the height above the ground at which the wind speed goes to zero. Surface
roughness length is defined by the individual elements on the landscape such as trees and buildings.
In order to determine surface roughness length, the USEPA recommends that a representative length
be defined for each sector, based on an upwind area-weighted average of the land use within the
sector, by using the eight land use categories outlined by the USEPA. The inverse-distance weighted RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
14-4
surface roughness length derived from the land use classification within a radius of 1km from
Ballyhaise Meteorological Station is shown in Table A1.
Table A1 Surface Roughness based on an inverse distance weighted average of the land use within a 1km
radius of Ballyhaise Meteorological Station
Sector Area Weighted Land Use Classification Spring Summer Autumn Winter Note 1
0-360 100% Grassland 0.05 0.1 0.01 0.01
Note 1 Winter defined as periods when surfaces covered permanently by snow whereas autumn is defined as periods
when freezing conditions are common, deciduous trees are leafless, and no snow is present. Thus, for the current
location autumn more accurately defines “winter” conditions in Ireland.
Albedo
Noon-time albedo is the fraction of the incoming solar radiation that is reflected from the ground
when the sun is directly overhead. Albedo is used in calculating the hourly net heat balance at the
surface for calculating hourly values of Monin-Obuklov length. A 10km x 10km square area is drawn
around the meteorological station to determine the albedo based on a simple average for the land
use types within the area independent of both distance from the station and the near-field sector. The
classification within 10km from Ballyhaise Meteorological Station is shown in Table A2.
Table A2 Albedo based on a simple average of the land use within a 10km × 10km grid centred on Ballyhaise
Meteorological Station
Area Weighted Land Use Classification Spring Summer Autumn Winter Note 1
100% Grassland 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.20
Note 1 For the current location autumn more accurately defines “winter” conditions in Ireland.
Bowen Ratio
The Bowen ratio is a measure of the amount of moisture at the surface of the earth. The presence of
moisture affects the heat balance resulting from evaporative cooling which, in turn, affects the Monin-
Obukhov length which is used in the formulation of the boundary layer. A 10km x 10km square area
is drawn around the meteorological station to determine the Bowen Ratio based on geometric mean
of the land use types within the area independent of both distance from the station and the near-field
sector. The classification within 10km from Ballyhaise Meteorological Station is shown in Table A3.
Table A3 Bowen Ratio based on a geometric mean of the land use within a 10km × 10km grid centred on
Ballyhaise Meteorological Station
Area Weighted Land Use Classification Spring Summer Autumn Winter Note 1
100% Grassland 0.40 0.80 1 1
Note 1 For the current location autumn more accurately defines “winter” conditions in Ireland.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
AUGUST 2026
VOLUME III
APPENDICES TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
APPENDIX 15.1
SUMMARY OF RELEVANT
LEGISLATION
Stream BioEnergy Ireland Limited
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 1 of 9
15.1 Summary of Relevant Legislation
15.1.1 Historic and Archaeological Heritage and Miscellaneous Provisions Act (2023)
The Historic and Archaeological Heritage and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023 was enacted in
October 2023 and this this Act is now law. The Minister for DHLGH commenced certain provisions
in May 2024 (S.I. No. 252/2024) which relate to World Heritage Property in the State, inventories,
the protection of certain records, the promotion of heritage, and the issuing of statutory guidance.
Certain related and supporting provisions concerning implementation and enforcement are also
commenced. Further provisions in December 2024 (S.I. No. 663/2024) relate to underwater
cultural heritage and another Commencement Order in March 2025 (S.I. No. 88/2025) relates to
prohibitions, offences, defences and procedural matters. However, until the Act is fully
commenced, the National Monuments Acts and the Architectural Heritage (National Inventory)
and Historic Monuments (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act have not yet been repealed and therefore
remain in force.
The Act also contains transitional provisions which will, if necessary, enable certain aspects of the
existing National Monuments Acts 1930 to 2014 to continue in operation while successor
provisions are being brought fully into operation. An example of this would be provisions enabling
the Record of Monuments and Places to continue to have effect pending the establishment of a
new Register of Monuments.
A person performing a function under this Act shall recognise and take due account of the
following principles in performing that function:
a) that historic heritage is a non-renewable resource of great cultural and scientific
importance which, in addition to its intrinsic value, provides evidence for the development
of society and promotes public understanding and appreciation of all periods of the past;
b) that the first option to be considered should be the protection in situ of historic heritage
and that there ought to be a presumption in favour of this option;
c) that any removal or alteration of historic heritage should be accompanied by all necessary
and appropriate recording of such heritage;
d) that the Valletta Convention should be adhered to as well as any other international
treaty, to which the State is a party, the provisions of which are aimed at promoting or
securing the protection of the archaeological, architectural or other historic heritage;
e) that responsibility for the protection of historic heritage is, as a resource of benefit to all,
shared by all and, accordingly, that those permitted to remove or interfere with such
heritage should, in the normal course, bear the costs of any recording or protective work
necessitated by, or associated with, such removal or interference.
For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared that the destruction, whether in whole or in part
and by whatever means, of a monument to which general protection or special protection applies
shall not prejudice the continuation of such protection to the remainder (if any) of the monument,
including the site, surrounding area and immediate surroundings of the monument. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 2 of 9
The Historic and Archaeological Heritage and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023 will establish a
Register of Monuments which will replace and supersede the existing Record of Monuments and
Places and the Register of Historic Monuments. The Register shall include
a) prescribed monuments known to the Minister which are deemed appropriate to be
entered in the Register;
b) relevant things of a relevant interest deemed appropriate to be entered in the Register.
A prescribed monument will be a relevant thing of archaeological interest or of other relevant
interest. It may be prescribed by reference to any one or more than one of the following criteria:
(a) age, date or period (including by reference to any terminology relating to periods) that, in
the opinion of the Minister, is or has been in use in archaeology or other relevant
disciplines;
(b) morphology;
(c) condition;
(d) typology (including by reference to typologies which, in the opinion of the Minister, are
or have been in use in archaeology or other relevant disciplines);
(e) the environment in which the relevant thing is situated (including whether or not the
relevant thing is situated under water);
(f) the circumstances in which the relevant thing is found (including the manner of finding);
(g) whether the relevant thing is or is not marked or shown on any—
i. edition of any ordnance map, or
ii. map prescribed for the purposes of this paragraph.
“Relevant thing” means any of the following things, means any of the following things, whether
situated on, in or under land and whether or not attached to the surface of the land or forming
part of land and whether or not intentionally or originally in the sites where they respectively are::
a) any artificial structure, construction, deposit, feature or layer (including any building and
any burial or interment);
b) any artificially altered structure, construction, deposit, feature or layer, whether or not
natural in origin;
c) any wreck;
d) any ritual or ceremonial site;
e) any site where an historic event took place, including any other site directly associated
with that event; RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 3 of 9
f) any battlefield;
g) any site with legendary or mythological associations;
h) any feature, deposit or layer, whether or not natural in origin and whether or not
artificially altered, containing or providing information or evidence relating to the past
environment;
The Register shall be in the form of an electronic database which is easily accessible to members
of the public through public telecommunication networks. The registered monument may include
a surrounding area which is considered reasonably necessary to secure the protection of the
monument or thing.
Where a person finds, or believes that he or she has found a prescribed monument other than a
registered monument, the person shall make a preliminary report Minister or a member of An
Garda Síochána within 72 hours, or in the case of discovery in the course of licensable activity,
that it be reported to the Minister in such a manner as specified in the licence.
Special protection may be applied to a registered monument taking into account whether the
monument is, in terms of such heritage, of special or particular interest, character, integrity,
community or amenity value, whether at a local, regional, national or international level. This
includes
a) a national monument,
b) a wreck of 100 or more years old, or
c) a guardianship monument.
A person shall not carry out works at, on, in, under, to, or within the immediate surroundings of a
monument to which special protection applies, or direct or authorise the carrying out of such
works, other than under and in accordance with a licence. This shall be deemed to apply to a
registered monument in the ownership or guardianship of the Minister or a local authority where
special protection does not otherwise apply to the monument.
General protection applies to
a) a registered monument to which special protection does not apply, and
b) a prescribed monument (not being a registered monument).
A person shall not carry out works at, on, in, under, to, or within the immediate surroundings of a
monument to which general protection applies, or direct or authorise the carrying out of such
works, other than under and in accordance with a licence.
A person shall not, except under and in accordance with a licence, do any of the following at, on,
in, over, under or in the vicinity of a wreck 100 or more years old, a registered monument or
prescribed monument which is under water, or an archaeological object which is underwater:
a) dive or direct or authorise diving; RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 4 of 9
b) use or possess, or direct or authorise the use or possession of, diving, survey or salvage
equipment;
c) dump or deposit, or direct or authorise the dumping or deposition of, any thing whether
or not it interferes with or causes damage to the thing;
d) interfere, remove or tamper in any way (whether with or without causing damage) with
the thing.
The Minister may prescribe a licence, consent, approval, permission or other authorisation where
a) a licence, consent, approval, permission or other authorisation is required to be granted,
issued or given under an enactment (not being the Act of 2000) for works to be carried
out which may require an EIA, and
b) the Minister is satisfied that such works are capable of being at, on, in, under, to, or within
the immediate surroundings of a monument, and it is reasonable and proportionate to do
so and compatible with the protection of monuments,
The Minister shall consider whether or not the relevant works in respect of which they should be
made subject to conditions and may require all or any of the following:
a) the carrying out of an assessment of heritage interest or potential including an assessment
by way of archaeological excavation, use of detection devices or any form of photographic
or geophysical survey equipment or any other appropriate form of survey or inspection;
b) the recording of the monument as a whole or any part or aspect of it (including its
immediate surroundings) or any objects on, in, under or within it or its immediate
surroundings including recording by way of archaeological excavation, use of detection
devices or any form of photographic or geophysical survey equipment or any other
appropriate form of survey or inspection;
c) the carrying out of any form of monitoring (including archaeological monitoring),
supervision or inspection;
d) the salvaging, collection or protection of any part of the monument (including its
immediate surroundings) or any object on, in, under or within it or its immediate
surroundings and, where appropriate, the preparation of such part or object for
deposition in an appropriate museum or other site for such deposition;
e) the specification of the time period when the relevant works are to be carried out;
f) that the relevant works be done in a specified manner or be funded or carried out by a
specified person or a person falling within a specified category of persons.
The Minister shall make a screening determination for EIA in respect of the proposed relevant
works on the basis of the information provided by the applicant. The Minister shall ensure that,
before the application is determined, proposed relevant works likely to have significant effects on RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 5 of 9
the environment by virtue of their nature, size or location (or any combination thereof) are made
subject to an EIA. The applicant shall in this case submit to the Minister an EIAR in respect of the
proposed relevant works, having regard to guidelines issued by the Minister.
The Minister may appoint himself or herself, or with the consent of a local authority, appoint the
local authority as the guardian of a registered monument to which special protection applies. A
national monument under the Act of 1930 will be deemed both a registered monument and a
guardianship monument.
Any archaeological object where such object has no known owner shall be vested in the State. An
owner or owner exception of land, not being the State, or a finder of an archaeological object is
deemed not to acquire any rights of ownership to an archaeological object found on, in or under
the land.
Where a person finds, or believes that he or she has found an archaeological object, the person
shall make a preliminary report of the finding of the thing to the Board of the National Museum
of Ireland or a member of An Garda Síochána within 72 hours, in the case of licensable activity, to
the Minister or the Board in such manner as is specified in the licence. A person, other than a
relevant person, shall not interfere with or remove a relevant archaeological object, or cause it to
be interfered with or removed, except under and in accordance with a licence, or where there is
reasonable grounds to believe that it is necessary to remove the thing from the site where he or
she found it for the purposes of the safekeeping of the thing.
“Architectural heritage” means—
a) structures and buildings together with their settings and attendant grounds, fixtures and
fittings,
b) groups of structures and buildings referred to in paragraph (a), and
c) sites,
that are of archaeological, architectural, cultural, historic, scientific, social or technical interest;
A person shall not, other than under and in accordance with a licence—
a) undertake or carry out, or direct or authorise the undertaking or carrying out of,
archaeological excavation,
b) … archaeological monitoring,
c) search for or collect… archaeological objects lying exposed on the surface of land, whether
or not any such object is known to be on, in or under that land,
d) search for… wrecks one hundred or more years old or archaeological objects or prescribed
monuments, or other relevant things of archaeological interest, situated on, in or under
the sea bed or land covered by water…
e) be in possession of a detection device in, at, on, over or above, or within the immediate
surroundings of, a registered monument or a wreck one hundred or more years old, or RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 6 of 9
f) use… a detection device for the purpose of identifying, locating (including searching for),
investigating, surveying or recording any archaeological object or monument or relevant
thing of archaeological interest…
Anything done by a person in the course of his or her employment shall, in any proceedings
brought under this Act, be treated as done also by that person’s employer, whether or not it was
done with the employer’s knowledge or approval. Anything done by a person as agent for another
person, with the authority (whether express or implied and whether precedent or subsequent) of
that other person shall, in any proceedings brought under this Act, be treated as done also by that
other person.
15.1.2 National Monuments Legislation (1930-2014)
The National Monument Act, 1930 (as amended) provides the formal legal mechanism to protect
monuments in Ireland. Protection of a monument is provided via:
Record of Monuments and Places (RMP);
National Monument in the ownership or guardianship of the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Regional,
Rural & Gaeltacht Affairs or a Local Authority;
National Monument subject to a Preservation Order (or temporary Preservation Order);
Register of Historic Monuments (RHM).
The definition of a monument is specified as:
any artificial or partly artificial building, structure or erection or group of such buildings, structures
or erections;
any artificial cave, stone or natural product, whether forming part of the ground, that has been
artificially carved, sculptured or worked upon or which (where it does not form part of the place
where it is) appears to have been purposely put or arranged in position;
any, or any part of any, prehistoric or ancient tomb, grave or burial deposit, or (ii) ritual, industrial
or habitation site; and
any place comprising the remains or traces of any such building, structure or erection, any cave,
stone or natural product or any such tomb, grave, burial deposit or ritual, industrial or habitation
site.
Under Section 14 of the Principal Act (1930):
It shall be unlawful...
to demolish or remove wholly or in part or to disfigure, deface, alter, or in any manner injure or
interfere with any such national monument without or otherwise than in accordance with the
consent hereinafter mentioned (a licence issued by the Office of Public Works National
Monuments Branch), RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 7 of 9
or
to excavate, dig, plough or otherwise disturb the ground within, around, or in the proximity to any
such national monument without or otherwise than in accordance...
Under Amendment to Section 23 of the Principal Act (1930):
A person who finds an archaeological object shall, within four days after the finding, make a report
of it to a member of the Garda Síochána...or the Director of the National Museum...
The latter is of relevance to any finds made during a watching brief.
In the 1994 Amendment of Section 12 of the Principal Act (1930), all the sites and ‘places’ recorded
by the Sites and Monuments Record of the Office of Public Works are provided with a new status
in law. This new status provides a level of protection to the listed sites that is equivalent to that
accorded to ‘registered’ sites [Section 8(1), National Monuments Amendment Act 1954] as
follows:
The Commissioners shall establish and maintain a record of monuments and places where they
believe there are monuments and the record shall be comprised of a list of monuments and such
places and a map or maps showing each monument and such place in respect of each county in
the State.
The Commissioners shall cause to be exhibited in a prescribed manner in each county the list and
map or maps of the county drawn up and publish in a prescribed manner information about when
and where the lists and maps may be consulted.
In addition, when the owner or occupier (not being the Commissioners) of a monument or place
which has been recorded, or any person proposes to carry out, or to cause or permit the carrying
out of, any work at or in relation to such monument or place, he shall give notice in writing of his
proposal to carry out the work to the Commissioners and shall not, except in the case of urgent
necessity and with the consent of the Commissioners, commence the work for a period of two
months after having given the notice.
The National Monuments Amendment Act enacted in 2004 provides clarification in relation to the
division of responsibilities between the Minister of Environment, Heritage and Local Government,
Finance and Arts, Sports and Tourism together with the Commissioners of Public Works. The
Minister of Environment, Heritage and Local Government will issue directions relating to
archaeological works and will be advised by the National Monuments Section and the National
Museum of Ireland. The Act gives discretion to the Minister of Environment, Heritage and Local
Government to grant consent or issue directions in relation to road developments (Section 49 and
51) approved by An Bord Pleanála and/or in relation to the discovery of National Monuments.
14A. (1) The consent of the Minister under section 14 of this Act and any further consent or licence
under any other provision of the National Monuments Acts 1930 to 2004 shall not be required
where the works involved are connected with an approved road development.
14A. (2) Any works of an archaeological nature that are carried out in respect of an approved road
development shall be carried out in accordance with the directions of the Minister, which
directions shall be issued following consultation by the minister with the Director of the National
Museum of Ireland. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 8 of 9
Subsection 14A (4) Where a national monument has been discovered to which subsection (3) of
this section relates, then the road authority carrying out the road development shall report the
discovery to the Minister subject to subsection (7) of this sectio n, and pending any directions by
the Minister under paragraph (d) of this subsection, no works which would interfere with the
monument shall be carried out, except works urgently required to secure its preservation carried
out in accordance with such measures as may be specified by the Minister.
The Minister will consult with the Director of the National Museum of Ireland for a period not
longer than 14 days before issuing further directions in relation to the national monument.
The Minister will not be restricted to archaeological considerations alone, but will also consider
the wider public interest.
15.1.3 Architectural Heritage (National Inventory) and Historic Monuments (Miscellaneous
Provisions) Act, 1999
This Act provides for the establishment of a national inventory of architectural heritage and
historic monuments.
Section 1 of the act defines “architectural heritage” as:
(a) all structures and buildings together with their settings and attendant grounds, fixtures and
fittings,
(b) groups of such structures and buildings, and,
(c) sites
which are of architectural, historical, archaeological, artistic, cultural, scientific, social or technical
interest.
Section 2 of the Act states that the Minister (for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands) shall
establish the NIAH, determining its form and content, defining the categories of architectural
heritage, and specifying to which category each entry belongs. The information contained within
the inventory will be made available to planning authorities, having regard to the security and
privacy of both property and persons involved.
Section 3 of the Act states that the Minister may appoint officers, who may in turn request access
to premises listed in the inventory from the occupiers of these buildings. The officer is required to
inform the occupier of the building why entry is necessary, and in the event of a refusal, can apply
for a warrant to enter the premises.
Section 4 of the Act states that obstruction of an officer or a refusal to comply with requirements of
entry will result in the owner or occupier being guilty of an offence.
Section 5 of the Act states that sanitary authorities who carry out works on a monument covered
by this Act will as far as possible preserve the monument with the proviso that its condition is not
a danger to any person or property, and that the sanitation authority will inform the Minister that
the works have been carried out. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 9 of 9
The provisions in the Act are in addition to and not a substitution for provisions of the National
Monument Act (1930–94), and the protection of monuments in the National Monuments Act is
extended to the monuments covered by the Architectural Heritage (National Inventory) and
Historic Monuments (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (1999).
15.1.4 The Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1999
The Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1999, which came into force on 1st January
2000, provides for the inclusion of protected structures into the planning authorities’ development
plans and sets out statutory regulations regarding works affecting such structures, thereby giving
greater statutory protection to buildings. All structures listed in the development plan are now referred
to as Protected Structures and enjoy equal statutory protection. Under the 1999 Act the entire
structure is protected, including a structures interior, exterior, the land lying within the curtilage of the
protected structure and other structures within that curtilage. This Act was subsequently repealed and
replaced by the Planning and Development Act, 2000, where the conditions relating to the protection
of architectural heritage are set out in Part IV of the Act.
15.1.4.1 Protected Structures, Curtilage & Attendant Grounds
A protected structure is defined in the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act 2000 as any
structure or specified part of a structure, which is included in the planning authorities’ Record of
Protected Structures (RPS). Section 57 (1) of the 2000 Act states that “…the carrying out of works to a
protected structure, or a proposed protected structure, shall be exempted development only if those
works would not materially affect the character of
(a) the structure, or
(b) any element of the structure, which contributes to its special architectural, historical,
archaeological, artistic, cultural, scientific, social or technical interest.
By definition, a protected structure includes the land lying within the curtilage of the protected
structure and other structures within that curtilage and their interiors. The notion of curtilage is not
defined by legislation, but according to Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning
Authorities (2004) and for the purposes of this report it can be taken to be the parcel of land
immediately associated with that structure and which is (or was) in use for the purpose of the
structure.
The attendant grounds of a structure are lands outside the curtilage of the structure but which
are associated with the structure and are intrinsic to its function, setting and/or appreciation. The
attendant grounds of a country house could include the entire demesne, or pleasure grounds, and
any structures or features within it such as follies, plantations, lakes etc.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
AUGUST 2026
VOLUME III
APPENDICES TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
APPENDIX 15.2
EXCERPTS OF COUNTY
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Stream BioEnergy Ireland Limited
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 1 of 3
15.2 Excerpts of County Monaghan County Development Plan (2025-2031) –
Chapter 6: Heritage, Conservation and landscape
15.2.1 Protected Structure Objectives
BHO 1: To protect and conserve all structures included in the Record of Protected Structures and
to encourage the sympathetic re-use and long-term viability of such structures without detracting
from their special interest and character.
BHO 2: To contribute, as appropriate, towards the protection of archaeological heritage, in
particular by implementing the relevant provisions of the Act 2000 (as amended).
BHO 3: The Council aims to conserve the built fabric of the Ulster Canal, Great Northern Railway,
historic mills and other industrial heritage structures throughout the county and planning
permission will be required for their removal or alteration.
BHO 4: To support and promote best practice conservation in works to Protected Structures and
to encourage the use of tradespeople and professionals trained in the use of traditional skills,
materials and building techniques.
BHO 5: To encourage the retention, rehabilitation and reuse of older buildings that are not
Protected Structures in recognition of their contribution both individually and collectively to the
unique character, heritage and identity of local areas and the County.
BHO 6: To protect vernacular architecture, such as thatched cottages, farm buildings and old
school-houses in the County for the benefit of future generations.
15.2.2 Protected Structure Policies
BHP 1: To contribute towards the protection of architectural heritage by requiring that proposals
for works shall be carried out in accordance with best practice, the legislative provisions of the Act
2000 (as amended) in relation to architectural heritage, and the policy guidance contained in the
Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines 2011 (and any new or updated/superseding
versions).
BHP 2: To review, maintain and update the Record of Protected Structures in consultation with
the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage and to encourage the sympathetic conservation,
renewal and repair of these structures.
BHP 3: Planning permission for the demolition or inappropriate alteration of any protected
structure shall not be granted except in exceptional circumstances and in accordance with Section
57(10)(b) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended).
BHP 4: To ensure that any new development proposed to or in the vicinity of a Protected Structure
will complement and be sympathetic to the structure and its setting in terms of its design, scale,
height, massing and use of materials and to resist any development which is likely to impact on
the building’s special interest and/or any views of such buildings and their setting. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 2 of 3
BHP 5: To facilitate the retention and sympathetic re-use of protected structures and their settings
in circumstances where the proposal is compatible with their character and special interest. In
certain instances, land use zoning restrictions and site development standards may be relaxed to
secure the conservation and reuse of a protected structure and to provide a viable use for any
building which is at risk by virtue of being derelict or vacant.
BHP 6: To use the provisions of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) and the
Derelict Sites Act 1990 to prevent the loss or deterioration of the County’s Architectural Heritage.
15.2.3 Architectural Conservation Areas Objectives
ACO 1: To carry out a comprehensive review of the Architectural Conservation Areas within the
County during the lifetime of this Plan.
ACO 2: To prepare character appraisals for each of the designated Architectural Conservation
Areas in the County to guide new development proposals and environmental improvements by
identifying the character of each Architectural Conservation Areas and designing objectives to
ensure that their distinctiveness and special interest are preserved and enhanced.
ACO 3: To support and promote best practice conservation in works to structures and buildings
within Architectural Conservation Areas and to encourage the use of tradespeople and
professionals trained in the use of traditional skills, materials and building techniques.
15.2.4 Architectural Conservation Areas Policies
ACP 1: To resist development that would adversely affect the character and appearance of the
Architectural Conservation Areas. New development or alterations to existing building(s) in an
Architectural Conservation Areas shall reflect the historic architecture in terms of scale, design
and materials used. Regard shall be had to any objectives contained in the character appraisals
(where applicable).
ACP 2: To implement and comply with the relevant guidance for Architectural Conservation Areas
in relation to proposals for development.
15.2.5 Protected Monuments and Places Objectives
PMPO 1: To safeguard and enhance archaeological monuments, town defences, medieval
structures, historic graveyards, industrial heritage, battlefields, national monuments, and heritage
sites that offer tangible historical evidence.
PMPO 2: To encourage and facilitate suitable forms of access, including disabled access, to
archaeological sites and/or the provision of appropriate signage, interpretive material, and virtual
access options.
PMPO 3: To promote understanding and appreciation of archaeological and cultural heritage.
PMPO 4: To identify the built and archaeological heritage in Monaghan County Council ownership
and those at risk from climate change, and to undertake climate change vulnerability assessments
for the historic structures and sites in the County where necessary. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 3 of 3
PMPO 5: To contribute, as appropriate, towards the protection of archaeological heritage, in
particular by implementing the relevant provisions of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as
amended) and the National Monuments Act, 1930 (as amended).
PMPO 6: To identify Archaeological sites in the Plan area to which public access could be provided
or improved, where appropriate in consultation with landowners.
PMPO 7: To contribute, as appropriate, towards the protection of archaeological sites and
monuments and their settings, archaeological objects and underwater archaeological sites that
are listed in:
a) Those contained within the Sites and Monuments Record maintained by the Department
of Housing, Local Government and Heritage.
b) Those contained within the Register of Historic Monuments.
c) National Monuments subject to Preservation Orders under the National Monuments Acts
and those in ownership or guardianship of the Minister for Housing, Local Government
and Heritage.
d) Archaeological objects within the meaning of the National Monuments Acts.
e) Archaeological features not yet identified but which may be impacted on by development.
f) Those which have been identified subsequent to the publication of the Record of
Monuments and Places.
15.2.6 Protected Monuments and Places Policies
PMP 1: Development adjacent to an archaeological monument or site will only be acceptable
where it is sited in a manner which minimises the impact on the monument and its setting.
Development which is likely to have an adverse impact upon an archaeological monument or site
or its setting shall be resisted.
PMP 2: To protect archaeological sites and monuments which are listed in the in Appendix 4 [of
the County Development Plan], Recorded Monuments, (and any subsequent additions by the
National Monuments Service) and to require their preservation in situ (or at a minimum
preservation by record) through the planning process.
PMP 3: To protect the setting of archaeological sites and monuments which are listed in the
Record of Monuments and Places in Appendix 4 (and any subsequent additions by the National
Monuments Service) from being adversely impacted upon, co-operating with all of the
recommendations of statutory bodies in the achievement of this objective.
15.2.7 Designed Landscapes Policies
DLP 1: To ensure that any new development will not adversely affect the site, setting or views to
and from historic houses, gardens and designed landscapes.
DLP 2: To require that any proposals for new development in the vicinity of historic houses or
demesnes landscapes are accompanied by an evaluation of the impact of the development on the
landscape, designed views and vistas to /from such a site.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
AUGUST 2026
VOLUME III
APPENDICES TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
APPENDIX 15.3
GLOSSARY OF IMPACTS
Stream BioEnergy Ireland Limited
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 1 of 7
15.3 Glossary of Impacts
15.3.1 Types of Impacts
Potential impacts on the receiving archaeological and cultural heritage environment can be
described as direct physical impacts, indirect physical impacts, and impacts on setting (i.e. the
surroundings in which an archaeological / cultural heritage receptor can be experienced (Historic
England 2017)).
Direct physical impacts are those development activities that directly cause damage to the fabric
of an archaeological / cultural heritage receptor. Typically, these activities are related to
construction works; e.g. they could include excavation of foundations, earthmoving / site
preparation creation of access roads, cycle paths, and the excavation of service trenches.
Indirect physical impacts are those processes, triggered by development activity, that lead to the
degradation of archaeological / cultural heritage receptors.
Impacts on the setting of archaeological / cultural heritage receptors describe how the presence
of a development changes the surroundings of an receptor in such a way that it affects (positively
or negatively) the heritage significance of that receptor. Visual impacts are most commonly
encountered. Such impacts may be encountered at all stages in the life cycle of a development,
but they are only likely to be considered significant during the prolonged operational life of the
development.
Types of impact (now referred to as effects), as defined by the EPA Guidelines on Information to
be Contained in Environmental Impact Assessment Reports (hereafter referred to as the EPA
Guidelines) (EPA 2022):
▪ Cumulative Impact – The addition of many minor or insignificant effects, including
effects of other projects, to create larger, more significant, effects.
▪ Do Nothing Impact – The environment as it would be in the future should the subject
project not be carried out.
▪ Indeterminable Impact – When the full consequences of a change in the environment
cannot be described.
▪ Irreversible Impact – When the character, distinctiveness, diversity or reproductive
capacity of an environment is permanently lost.
▪ Residual Impact – The degree of environmental change that will occur after the proposed
mitigation measures have taken effect.
▪ ‘Worst case’ Impact – The effects arising from a project in the case where mitigation
measures substantially fail.
▪ Indirect or Secondary Impacts – Effects on the environment, which are not a direct result
of the project, often produced away from the project site or because of a complex
pathway. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 2 of 7
15.3.2 Quality of Impacts
Impacts on the archaeological and cultural heritage environment are assessed in terms of their
quality, i.e. positive, negative, neutral:
▪ Negative Impact: A change that will detract from or permanently remove an
archaeological monument / cultural heritage receptor from the landscape;
▪ Neutral Impact: A change that does not affect archaeological and cultural heritage; and
▪ Positive Impact: A change that improves or enhances the setting of an archaeological /
cultural heritage receptor.
15.3.3 Duration of Impacts
The duration of an impact can be as follows:
▪ Temporary Impact Impact lasting for one year or less;
▪ Short-term Impacts Impact lasting one to seven years;
▪ Medium-term Impact Impact lasting seven to fifteen years;
▪ Long-term Impact Impact lasting fifteen to sixty years; and
▪ Permanent Impact Impact lasting over sixty years.
15.3.4 Assessment Methodology
15.3.4.1 Introduction
This assessment methodology has regard to the EPA assessment criteria (EPA 2022) and to the
and to the Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII), (2024) Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Impact
Assessment of TII National Road and Greenway Projects (‘TII Guidelines’ hereafter).
Archaeological and cultural heritage sites are a non-renewable resource and such receptors are
generally considered to be location sensitive. In this context, any change to their environment,
such as construction activity and ground disturbance works, could adversely affect these sites.
15.3.4.2 Significance / Sensitivity Criteria
In accordance with EPA Guidelines (EPA 2022), the context, character, significance and sensitivity
of each archaeological / cultural heritage receptor requires evaluation and the significance of the
impact is then determined by considering the significance / sensitivity of the receptor and the
predicted magnitude of the impact.
In accordance with the TII Guidelines (TII 2024), the significance criteria used to evaluate an
archaeological site, monument or complex take into account the character and integrity of the
receptor and any available data regarding it. This can be ascertained by looking at the following
criteria (compiled by Courtney Deery Heritage Consultancy Ltd, based on standard authorities and
guidelines as listed in Section 15.3.1.2 of Chapter 15): the existing status (level of protection),
condition or preservation, documentation or historical significance, group value, rarity, visibility
in the landscape, fragility or vulnerability, and amenity value (Table 1). While these criteria
contribute to the significance of a feature they should not be treated as definitive. These criteria RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 3 of 7
are indicators which contribute to a wider judgement based on the individual circumstances of
these archaeological / cultural heritage receptors.
Table 1: Explanation of Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Receptor Assessment Criteria
Criteria Explanation
Existing status The level of protection associated with an archaeological / cultural heritage receptor is an
important consideration.
Condition /
Preservation / Integrity
The survival of an archaeological / cultural heritage receptor’s archaeological potential both
above and below ground is an important consideration and should be assessed in relation to
its present condition and surviving features. Well-preserved sites should be highlighted, this
assessment can only be based on a field inspection.
Documentation / Data The significance of a an archaeological / cultural heritage receptor may be enhanced by the
existence of records of previous investigations or contemporary documentation supported by
written evidence or historic maps. Sites with a definite historical association or an example of
a notable event or person should be highlighted.
Group Value /
Character
The value of a single an archaeological / cultural heritage receptor may be greatly enhanced
by its association with related contemporary monuments or with monuments from different
periods indicating an extended time presence in any specific area. In some cases it may be
preferable to protect the complete group, including associated and adjacent land, rather than
to protect isolated monuments within that group.
Rarity / Character The rarity of some an archaeological / cultural heritage receptor types can be a central factor
affecting response strategies for development, whatever the condition of the individual
feature. It is important to recognise sites that have a limited distribution.
Visibility in the
landscape / Character
/ Integrity
Archaeological / cultural heritage receptors that are highly visible in the landscape have a
heightened physical presence. The inter-visibility between monuments may also be explored
in this category.
Fragility / Vulnerability
/ Integrity
It is important to assess the level of threat to an archaeological / cultural heritage receptor
from erosion, natural degradation, agricultural activity, land clearance, neglect, careless
treatment or development.
Amenity Value /
Character
Regard should be taken of the existing and potential amenity value of a an archaeological /
cultural heritage receptor.
An evaluation of the significance / sensitivity of archaeological / cultural heritage receptors is
based on their designation and on the extent to which these receptors contribute to the
archaeological or cultural heritage environment, though their individual or group qualities, either
directly or potentially. Table 2 presents the scale of significance / sensitivity together with criteria
as per the TII Guidelines. Undesignated archaeological or cultural heritage sites can be assigned a
low, medium or high sensitivity value, taking into consideration the criteria cited in Table 1 (e.g.
condition, character, integrity or preservation, data, group value, rarity, visibility in the landscape,
fragility or vulnerability, and amenity value).
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 4 of 7
Table 2: Significance / Sensitivity Criteria
Sensitivity /
Significance
Criteria
Very High Designated Built Heritage Receptors rated as being of international importance, including associated
historic gardens and designed landscapes.
Designated features of international intangible heritage value.
Designated historic landscapes of international value.
National Monuments.
Other designated Cultural Heritage Receptors of international importance.
World Heritage Properties.
High Architectural Conservation Areas.
Built Heritage Receptors rated as being of national importance by the NIAH, including associated
historic gardens and designed landscapes.
Historic landscapes (designated or undesignated) of outstanding interest and of demonstrable
national value. These will be well-preserved historic landscapes exhibiting considerable coherence,
time-depth, or other critical factors.
Other designated or undesignated Cultural Heritage Receptors of demonstrable national importance.
Places or features of national intangible heritage value.
Protected Structures.
Recorded Monuments (or sites and monuments scheduled for inclusion on the RMP) of high quality
and importance.
Sites and monuments subject to a Preservation Order or Temporary Preservation Order.
Undesignated receptors of high quality and importance.
World Heritage Tentative List properties.
Medium Built Heritage Receptors rated as being of regional importance by the NIAH, including associated
historic gardens and designed landscapes.
Historic landscapes of regional value (designated or undesignated).
Historic townscapes or built-up areas with demonstrable historic integrity in their buildings or built
settings (e.g. including street furniture and other structures).
Other designated or undesignated receptors of regional Cultural Heritage importance.
Places or features of regional intangible heritage value.
Recorded Monuments (or sites and monuments scheduled for inclusion on the RMP).
Low Built Heritage Receptors rated as being of local importance by the NIAH, including associated historic
gardens and designed landscapes.
Historic landscapes whose value is limited by poor preservation and/or poor survival of contextual
associations.
Historic townscape or built-up areas of limited historic integrity in their buildings, or built settings
(e.g. including street furniture and other structures).
Other designated or undesignated Cultural Heritage Receptors of local importance.
Places or features of local intangible heritage value.
Receptors compromised by poor preservation of contextual associations with inherent, albeit limited,
Cultural Heritage value.
Undesignated historic buildings of modest quality in their fabric or historical association.
Negligible Receptors/landscapes with very little surviving Cultural Heritage interest.
15.3.4.3 Defining Receptor Types
15.3.4.3.1 National Monument
The National Monuments Act (1930, Section 2) defines a ‘National Monument’ as
‘a monument or the remains of a monument the preservation of which is a matter of national
importance by reason of the historical, architectural, traditional, artistic or archaeological
interest attaching thereto’. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 5 of 7
The National Monuments legislation legally protects access to and the visual amenity associated
with National Monuments and requires consent from the Minister for invasive works in their
vicinity.
15.3.4.3.2 Recorded Monuments
The primary source of information for archaeology is the Record of Monuments and Places (RMP)
maintained by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage (DHLGH). The RMP
documents known upstanding archaeological monuments, their original location (in cases of
destroyed monuments) and the position of possible sites in rural areas identified as cropmarks on
vertical aerial photographs dating to before 1700 AD (with some later ones also being included).
It is based on a comprehensive range of published and publicly available documentary and
cartographic sources.
For the purpose of the assessment, the Sites and Monument Record (SMR) data and mapping as
updated by the Archaeological Survey of Ireland (ASI) (www.archaeology.ie) was examined so it
could be used within an interactive identification and mapping system developed for Proposed
Project.
15.3.4.3.3 Zones of Notification
Zones of notification (ZoN) around RMP / SMR sites are provided on the statutory RMP mapping
and on the non-statutory Historic Environment Viewer of the ASI. a Section 12 Notification of
Works will be required. Under Section 12 of the 1994 amendment of the National Monuments
Act, all monuments listed on the 'Record of Monuments and Places' (RMP) are given a minimum
level of protection in the form of a requirement to give two months’ notice in writing to the
Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage of intention to interfere. In this case, a
description of the proposed works will have to be forwarded to the Minister in order to
demonstrate that the monument in question will remain unaffected by the said works. These can
also indicate areas within the urban and rural landscape that possess the potential to contain
archaeological remains due to the settlement history of a place and or to the presence of
topographical features such as rivers, lakes and high, defendable ground.
15.3.4.3.4 Non-Designated Sites
Newly identified archaeological sites that have been confirmed through archaeological
investigation (monitoring, testing, excavation, geophysical survey) are considered to be of
medium importance. Such sites are undesignated as they have yet to be added to the SMR.
Potential or undesignated archaeological sites identified through aerial Images, historic mapping,
stray finds are considered to be of low sensitivity, as they have yet to be ground-truthed through
archaeological investigation. Similarly, undisturbed greenfield areas and riverine environs, which
have an inherent but as yet unproven archaeological potential are considered to be of low
sensitivity.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 6 of 7
15.3.4.4 Magnitude of Impact
When assessing the impact magnitude, the following criteria need to be considered:
▪ Extent – size, scale and spatial distributions of the impact;
▪ Duration – period of time over which the impact will occur;
▪ Frequency – how often the impact will occur; and
▪ Context – how will the extent, duration and frequency contrast with the accepted
baseline conditions (see Table 2 which explains the sensitivity criteria).
Table 3: Magnitude of Effect
Impact Magnitude Criteria
Very High Major alteration to, or complete loss of, a Cultural Heritage Receptor. Effects likely to be
experienced at a very large scale; considered permanent and irreversible.
High Notable or long-term change to a Cultural Heritage Receptor.
Medium Moderate or long-term change over a restricted area or a moderate change to a
Cultural Heritage Receptor.
Low Minor, short- or medium-term change over a restricted area or a minor change to a Cultural
Heritage Receptor.
Negligible Imperceptible change to a Cultural Heritage Receptor.
15.3.4.5 Significance of Effect
The likely significance of effect is determined by considering the baseline rating (importance) of
the receptor upon which there is an impact and the magnitude of the effect (Image 1). The effect
significance is defined as Imperceptible, Not Significant, Slight, Moderate, Significant, Very
Significant, or Profound (Table 4 and Image 1). RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Page 7 of 7
Image 1: Chart showing typical classifications of the significance of effects, from the EPA
Guidelines (Figure 3.5, EPA 2022)
Table 4: Defining significance of impacts.
Impact Definition
Profound An effect which obliterates a Cultural Heritage Receptor of high or very high importance.
Very Significant An effect which, by its character, magnitude, duration or intensity considerably alters most of an
important aspect of the Cultural Heritage Receptor.
Significant An effect which, by its character, magnitude, duration or intensity alters an important aspect of the
Cultural Heritage Receptor.
Moderate An effect that alters the character of the Cultural Heritage Receptor in a manner that is consistent
with existing and emerging baseline trends.
Slight An effect which causes noticeable changes in the character of the Cultural Heritage Receptor without
affecting its importance.
Not Significant An effect which causes noticeable changes in the character of the Cultural Heritage Receptor but
without significant consequences.
Imperceptible An effect capable of measurement but without significant consequences.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
AUGUST 2026
VOLUME III
APPENDICES TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
APPENDIX 15.4
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY REPORT
Stream BioEnergy Ireland Limited
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY
REPORT
Maghernakelly Townland, Drum,
Cootehill,
County Monaghan
J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd.
124 Oaklawn West
Leixlip
County Kildare
www.jmlsurveys.com
01 615 4647
Licence Number: 24R0379
Date:
27/09/2024
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
. . . . . . .
SURVEY SUMMARY SHEET
MAGHERNAKELLY, DRUM, COUNTY MONAGHAN
Site Name Maghernakelly,
County Monaghan JML Ref No. 24036
Townland Maghernakelly Licence No. 24R0379
County County Monaghan Licence Holder Joanna Leigh
ITM (centre) E658925, N818430 Purpose Pre-planning Investigation
Client CDHC Ltd. Reference No. NA
Ground
Conditions
The site is located on a steep north facing slope. The fields were under pasture at
the time of survey.
Survey Type Detailed gradiometer survey totalling c.6 hectares.
Summary
Two adjacent areas of potential archaeological interest have been identified. The areas comprise of isolated
responses within areas of increased magnetic response. Although it is possible that these reflect more recent
activity, it is equally possible that they represent archaeological pits comprising of burnt material or
archaeological burnt spreads.
A faint linear trend runs through Area A and most likely represents a former field division. Along this there are
two isolated responses and associated linear trends. They form a vague rectilinear pattern, and it is possible
that plough damaged archaeological remains are represented here. However, it is equally likely that they are
more recent in origin, perhaps contemporary with the former field division. Archaeological interpretation is
tentative.
In Area B, two isolated responses have been identified immediately adjacent to the existing field boundary.
The responses have a magnetic signature indicative of short ditch-type features. However, their proximity to
the existing field boundary makes interpretation unclear. These may result from more recent activity.
Broad responses are evident in Areas A and B. These are interpreted as natural in origin, most likely reflecting
variations within the sub-soil. They are not considered to be of archaeological interest.
Fieldwork
Date 17th-19th September 2024
Report Date 27/09/2024 Report Author Joanna Leigh
J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd.
124 Oaklawn West,
Leixlip, Co. Kildare
Tel: 01 615 4647
Mobile: 0879062729
www.jmlsurveys.com RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Contents
1. Introduction 1
2. Survey ground conditions and further information 1
3. Survey Methodology 1
4. Data Display 2
5. Survey Results 3
6. Discussion & Conclusion 4
7. Technical Information 5
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Geophysical Survey Maghernakelly, Drum, County Monaghan
________________________________________________________________________________________________
J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 1 27/09/2024
Geophysical Survey Report
Maghernakelly, Drum, County Monaghan
1 Introduction
1.1 A geophysical survey has been conducted by J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. at a site in
the townland of Maghernakelly, Drum, Cootehill, County Monaghan. This survey
forms part of a wider pre-planning investigation by Courtney Derry Heritage
Consultancy Ltd.
1.2 The survey application area is located within two fields (Areas A and B) in the
townland of Maghernakelly, County Monaghan. The R189 road forms the eastern
boundary of the application area. Clones is located 10km to the northwest and
Cootehill is 4km to the southeast. Figure 1 presents the site location with a survey
location plan in Figure 2, at a scale of 1:2,000.
1.3 There are no recorded monuments within the application area. A recorded hilltop
enclosure (MO022-008) is located to the immediate southwest. This is depicted as
a large oval embanked enclosure on the 1834 edition of the OS 6-inch map. Other
recorded monuments in the vicinity include a ringfort and souterrain site (MO022-
007), and another ringfort (MO022-009). The location of the monuments is presented
in Figure 1.
1.4 The main aim of the survey was to identify any geophysical responses that may
represent the remains of unknown archaeology within the application area. A
detailed gradiometer survey was conducted under licence 24R0379, issued by the
Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage.
2 Survey Ground Conditions and Further Information
2.1 The application area is contained within two fields with a dominant north facing slope.
Ground conditions were suitable, with the fields comprising of short pasture at the
time of survey.
2.2 A series of electricity poles runs through both fields. These have resulted in localised
magnetic disturbance, evident in the survey results, but have not affected the overall
interpretation.
3 Survey Methodology
3.1 A detailed gradiometer survey detects subtle variations in the local magnetic field
and measurements are recorded in nano-Tesla (nT). Some archaeological features RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Geophysical Survey Maghernakelly, Drum, County Monaghan
________________________________________________________________________________________________
J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 2 27/09/2024
such as ditches, large pits and fired features have an enhanced magnetic signal and
can be detected through recorded survey.
3.2 Data was collected with a Bartington Grad 601-2 instrument. This is a specifically
designed gradiometer for use in archaeological prospection. The gradiometer
operates with a dual sensor capacity making survey fast and effective.
3.3 The instrument is calibrated in the field to ensure a constant high quality of data.
Extremely sensitive, these instruments can detect variations in soil magnetism to
0.01nT, affording diverse application throughout a variety of archaeological, soil
morphological and geological conditions.
3.4 All data was collected in ‘zigzag’ traverses. Grid orientation was positioned to best
facilitate data collection and remained constant throughout the survey areas. Data
was collected with a sample interval of 0.25m and a traverse interval of 1m. The
survey grid was set out using a GPS VRS unit. Survey tie-in information is available
upon request.
4 Data Display
4.1 A summary greyscale image of the survey results is presented in Figure 3, at a scale
of 1:1,250. An accompanying interpretation drawing is presented in Figure 4 at the
same scale.
4.2 Numbers in parentheses in the text refer to specific responses highlighted in the
interpretation diagrams (Figure 4).
4.3 Isolated ferrous responses in the gradiometer data highlighted in the interpretation
diagram most likely represent modern ferrous litter and debris and are not of
archaeological interest. These are not discussed in the text unless considered
relevant.
4.4 The raw gradiometer data is presented in archive format in Appendix A1.01. The raw
data is displayed as a greyscale image and xy-trace plot, both at a scale of 1:500.
The archive plots are used to aid interpretation of the results and are for reference
only. These are available as PDF images upon request.
4.5 The display formats referred to above and the interpretation categories are
discussed in the summary technical information section at the end of this report.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Geophysical Survey Maghernakelly, Drum, County Monaghan
________________________________________________________________________________________________
J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 3 27/09/2024
5 Survey Results (Figures 3 & 4)
Area A
5.1 In the south of Area A there are a cluster of responses within an area of increased
magnetic response (1). Although it is possible that this results from more recent
activity, it is possible that this is of archaeological interest. The responses are typical
of an area of pits comprising of burnt material or a burnt spread. This is considered
to be of archaeological potential.
5.2 To the immediate north of (1) is a further area of increased response (2). As with (1),
it is possible that this is of more recent origin. However, the responses magnetic
signature is typical of a burnt spread, and this is considered to be of archaeological
potential.
5.3 A faint linear trend (3) runs downslope across Area A. This most likely represents a
former field division.
5.4 Along the probable field division there are trends and isolated responses (4). These
have a vague rectilinear pattern. It is possible that plough damaged archaeological
features are represented here. However, interpretation is tentative. The responses
may represent the remains of a more recent agricultural feature associated with the
probable former field division (3). Nevertheless, an archaeological interpretation
must be considered.
5.5 A faint curvilinear trend (5) runs east to west in the northern half of Area A. The trend
appears to follow the contours of the slope and may be natural in origin. It is equally
possible that another former field division is represented here.
5.6 Along the southeastern field boundary of Area A there is a broad spread of
heightened readings (6). This is indicative of natural variations within the sub-soil
and is not considered to be of archaeological interest.
Area B
5.7 In area B there is a continuation of the broad spread (6). This is considered to be
natural in origin.
5.8 To the north of (6) in Area B there are two responses (7). These are located
immediately adjacent to the field boundary and may result from more recent activity.
However, the magnetic signatures of the responses are typical of ditch or pit-type
features and an archaeological interpretation must be considered. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Geophysical Survey Maghernakelly, Drum, County Monaghan
________________________________________________________________________________________________
J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 4 27/09/2024
5.9 Elsewhere in Area B there are broad spreads of heightened response (8), similar in
form to (7). These are most likely natural in origin, representing variations within the
sub-soil. They are not considered to be of archaeological interest.
6 Discussion & Conclusion
6.1 Two areas of responses within areas of increased magnetic responses have been
identified in the south of Area A. Although it is possible that they result from more
recent activity, an archaeological interpretation must be considered. The responses
may represent the remains of pits comprising of burnt material or burnt spreads of
archaeological material.
6.2 A faint linear trend runs north to south through Area A. This most likely represents a
former field boundary. Along this, there are linear trends and two isolated responses.
These form a vague rectilinear pattern. It is possible that they are contemporary with
the former field boundary and result from agricultural activity. However, it is equally
possible that they represent plough damaged archaeological features. An
archaeological interpretation is cautious.
6.3 In Area B there are two responses of potential interest. It is possible that they
represent short ditch-type features. However, it is noted that they are immediately
adjacent to the existing field boundary and may result from more recent activity. An
archaeological interpretation is unclear.
6.4 Broad responses in Areas A and B are typical of natural features and most likely
result from variations within the sub-soil. These are not considered to be of
archaeological interest.
6.5 Consultation with a licensed archaeologist and with the Department of Housing,
Local Government and Heritage is recommended to establish if any additional
archaeological works are required. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Geophysical Survey Maghernakelly, Drum, County Monaghan
________________________________________________________________________________________________
J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 5 27/09/2024
7 Technical Information Section
Instrumentation & Methodology
Detailed Gradiometer Survey
Detailed gradiometer survey can either be targeted across a
specific area of interest or conducted as a blanket survey across
an entire application area, often as a standalone methodology.
Sampling methodologies can vary but a typical survey is conducted
with a sample interval of 0.25m and a traverse interval of 1m. This
allows detection of potential archaeological responses. Data is
collected in grids measuring 40m x 40m, with the data displayed
accordingly. A more detailed survey methodology may be applied where archaeological
remains are thought likely. This can sometimes produce results with a more detailed
resolution. A survey with a grid size of 20m x 20m and a traverse interval of 0.5m will
provide a data set with high resolution.
Bartington GRAD 601-2
The Bartington Grad 601-2 instrument is a specifically designed
gradiometer for use in archaeological prospection. The
gradiometer operates with a dual sensor capacity making
survey fast and effective. The sensors have a separation of 1m
allowing greater sensitivity.
Frequent realignment of the instruments and zero drift correction ensure a constant high
quality of data. Extremely sensitive, these instruments can detect variations in soil
magnetism to 0.1nT, affording diverse application throughout a variety of archaeological,
soil morphological and geological conditions.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Geophysical Survey Maghernakelly, Drum, County Monaghan
________________________________________________________________________________________________
J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 6 27/09/2024
Gradiometer Data Display & Presentation
XY Trace
The data are presented as a series of linear traces,
enabling a semi-profile display of the respective
anomalies along the X and Y-axes. This display option is
essential for distinguishing between modern ferrous
materials (buried metal debris) and potential
archaeological responses. The XY trace plot provides a
linear display of the magnitude of the response within a
given data set.
Greyscale*
As with dot density plots, the greyscale format assigns a
cell to each datum according to its location on the grid. The
display of each data point is conducted at fine increments,
allowing the full range of values to be displayed within the
given data set. This display method also enables the
identification of discrete responses that may be at the limits
of instrument detection. In the summary diagrams
processed, interpolated data is presented. Raw un-
interpolated data is presented in the archive drawings
along with the xy-trace plots.
Interpretation
An interpretation of the data is made using the plots
presented in the final report, in addition to examination of
the raw and processed data. The project managers’
knowledge and experience allow a detailed interpretation
of the survey results with respect to archaeological
potential.
*XY Trace and raw greyscale plots are presented in archive form for display of the raw survey data.
Summary greyscale images of the interpolated data are included for presentation purposes and to
assist interpretation. The archive plots are provided as PDF images upon request. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Geophysical Survey Maghernakelly, Drum, County Monaghan
________________________________________________________________________________________________
J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 7 27/09/2024
Glossary of Interpretation Terms
Categories of responses may vary for different data sets. The list below are the most used
categories for describing geophysical responses, as presented in the summary
interpretation diagrams.
Archaeology
This category refers to responses which are interpreted as of clear archaeological potential
and are supported by further archaeological evidence such as aerial photography or
excavation. The term is generally associated with significant concentrations of former
settlement, such as ditched enclosures, pits, and associated features.
? Archaeology
This term corresponds to anomalies that display typical archaeological patterns where no
record of comparative archaeological evidence is available. In some cases, it may prove
difficult to distinguish between these and evidence of more recent activity also visible in
the data.
Area of Increased Magnetic Response
These responses often lack any distinctive archaeological form, and it is therefore difficult
to assign any specific interpretation. The resulting responses are site specific, possibly
associated with concentrations of archaeological debris or more recent disturbance to
underlying archaeological features.
Trend
This category refers to low-level magnetic responses barely visible above the magnetic
background of the soil. Interpretation is tentative, as these anomalies are often at the limits
of instrument detection.
Ploughing/Ridge & Furrow
Visible as a series of linear responses, these anomalies equate with recent or
archaeological cultivation activity.
? Natural
A broad response resulting from localised natural variations in the magnetic background
of the subsoil; presenting as broad amorphous responses most likely resulting from
geological features.
Ferrous Response
These anomalies exhibit a typically strong magnetic response, often referred to as ‘iron
spikes,’ and are the result of modern metal debris located within the topsoil.
Area of Magnetic Disturbance
This term refers to large-scale magnetic interference from existing services or structures.
The extent of this interference may in some cases obscure anomalies of potential
archaeological interest. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Geophysical Survey Maghernakelly, Drum, County Monaghan
________________________________________________________________________________________________
J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 8 27/09/2024
Bibliography
European Archaeological Council (EAC) (2016) ‘Guidelines for the use of Geophysics in
Archaeology’ by Armin Schmidt, Paul Linford, Neil Linford, Andrew David, Chris Gaffney,
Apostolos Sarris, and Jörg Fassbinder.
English Heritage (2008) ‘Geophysical guidelines: Geophysical Survey in Archaeological
Field Evaluation.’ Second Edition.
Gaffney, C. Gater, J. & Ovenden, S. (2006) ‘The use of Geophysical Techniques in
Archaeological Evaluations.’ IFA Paper No. 6.
Gaffney, C & Gater, J (2003). ‘Revealing the buried past: Geophysics for Archaeologists.’
Tempus Publishing Limited.
National Soil Survey of Ireland (1980) General soil map second edition (1:575,000). An
Foras Taluntais.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Geophysical Survey Maghernakelly, Drum, County Monaghan
________________________________________________________________________________________________
J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 9 27/09/2024
List of Figures
Figure Description Scale
Figure 1 Site Location Diagram N.T.S.
Figure 2 Survey Location Diagram 1:2,000
Figure 3 Summary Greyscale Image 1:1,250
Figure 4 Summary Interpretation Diagram 1:1,250
Archive Data Supplied as a PDF Upon Request
A1.01 Raw data XY-Trace plot & greyscale image 1:500
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
MO022-008
Hilltop enclosure
MO022-007
Ringfort & Souterrain MO022-009
Ringfort
Project:Client:
metres
N
Site Location
Geophysical Survey
Maghernakelly, Drum
County Monaghan
CDHC Ltd.
Title:
0 NTS
Surveys Ltd.
J.M. Leigh
www.jmlsurveys.com
Scale @ A4:1:NTS
Figure:1
Licence No.:24R0379
Issue Date:27.09.2024
Application Area RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
X = 658790
Y = 818530
X = 659100
Y = 818340
A R E A A
A R E A B
Project:Client:
metres
N
Survey Location
Geophysical Survey
Maghernakelly, Drum
County Monaghan
CDHC Ltd.
Title:
0 80
Surveys Ltd.
J.M. Leigh
www.jmlsurveys.com
Scale @ A4:1:2,000
Figure:2
Licence No.:24R0379
Issue Date:27.09.2024
Application Area Detailed
Gradiometer Survey RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
X = 658740
Y = 818460
X = 659100
Y = 818340
AREA A AREA B
Client:Project:Title:
Summary Greyscale ImageNCDHC Ltd.
-2.0
3.0
nT
Geophysical Survey
Maghernakelly, Drum
County Monaghan Surveys Ltd .
J.M. Leigh
www.jmlsurveys.com
metres0 50
1:1,250
Figure:3
Licence No.:24R0379
Issue Date:27.09.2024
Scale @ A3:RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
X = 658740
Y = 818460
X = 659100
Y = 818340
AREA A AREA B
EP
EP
EP
EP
1
2
3
3
4
5
5
5
6
6
7
8
8
8
Client:Project:Title:
Summary InterpretationNCDHC Ltd.
Geophysical Survey
Maghernakelly, Drum
County Monaghan Surveys Ltd .
J.M. Leigh
www.jmlsurveys.com
metres0 50
1:1,250
Figure:4
Licence No.:24R0379
Issue Date:27.09.2024
Scale @ A3:
?Archaeology Area of increased
magnetic response Modern ferrous Modern magnetic
disturbanceTrend?Natural RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
AUGUST 2026
VOLUME III
APPENDICES TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
Stream BioEnergy Ireland Limited
APPENDIX 15.5
TESTING REPORT
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Test Excavation Report
Licence no. 24E1224
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
For
Stream bioenergy
Author: Liam Coen
Date: 8th July 2025 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 1
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 2
1.1. General .................................................................................................................................. 2
1.2. Site location ........................................................................................................................... 2
1.3. Development description ...................................................................................................... 2
1.4. Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 3
2. Archaeological and Historical Background ............................................................................ 4
2.1. Prehistoric .............................................................................................................................. 4
2.2. Early Medieval period (c. 5th-12th Centuries AD) ................................................................... 4
2.3. Late medieval period (c. 12th–16th Centuries AD) .................................................................. 6
2.4. Post-medieval period............................................................................................................. 6
2.5. Cartographic Sources ............................................................................................................. 7
2.5.1. Down survey (1656-8) ....................................................................................................... 7
2.5.2. Ordinance Survey maps .................................................................................................... 8
2.6. Aerial Photography .............................................................................................................. 10
2.7. Previous Archaeological Investigations ............................................................................... 11
2.8. Topographical Files of the National Museum of Ireland ..................................................... 11
2.9. Recorded Monuments (RMP / SMR sites) ........................................................................... 11
3. Geophysical Survey, Licence no. 24R0379 .......................................................................... 13
4. Test Excavations, Licence no. 24E1224 ............................................................................... 15
4.1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 15
4.2. Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 15
4.3. Results ................................................................................................................................. 15
4.3.1. Archaeological Area 1 ..................................................................................................... 18
5. Summary and Recommendations ....................................................................................... 19
6. References ........................................................................................................................... 21
6.1. Bibliography ......................................................................................................................... 21
6.2. Online Sources ..................................................................................................................... 21
Plates .............................................................................................................................................. 22
APPENDIX 1 SUMMARY OF RELEVANT LEGISLATION ............................................................. 32
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
List of Figures
Figure 1 Site location ........................................................................................................................ 2
Figure 2 Draft development layout plan .......................................................................................... 3
Figure 3 Down Survey barony map of Dartree ................................................................................. 7
Figure 4 First edition OS map (1834) ................................................................................................ 8
Figure 5 Historical 25" to the mile OS map (1908) ........................................................................... 9
Figure 6 Aerial image OS 1995........................................................................................................ 10
Figure 7 Aerial image Google Earth 2024 ....................................................................................... 10
Figure 8 Surrounding RMP / SMR sites with Zones of Notification ................................................ 12
Figure 9 Interpretative results of geophysical survey, licence no. 24R0379 .................................. 14
Figure 10 Test trench layout over geophysical survey results ....................................................... 16
Figure 11 Details of Archaeological Area 1 ..................................................................................... 18
Figure 12 Proposed excavation for AA1 ......................................................................................... 20
List of Tables
Table 1 Details of surrounding RMP / SMR sites ............................................................................ 12
Table 2 Test trench details, 24E1224 ............................................................................................. 16
Table 3 Feature Register, 24E1224 ................................................................................................. 17
List of Plates
Plate 1 Trench 1 looking north-north-west .................................................................................... 22
Plate 2 Brick residue F3 in Trench 1 ............................................................................................... 22
Plate 3 Trench 2 looking north-west .............................................................................................. 23
Plate 4 Brick residue F4 in Trench 2 ............................................................................................... 23
Plate 5 Trench 3 looking north-east ............................................................................................... 24
Plate 6 Test slot in former field boundary F5 in Trench 3 .............................................................. 24 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Plate 7 Trench 4 looking east ......................................................................................................... 25
Plate 8 Former field boundary F6 in Trench 4 ................................................................................ 25
Plate 9 Brick residue F7 in Trench 4 ............................................................................................... 26
Plate 10 Trench 5 looking north-west ............................................................................................ 26
Plate 11 Brick residue F8 in Trench 5 ............................................................................................. 27
Plate 12 Trench 6 looking north ..................................................................................................... 27
Plate 13 Test slot in former field boundary F9 cutting burnt mound trough F10 in Trench 6 ....... 28
Plate 14 Close up of truncated section of burnt mound trough F10 in Trench 6 .......................... 28
Plate 15 Trench 7 looking north-west ............................................................................................ 29
Plate 16 Former field boundary F11 in Trench 7 ............................................................................ 29
Plate 17 Trench 8 looking south-south-west .................................................................................. 30
Plate 18 Brick residue F12 in Trench 8 ........................................................................................... 30
Plate 19 Trench 9 looking east ....................................................................................................... 31
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Test excavations in advance of a planning application took place as part of an assessment for a
greenfield site in Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan. They took place under licence 24E1224
issued by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage in consultation with the
National Museum of Ireland. Nine trenches were excavated to investigate the results of a
geophysical survey (licence no. 24R0379) that indicated several features that may be of
archaeological significance. Test excavations revealed a single area of archaeological interest, AA1,
that comprised of a burnt mound deposit filling and overlying a pit or trough. Burnt mounds,
sometimes known as fulachta fia, are relatively common prehistoric archaeological sites and this
example can be assessed, prior to excavation, as of moderate archaeological significance. The
remaining geophysical features investigated comprised of now removed field boundaries and
scattered evidence of brick making.
No detailed development layout is available, but it is anticipated that significant groundworks will
occur during the construction of the proposed renewable biogas plant. If preservation in situ is
not feasible, given construction constraints, it is recommended that the area of archaeological
interest, AA1, be preserved by record, i.e. subject to full archaeological excavation. An area of
excavation is proposed comprising the identified archaeology and an appropriate buffer, c. 5m to
capture any associated features. This archaeological excavation will need to take place under
licence issued by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage in consultation with
the National Museum of Ireland.
It is further recommended to monitor the construction groundworks for the development in order
to identify and resolve any archaeological material or features that may have been missed during
the assessment. If any archaeological features or deposits are identified during the course of
monitoring, then works around them will be stopped and the relevant authorities contacted to
agree an appropriate strategy to proceed. Monitoring should be undertaken by a suitably qualified
archaeologist under licence issued by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage
in consultation with the National Museum of Ireland.
These recommendations are subject to approval from the Department of Housing, Local
Government and Heritage who may issue alternative recommendations.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
2
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. General
This report presents the results of test excavations undertaken at a site in Maghernakelly, Drum,
Co. Monaghan. They took place to inform a planning application for a proposed renewable biogas
plant. Test excavations followed a geophysical survey of the site and took place under licence
24E1224 issued by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage (DHLGH) in
consultation with the National Museum of Ireland (NMI).
1.2. Site location
The greenfield site of c. 5ha is located in two sloping pasture fields in Maghernakelly townland;
near Drum, Co. Monaghan (Parish of Ematris, Dartree Barony; Co. Monaghan 6” OS sheet 22; ITM
centre of site: 658940, 818430).
Figure 1 Site location
1.3. Development description
There are no finalized design plans currently available but it is anticipated that construction of the
renewable biogas plant will entail substantial groundworks that will have a significant adverse
impact on any archaeological features that may exist on the site. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
3
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Figure 2 Draft development layout plan
1.4. Methodology
A review of the following information took place in order to inform the report:
▪ National Monuments in State care, as listed by the National Monuments Service (NMS)
of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage (DHLGH);
▪ Sites with Preservation Orders;
▪ Sites listed in the Register of Historic Monuments;
▪ Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) and the Sites and Monuments Record (SMR)
from the Archaeological Survey of Ireland; The statutory RMP records known upstanding
archaeological monuments, their original location (in cases of destroyed monuments)
and the position of possible sites identified as cropmarks on vertical aerial photographs.
Archaeological sites identified since 1994 have been added to the non-statutory SMR
database of the Archaeological Survey of Ireland (National Monuments Service, DHLGH),
which is available online at www.archaeology.ie and includes both RMP and SMR sites.
Archaeological sites identified since 1994 are placed on the SMR and are scheduled for
inclusion on the next revision of the RMP;
▪ National Inventory of Architectural Heritage (NIAH) Building Survey (NIAH ratings are
international, national, regional, local and record, and those of regional and above are
recommended for inclusion in the RPS);
▪ National Inventory of Architectural Heritage (NIAH) Garden Survey (paper survey only);
▪ A review of artefactual material held in the National Museum of Ireland;
▪ Cartographical Sources, Tailte Éireann Historic Mapping Archive, including early editions
of the Ordnance Survey including historical mapping (such as Down Survey 1656 Map);
▪ The Irish archaeological excavations catalogue i.e. Excavations bulletin and Excavations
Database;
▪ Place names; Townland names and toponomy (loganim.ie);
▪ National Folklore Collection (Duchas.ie);
▪ A review and interpretation of aerial imagery (Tailte Éireann Aerial Imagery 1995, 2000,
2005, Aerial Premium 2013-2018, Digital Globe 2011-2013, Google Earth 2001–2025, RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
4
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Bing 2025) to be used in combination with historic mapping to map potential cultural
heritage assets.
▪ A review of existing guidelines and best practice approaches.
A bibliography of sources used is provided in the References section.
2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
2.1. Prehistoric
Evidence for known prehistoric activity surrounding the proposed development site is sparse, with
very few sites or finds being noted in this area. The closest site of potential prehistoric origin is a
stone row (RMP No.: MO017-068) known as the ‘Grey Stones’ which located c. 920m north of the
proposed development, in Drumgole townland. The site is situated on a north-east facing slope
on the summit of a drumlin ridge that runs along an east-north-east/west-south-west orientation.
A fourth stone, standing 5m to the south of the row also follows the same orientation as the other
stones. While dating this type of monument without archaeological excavation can be extremely
difficult, sites such as this are typically considered to be prehistoric in date.
More concrete evidence for prehistoric activity exists in the wider landscape, for example a
megalithic court tomb (RMP No.: MO018-043) in Edergole townland, c. 4.2km north-east of the
proposed site. Court tombs make up around 30% of the classified megalithic tombs identified in
Ireland and are defined by the presence of an uncovered court which is generally situated at the
broader end of a long trapezoidal cairn that is defined by megalithic kerbstones in front of a
covered burial gallery. These sites have a distinctive distribution pattern and are more commonly
found in the northern third of the island (O’Sullivan and Downey 2019). Court tombs typically date
to the very early part of the Neolithic period, c. 3700-3570 BC, although some examples may also
have been reused in the Chalcolithic / Early Bronze Age (Schulting et al. 2012). The example from
Edergole (RMP No.: MO018-043) is located at the bottom of the west facing slope of a knoll on
the crest of a drumlin ridge running east/west. It has since been incorporated into the northern
bank of a road (L6330), which also runs along the east/west axis of the site. At the east-north-east
of the monument, two jambs surmounted by a large lintel provide access to the burial gallery.
Later and more substantial prehistoric activity in the wider landscape around the proposed
development site is represented by an upstanding section of the Black Pig’s Dyke (RMP No.:
MO021-011), the eastern extent of which is c. 10km from the proposed site. The Black Pig’s Dyke
comprises around a dozen individual linear earthworks which occur across the width of the north
midlands and south Ulster and it is among the most extensive and best preserved examples of this
monument type on the island. Folk tradition states that the earthworks were torn into the
landscape by a rampaging giant mystical pig, while in the 20th century the earthworks were
interpreted as the remains of a formerly unified territorial boundary for Ulster known as ‘the Great
Wall of Ulidia’. Today, it is recognised that the interpretation of this monument is much more
complex encompassing multiple phases of remodelling and refurbishment, as well as considerable
variability between the upstanding sections (Ó Drisceoil and Condit 2015). While linear earthworks
such as this may date to the Bronze, the Black Pig’s Dyke mainly dates to the Iron Age (c. 500 BC –
AD 500).
2.2. Early Medieval period (c. 5th-12th Centuries AD)
The Early Medieval Period is well-represented in the area around the proposed development site
from an archaeological perspective, particularly in relation to settlement evidence. There are a
number of ringforts in the wider landscape around the proposed site (RMP No.: MO022-007001; RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
5
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
MO022-009; MO023-004; MO023-001; MO018-045; MO017-066; MO017-064; MO022-006).
Ringforts are among the most common monuments in Ireland and consist of areas enclosed by an
earthen bank formed by material thrown up from the digging of a concentric ditch on its outside.
They are usually enclosed by a single bank (univallate) while bivallate or trivallate ringforts (i.e.
those enclosed by double or triple rings of banks) are less common. The number of banks and
ditches enclosing these monuments is considered to reflect the status of the site, rather than the
strengthening of its defences (Stout 1997). Variations include the raised or platform rath type, in
which the interior has been artificially raised, often in a number of stages throughout the
occupation of the site and ultimately presenting as a flat-topped mound (Edwards 2005).
Archaeological excavation has shown that most ringforts functioned as defensible family
homesteads, and most were built during the Early Medieval period (5th - 9th century AD).
However, some appear to have evidence of Iron Age activity, while others were inhabited as late
as the 17th century. They are typically found at slightly higher ground, such as the summits and
slopes of small hills and drumlins, affording good views and drainage (Edwards 2005), as is the
case in Monaghan’s drumlin landscape. Excavation within the interior of ringforts has revealed the
remains of circular and rectangular dwelling houses as well as smaller huts probably used to stall
animals, with timber forming the principal building material. The enclosing earthworks would also
have protected domestic livestock from natural predators such as wolves. Specialist activities
appear to have taken place at some of these sites, with a number showing evidence of
metalworking.
One of the ringfort sites in the vicinity of the proposed development site (RMP No.: MO022-
007001) also appears to be associated with a souterrain (RMP No.: MO022-007002). Souterrains
are artificial underground or semi-subterranean passages and chambers built of stone and/or
wood, often with entrances within the house, from the farmyard, or from the ditch surrounding
the enclosure (O’Sullivan et al. 2014 [2021]). These sites are typically interpreted as having been
used for storage, for refuge or both, and recent experimental archaeological research has
demonstrated that the conditions within souterrains are suitable for the cold storage of foodstuffs
such as dairy (Meharg 2019). The souterrain in Drumanny (RMP No.: MO022-007002) presents as
a hollow with a diameter of c. 5m on the perimeter of the associated ringfort (RMP No.: MO022 -
007001) and has been interpreted as the site of a collapsed souterrain.
There are also a number of lakes in the wider area around the proposed development site which
give rise to an additional form of Early Medieval settlement – crannogs (RMP No.: MO023-002;
MO022-003; MO017-067; MO022-021). Crannogs (lake settlements) are a distinctively Irish form
of settlement enclosure, typically defined as artificial islets of stone, timber and soil enclosed
within a wooden palisade, but can also include stone cairns without palisades, deliberately
enhanced natural islands and occupation platforms situated along lake shore edges but not
necessarily surrounded by water (O’Sullivan et al. 2014 [2021]).
Archaeological evidence shows that Irish crannogs can vary widely in morphology and
construction and, although typically found in single isolated examples, there are some instances
of crannog clusters along lakes and lakeshores which may indicate individual sites within the
groups were contemporary but may have had differing roles. These sites often provide evidence
for long chronologies of construction, occupation and abandonment, resulting in sites that are
considerably built up over time. Crannogs appear to have had a range of functions and their use
changed over time. Like their dryland counterpart, the ringfort, the size and complexity of their
construction is typically interpreted as a display of social status and power. Some sites appear to
have been seasonal or permanent royal residences, while others functioned as ecclesiastical sites
such as storage places for holy relics or even hermitages. However, for the most part they are the RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
6
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
dwellings of the moderately wealthy, representing more remote and easily defensible
counterparts to the ringfort (O’Sullivan et al. 2014 [2021]).
2.3. Late medieval period (c. 12th–16th Centuries AD)
Archaeological evidence for activity in the area around the proposed development site is sparse.
The Anglo-Normans invaded Ireland in 1169, taking Dublin a year later. They came under the
leadership of Gilbert de Clare, otherwise known as Strongbow. He led the invasion at the request
of Dermot McMurrough, the dispossessed king of Leinster. At this time the study area formed part
of the kingdom of Airghialla, which was under the control of the O’Carrolls. Attempts by the Anglo-
Normans to conquer this area were slow to start. As with elsewhere in the country, the initial
penetration was marked by the erection of a series of earthwork castles, such as the motte and
bailey in Clones (RMP No.: MO011-008001), c. 20km north-west of the proposed site.
As English rule became more solidified in following decades, the barony of Dartree (in which the
proposed development site is located), together with the baronies of Cremorne and Farney were
part of the grant of Ardee made to Peter Pippard c. 1190 (Otway-Ruthven 1968). By the mid-14th
century, the area was under the control of the Gaelic Irish MacMahon family who remained in
power there until the end of the 16th century (Ó Dufaigh and Duffy 1999). In 1591 a process of
settlement commenced in Monaghan aimed at abolishing landholding under Irish law and
eliminating the rule of the MacMahons. As a result of the 1591 settlement, Monaghan was
excluded from the later Plantation of Ulster (Duffy 1981).
2.4. Post-medieval period
There is also little archaeological evidence for activity in the study area for much of the Post-
Medieval period. It is not until the 19th century that we have substantial records from the area.
In his Topographical Dictionary of Ireland, Lewis (1837) describes the parish of Ematris, in which
the proposed development site is located. He records that the parish is home to 7541 inhabitants
and that the soils of the region are comprised of rich shallow loam above deep stiff clay which is
very difficult to cultivate. The primary industries of the area are described as weaving linen and
agriculture. Lewis (1837) also notes a number of gentlemanly seats within the parish, including
the New Park estate where the proposed development site is located. Another nearby estate,
Forest View, is depicted in the First Edition 6” mapping (1834), just over 1km south-west of the
proposed site.
The 25” Ordnance Survey mapping of the area, produced in 1908, shows the presence of an
Orange Hall on the opposite site of the road to the northern boundary of the proposed
development. Orange Halls are the meeting places of the Orange Order, an international
Protestant fraternal order, best known for its annual celebration of William of Orange’s victory at
the Battle of the Boyne in 1690 on the 12th of July. It is unclear when this Orange Hall was built,
but it is recorded on both the 25” and Last Edition 6” (1910) mapping for the area. Monaghan,
Cavan and Donegal are the only counties of Ulster that remained in the Irish Free State, and later
the Republic of Ireland, after partition in 1921. In 1911, more than one-fifth of the population in
these counties was Protestant (Fitzpatrick 2002), meaning the Orange Halls played an important
role in the social, political and religious life of this segment of the population. In 1921, 57 halls
were known in Monaghan and by 1965, although the numbers had declined 40 remained with an
estimated 700 members (Fitzpatrick 2002).
As these numbers suggest, following partition Orange demonstration continued to be held across
Monaghan, Donegal and Cavan, although this came to an end in Monaghan in 1931. Information
about a planned armed interference with the annual Monaghan Orange parade by local RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
7
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Republicans put an end to county demonstrations, but smaller parades from the Orange Halls to
the local church were planned. By the middle of the 20th century, most southern Orange members
attended the demonstrations in Northern Ireland rather than host their own, as continues to be
the case today (Walker 2012). The presence of an Orange House in the area of the proposed
development is an important aspect of this cultural heritage and is of local historical interest.
2.5. Cartographic Sources
2.5.1. Down survey (1656-8)
The Down Survey of 1656-58 was, at the time, the most detailed cartographic survey in the world,
undertaken in order to measure the land forfeited from the Catholic population to be
redistributed amongst merchant adventurers and loyal English soldiers. The ‘Barony Map of Dartry
(Dartree)’ shows the lands in and around Maghernakelly townland, where the proposed
development site is found. The land is recorded as comprising 23 plantation acres of unprofitable
land and 61 plantation acres of profitable land, all of which was forfeited. The unprofitable land
appears to largely consist of ‘bogg (bog) common’ in the north-east of the townland. This is part
of a larger stretch of bog that runs along a north-east/south-west axis to the north of the
townland.
The Down Survey also records the contemporary land ownership of each parcel of land mapped.
In 1641, the townland was in the ownership of a Protestant named Thomas Burnett who also
appears to have owned a total of 30 townlands within the barony of Dartree. By 1670 the land
had changed hands and Maghernakelly is recorded as being in the ownership of a Protestant
named Richard Dawson. Dawson is also recorded as having owned 22 townlands in Dartree barony
and 2 townlands in the barony of Cremorne.
Figure 3 Down Survey barony map of Dartree
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
8
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
2.5.2. Ordinance Survey maps
The first edition Ordnance Survey (OS) 6” map of 1834 provides the earliest complete and accurate
survey of the study area. On this map, the proposed site appears to form part of the northern
extent of the New Park estate. New Park House, outbuildings and gardens, which at this time was
occupied by Dacre Hamilton (Lewis 1837), are depicted to the south of the proposed development
site. To the south-west of the proposed development site a fort is shown and is consistent with
the location of the hilltop enclosure (RMP No.: MO022-008) recorded by the Record of
Monuments and Places. The road layout depicted in the area around the proposed site is also
consistent with the modern layout shown in later aerial and satellite imagery.
In this edition of the historical mapping, the site occupies parts of three fields. This was parkland
that formed part of the designed landscape of the New Park estate and estate planting is evident
in the rows of trees depicted within and along the boundary of the proposed site. The northern
boundary of the proposed development site forms the townland boundary, which at this time is
marked by a road (consistent with the existing L6330 road).
Figure 4 First edition OS map (1834)
The Ordnance Survey 25” maps were produced from the 1890s and into the early 20th century at
a scale of 25-inches-to-a-mile. The enhanced resolution of these maps can often provide more
detail about an area. The 25” maps for the present study area were produced in 1908. There has
been little change overall in the c. 70 years since the area was last surveyed, although the biggest
development has been the considerable subdivision of land within the proposed site and in the
wider landscape around it which has resulted in a greater number of individual fields that are
depicted. The land within the proposed site now comprises five fields and the previous estate
plantation is not depicted in this edition, indicating that the former parkland has been given over
to agriculture.
New Park House remains to the south of the proposed site and a gate lodge has been added to
the estate. An Orange Hall is now depicted to the north of the proposed site and the area to the RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
9
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
north-east is now named as ‘Black Kesh’, perhaps referring to a local bridge or crossing. The road
network shown has not changed significantly since the previous edition of the mapping.
The Last Edition of the 6” OS mapping for the study area was produced in 1910, only two years
after the 25” mapping and very little changed in the area during this time. As a result, this edition
of the OS mapping is not shown here.
Figure 5 Historical 25" to the mile OS map (1908)
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
10
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
2.6. Aerial Photography
A review and interpretation of aerial imagery (OSI Aerial Imagery 1995, 2000, 2005, Aerial
Premium 2013-2018, Digital Globe 2011-2013, Google Earth 2001–2025, Bing 2022) has been
undertaken. The site is in its current layout as pasture fields has been established for several
decades. An inherent moderate archaeological potential exists for the survival of sub-surface
archaeological remains for any relatively undisturbed greenfield site of this scale. No increased
archaeological potential has been identified from the study of aerial imagery.
Figure 6 Aerial image OS 1995
Figure 7 Aerial image Google Earth 2024 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
11
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
2.7. Previous Archaeological Investigations
There have been no previous archaeological investigations within the development site and
relatively little previous archaeological investigation in the wider vicinity. This is likely a reflection
of the rural nature of the site and the scarcity of development-led archaeological investigations.
There has been only one previous archaeological investigation within 1km of the site.
Archaeological test excavations were carried out at a site in Maghernakelly, c. 650m south-east of
the proposed development site, in December 2006 (Licence No.: 06E1132; Excavations.ie Ref.:
2006:1676). The site was located on the grounds of a disused mushroom factory and had been
granted planning permission for the construction of two residential properties. The site was across
the road from a ringfort – rath (RMP No.: MO022-009) and lay within its Zone of Notification. A
total of seven trenches were excavated, however no features, deposits or artefacts of
archaeological significance were identified at the site, possibly due to the previous disturbance
caused by the construction of the mushroom factory.
2.8. Topographical Files of the National Museum of Ireland
A search of the online database (www.heritagemaps.ie) for the Topographical Files of the NMI did
not record any entries for Maghernakelly or the surrounding area. The closest entries are 8km to
the south-east from the townland of Cohaw, Co. Cavan and relate to the excavation of a megalithic
tomb there.
2.9. Recorded Monuments (RMP / SMR sites)
There are no Recorded Monuments (RMP / SMR sites) within or immediately adjacent to the
subject site. The closest is MO022-008--- Hilltop enclosure c. 150m to the south-west in
Maghernakelly townland. This site is currently undated and could be from either the prehistoric
or, less likely, the historic period. Other monuments in the surrounding landscape include Early
medieval ringforts, MO022-007001, MO017-066--- and MO022-009--- and a prehistoric
monument MO017-068---, a stone row. These are generally thought to date from the Bronze Age
(c. 2200-800 BC). Details of these monuments are presented in the table below.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
12
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Figure 8 Surrounding RMP / SMR sites with Zones of Notification
Table 1 Details of surrounding RMP / SMR sites
RMP / SMR no. Class Townland ITM Distance
MO017-066---- Ringfort - rath Drumhay 657751, 819286 c. 1.4 km to NW
Located at the SW summit of a short NE-SW drumlin ridge. This rath is depicted as an earthwork on McCrea’s map
of County Monaghan (1793) and on the 1834 and 1907 editions of the OS 6-inch map. It is a raised subcircular
grass-covered area (dims c. 39m N-S; c. 33.5m E-W) defined by an overgrown earthen bank (int. H 0.2m) largely
reduced to an external overgrown scarp (H c. 1.7-3m), and a shallow fosse (Wth c. 2.75m) SSW-W-NN. The fosse is
replaced by a farm lane NNE-SE and is slightly curtailed by an outer field bank SSW-W but is not visible elsewhere.
There is an entrance ramp (Wth of base 1.9m) with low banks (Wth c. 1m; H 0.9m) on either side that has probably
been modernised at SSW.
MO017-068---- Stone row Drumgole c. 550m to N
Situated on a NE-facing slope on one of the summits on an ENE-WSW drumlin ridge. Three stones in a line ENE-
WSW are incorporated in a field bank and are known as the ‘Grey stones’. A fourth stone 5m to the S, has a similar
orientation.
MO022-007001- Ringfort - rath Drumanny 658449, 817767 c. 650 to SW
Located on an E-W drumlin ridge with higher ground just to the W. It is depicted as an oval enclosure on the NE
side of a NW-SE section of a minor road on the 1834 edition of the OS 6-inch map where it is described in gothic
lettering as a ‘fort’ and as a D-shaped enclosure NE of the road on the 1907 edition. Traces of a D-shaped
enclosure (dims 46m NW-SE; 26m NE-SW) that slopes down to the SE is defined by a scarp (at NE: Wth 2.4m; H
1.3m) and hedge NW-E-SE, but it is truncated by a NW-SE road at SW. The perimeter SW-NW cannot be identified,
and there is no visible fosse although traces of one (Wth c. 1.5m) were visible in the 1940s (SMR file). The original
entrance is not identified but a hollow (diam. 5m) on the perimeter at NE may be the site of a collapsed souterrain.
MO022-007002- Souterrain DrumannyY 658465, 817783 c. 630 to SW RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
13
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
RMP / SMR no. Class Townland ITM Distance
Located on an E-W drumlin ridge with higher ground just to the W. A hollow (diam. 5m) on the perimeter of rath
(MO022-007001-) at NE may be the site of a collapsed souterrain that was described in 1945 as being very narrow
(SMR file).
MO022-008---- Hilltop enclosure Maghernakelly 658783, 818147 c. 150 to SW
Situated on top of a drumlin. It is depicted as a large oval embanked enclosure on the 1834 edition of the OS 6-inch
map where it is described in gothic lettering as a ‘fort’, and as a large hachured oval feature on the 1907 edition.
This is an oval grass-covered area (dims 107m NW-SE; 69m NE-SW) defined by a scarp (Wth 1.2-1.3m; H 1.7-1.9m)
and hedge, with a field bank at its base N-SSE replaced by a farm track SSE-WNW. An original entrance is not
identified.
MO022-009---- Ringfort - rath Maghernakelly 659198, 817720 c. 300 to SSE
Located towards the bottom of a SE-facing slope. This is a circular grass and scrub-covered area (diam. 36m E-W;
34.5m N-S) that slopes down to the S and is defined by an earthen bank (at N: Wth of base 4.7m; int. H 0.8m; ext.
H 1.45m) that is largely reduced to an external scarp. There is an outer fosse (at NE: Wth of top 2.5m; Wth of base
1.9m; D 0.3m) W-NE that has been deepened W-N where it has an outer field bank. There are several gaps in the
bank but the original entrance is not identified. Archaeological testing (06E1132) immediately to the N produced
no related material (Roynane 2009).
3. GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY, LICENCE NO. 24R0379
A detailed gradiometer survey was carried out within the proposed development between 17th-
19th September 2024 (Licence No.: 24R0379; Leigh 2024). The survey area included both fields
within the proposed development: Area A to the west and Area B to the east. The main aim of the
survey was to identify any geophysical responses that may represent the remains of unknown
archaeology within the application area.
A series of electricity poles runs through both fields. These have resulted in localised magnetic
disturbance, evident in the survey results, but have not affected the overall interpretation.
8 areas or features were highlighted in the survey. Numbers 1 and 2 were interpreted as
geophysical anomalies often representative of burnt mounds or fulachta fia. These are prehistoric
sites usually comprising of sub-soil cut pits or troughs filled with burnt stone and charcoal.
Numbers 3 and 5 likely represent earlier field boundaries. Numbers 6 and 8 are likely of geological
origin. Numbers 4 and 7 contain anomalies that may represent pits of archaeological origin.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
14
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Figure 9 Interpretative results of geophysical survey, licence no. 24R0379 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
15
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
4. TEST EXCAVATIONS, LICENCE NO. 24E1224
4.1. Introduction
Test excavations took place on a greenfield site of c. 5ha at Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
to inform a planning application. Test excavations formed part of an assessment of the site and
followed a geophysical survey that took place under licence 24R0379. Several features of potential
archaeology were identified from the geophysical survey and the test trenches were principally
located to assess the geophysical survey results.
4.2. Methodology
A total of 9 trenches were excavated using a 13 tonne tracked mechanical excavator fitted with a
grading bucket under constant archaeological supervision. Trenches were located to investigate
the results of a geophysical survey with one placed in a geophysical ‘blank’ area to help verify the
geophysical survey results. Trenches were excavated in 0.2m spits until the subsoil or the top of
any potential archaeological deposits were exposed. Potential features were assessed, then
cleaned with a hand dug test slot excavated in them to help determine their archaeological nature
and extent.
4.3. Results
Test excavations took place over two days 30th June – 1st July 2025. Conditions were generally clear
with occasional showers. Topsoil, F1, was between 0.25-0.45m in depth over the sloping site.
Subsoil, F2, was a consistent mottled light brown, yellow and grey firm stoney clay.
In general, the geophysical survey proved to be reliable. Almost all of the geophysical signals
corresponded to subsoil cut features though some variations were identified. The linear responses
corresponding to earlier field boundaries on the OS maps were present in Trenches 3, 4, 6 and 7,
though often a metre or so out of line. This may be the result of the geophysical survey recording
magnetic signals for associated banks or other related features for the field boundary rather than
solely the subsoil-cut ditch. The two test slots excavated in the former field boundary ditches, in
Trenches 3 and 6, revealed stone-filled drains at the bases of the ditches. The stone was angular
machine crushed stone indicating the modern nature of the ditch and was probably introduced
sometime in the mid-twentieth century when both field boundaries were removed according to
the cartographic sources and aerial imagery.
The pit-like responses from the geophysical survey generally corresponded to brick making activity
and were identified in Trenches 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8. Brick making in Ireland is a post-medieval activity
(Rynne 2006, 165-172) and it was up to the late seventeenth century before it is seen used in
vernacular buildings. Before the late nineteenth century, it was often manufactured in casual brick
clamps close to the site of construction. The patches of brick residue (F3, F4, F7, F8, & F12)
scattered through the fields here may represent the small-scale manufacture of brick for use in
New Park house or any associated outbuildings, as recorded in the First edition OS map of 1834
(Figure 4). RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
16
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Figure 10 Test trench layout over geophysical survey results
Table 2 Test trench details, 24E1224
Trench
no.
Geophysical
anomaly
Dimensions (L x B x D
in metres) Comment
1 1 48 x 1.8 x 0.3-0.4 Contains brick making residue F3 in location of geophysical
anomaly 1. No archaeology found
2 2 30 x 1.8 x 0.3-0.4 Contains brick making residue F4 in location of geophysical
anomaly 2. No archaeology found
3 3 21 x 1.8 x 0.25-0.35
No features in location of curvilinear geophysical anomaly.
Contains ditch F5 in location of linear geophysical anomaly 3
(former field boundary). No archaeology found
4 3, 4 30 x 1.8 x 0.3-0.4
Contains ditch F6 in location of geophysical anomaly 3
(former field boundary) & brick making residue F7 in
location of rectilinear geophysical anomalies 4. No
archaeology found
5 undesignated 21 x 1.8 x 0.3-0.45 Contains brick residue F8 in location of geophysical anomaly
6 5 20 x 1.8 x 0.25-0.35
Contains ditch F9 (former field boundary) in location of
geophysical anomaly 5 & burnt mound deposit & trough F10
in location of geophysical ‘pit’ anomaly
7 5 20 x 1.8 x 0.3-0.4
Contains ditch F11 (former field boundary, same as ditch F9
in Trench 6) in proximity to geophysical anomaly 5. No
archaeology found RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
17
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Trench
no.
Geophysical
anomaly
Dimensions (L x B x D
in metres) Comment
8 6, 7 30 x 1.8 x 0.35-0.5
Contains brick making residue F12 in location of geophysical
anomaly 7. No feature for ‘natural’ anomaly 6. No
archaeology found
9 n/a 32 Investigating geophysical ‘blank’ area. No archaeology found
Total 232 linear metres; 417.6 sq. metres
Table 3 Feature Register, 24E1224
Feature no. Trench Dimensions Description
F1 All 0.25-0.45 D Topsoil; friable brown loam
F2 All - Subsoil; mottled yellow, brown and grey stoney clay
F3 1 17m L x > 1.8m W x
0.2m D
Brick making residue in 3 concentrations; mixed red, black &
brown deposit with frequent fragments of coarse brick
F4 2 2.8m L x >1.8m W Brick making residue; mixed red and brown deposit with
occasional brick fragments
F5 3 2.00m W x >0.8m D
Ditch, linear in plan; traversed the trench; V-shaped in profile;
not bottomed, crushed stone drain near base of ditch; filled with
friable brown silt but lense of natural stoney clay near top of
ditch fill may indicate collapse of field boundary bank
F6 4 1.80m W Same as ditch F5 from Trench 3, traverses the trench
F7 4 4.3m L x >1.8m W
Brick making residue in 2 concentrations, one of which traversed
the trench; mixed brown, black & red deposit with frequent
brick fragment & occasional charcoal inclusions
F8 5 2.00m L x > 1.8m W
Brick making residue, traversed the trench; mixed brown, black
& red deposit with frequent brick fragment & occasional
charcoal inclusions
F9 6 1.9m W x > 0.4m D
Ditch; Linear in plan, traversed the trench, V-shaped in profile,
straight sides, not bottomed, crushed stone-filled drain near
base of ditch; filled with friable brown silt with occasional stone
inclusions; truncated burn mound trough F10
F10 6 2.8m NE/SW x 0.5-
>1.4m x 0.25m D
Burnt mound deposit; friable black stoney (c. 50% of fill, many
heat-affected) sandy silt with occasional charcoal inclusions;
truncated by modern ditch F9; deposit fills trough with straight,
upright sides & flattish base
F11 7 1.8m W Same as ditch F9 in Trench 6; traverses the trench
F12 8 10.5m L x > 1.8m W
Intermittent brick making residue deposit, traversed the trench;
mixed brown, black & red deposit with brick fragment &
occasional charcoal inclusions
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
18
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
4.3.1. Archaeological Area 1
A single area of archaeological interest was identified during the course of testing and termed
Archaeological Area (AA) 1. It comprised an archetypal burnt mound deposit, F10. Burnt mounds,
sometimes also termed fulachta fiadh, are prehistoric sites that present as charcoal stained soils
with frequent heat-affected stone. Burnt mounds developed as heated stone was placed in a
water filled pit or trough to heat or boil water for one or a variety of domestic, ritual or industrial
purposes. Troughs can sometimes be lined with wood or other material, evidence for structures
can survive while mounds of the discarded heated stone and associated charcoal usually build up
around the trough. Relatively common sites in Ireland, they were most frequently used during the
Bronze Age period (c. 2200 – 800 BC).
The burnt mound deposit was truncated by the modern ditch F09 that was recorded on the early
OS maps. It revealed that the deposit F10, visible on the surface of the trench as an irregular
deposit with angular outlines, also filled a subsoil cut feature. With straight sides and a flattish
base, the feature was 0.25m in depth. The surface deposit was recorded for 2.8m north-
east/south-west and between 0.5m and 1.4m in width as it extended out of the trench to the
north-east. Given the dimensions and morphology, the subsoil cut feature likely represents a
trough, a water-filled pit where the heated stone was placed for the burnt mound process. Any
associated mound, formed from the discarded heated stone, is likely to have been dispersed by
the action of ploughing or other agricultural practices over the millennia.
Figure 11 Details of Archaeological Area 1
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
19
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
5. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Test excavations in advance of a planning application took place as part of an assessment for a
greenfield site in Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan. They took place under licence 24E1224
issued by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage in consultation with the
National Museum of Ireland. Nine trenches were excavated to investigate the results of a
geophysical survey (licence no. 24R0379) that indicated several features that may be of
archaeological significance. Test excavations revealed a single area of archaeological interest, AA1,
that comprised of a burnt mound deposit filling and overlying a pit or trough. Burnt mounds,
sometimes known as fulachta fia, are relatively common prehistoric archaeological sites and this
example can be assessed, prior to excavation, as of moderate archaeological significance. The
remaining geophysical features investigated comprised of now removed field boundaries and
scattered evidence of brick making.
Recommendations
No finalized development layout is available but it is anticipated that substantial groundworks will
occur during the construction of the proposed renewable biogas plant. If preservation in situ is
not feasible, given construction constraints, it is recommended that the area of archaeological
interest, AA1, be preserved by record, i.e. subject to full archaeological excavation. An area of
excavation is proposed below (Figure 12) comprising the identified archaeology and an
appropriate buffer, c. 5m to capture any associated features. This archaeological excavation will
need to take place under licence issued by the Department of Housing, Local Government and
Heritage in consultation with the National Museum of Ireland.
It is further recommended to monitor the construction groundworks for the development in order
to identify and resolve any archaeological material or features that may have been missed during
the assessment. If any archaeological features or deposits are identified during the course of
monitoring, then works around them will be stopped and the relevant authorities contacted to
agree an appropriate strategy to proceed. Monitoring should be undertaken by a suitably qualified
archaeologist under licence issued by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage
in consultation with the National Museum of Ireland.
These recommendations are subject to approval from the Department of Housing, Local
Government and Heritage who may issue alternative recommendations. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
20
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Figure 12 Proposed excavation for AA1
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
21
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
6. REFERENCES
6.1. Bibliography
Duffy, P. 1981 “Patterns of Landownership in Gaelic Monaghan in the Late Sixteenth Century”,
Clogher Record 10(3), 304-322.
Edwards, N. 2005 “The archaeology of early medieval Ireland, c. 400-1169” in D. Ó Cróinín (ed.) A
New History of Ireland 1: Prehistoric and Early Ireland, 235-370. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Leigh, J. 2024 ‘Geophysical Survey Report. Maghernakelly Townland, Drum, Cootehill, County
Monaghan. Licence Number: 24R0379’. Unpublished report prepared by J. M. Leigh Surveys on
behalf of Courtney Deery Heritage Consultancy Ltd.
Lewis, S. 1837 A topographical dictionary of Ireland, 2 vols. London: Lewis and Co.
Ó Drisceoil, C. & Condit, E. 2015 “The Black Pig’s Dyke – Power Lines in the Landscape”,
Archaeology Ireland Heritage Guide No. 68.
Ó Dufaigh, S. & Duffy, J. 1999 “Medieval Monaghan: The Evidence of the Placenames”, Clogher
Record 16(3), 7-28.
O’Sullivan, A.; McCormick, F.; Kerr, T.; and Harney, L. 2014[2021] Early Medieval Ireland, AD 400-
1100: The evidence from archaeological investigations. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy.
O’Sullivan, M. & Downey, L. 2019 “Court Tombs”, Archaeology Ireland 33(1), 35-38.
Otway-Ruthven, A. J. 1968 A history of medieval Ireland. London.
Rynne, C. 2006 Industrial Ireland 1750-1930: An Archaeology Cork: Collins Press
Stout, M 1997 The Irish Ringfort Dublin: Four Courts Press
Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) 2015 ‘TII Palaeo-environmental Sampling Guidelines.
Retrieval, analysis and reporting of plant macro-remains, wood, charcoal, insects and pollen
from archaeological excavations’. Unpublished report prepared by Dr. M. McClatchie, Dr. E.
O’Carroll & Dr. E. O’Reilly on behalf of TII
6.2. Online Sources
Recorded Monuments (RMP/SMR sites) www.archaeology.ie
Cartographic sources www.downsurvey.tchpc.tcd.ie
www.heritagemaps.ie
www.geohive.ie
Aerial imagery www.geohive.ie
Google Earth Pro
Previous excavations www.excavations.ie RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
22
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
PLATES
Plate 1 Trench 1 looking north-north-west
Plate 2 Brick residue F3 in Trench 1
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
23
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Plate 3 Trench 2 looking north-west
Plate 4 Brick residue F4 in Trench 2
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
24
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Plate 5 Trench 3 looking north-east
Plate 6 Test slot in former field boundary F5 in Trench 3
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
25
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Plate 7 Trench 4 looking east
Plate 8 Former field boundary F6 in Trench 4
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
26
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Plate 9 Brick residue F7 in Trench 4
Plate 10 Trench 5 looking north-west
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
27
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Plate 11 Brick residue F8 in Trench 5
Plate 12 Trench 6 looking north
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
28
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Plate 13 Test slot in former field boundary F9 cutting burnt mound trough F10 in Trench 6
Plate 14 Close up of truncated section of burnt mound trough F10 in Trench 6
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
29
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Plate 15 Trench 7 looking north-west
Plate 16 Former field boundary F11 in Trench 7
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
30
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Plate 17 Trench 8 looking south-south-west
Plate 18 Brick residue F12 in Trench 8
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
31
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
Plate 19 Trench 9 looking east
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
32
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
APPENDIX 1 SUMMARY OF RELEVANT LEGISLATION
Historic and Archaeological Heritage and Miscellaneous Provisions Act (2023)
The Historic and Archaeological Heritage and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023 was enacted in
October 2023 and this this Act is now law. The Minister for DHLGH commenced certain provisions
in May 2024 (S.I. No. 252/2024) which relate to World Heritage Property in the State, inventories,
the protection of certain records, the promotion of heritage, and the issuing of statutory guidance.
Certain related and supporting provisions concerning implementation and enforcement are also
commenced. Further provisions in December 2024 (S.I. No. 663/2024) relate to underwater
cultural heritage. However, until the Act is fully commenced, the National Monuments Acts and
the Architectural Heritage (National Inventory) and Historic Monuments (Miscellaneous
Provisions) Act have not yet been repealed and therefore remain in force.
The Act also contains transitional provisions which will, if necessary, enable certain aspects of the
existing National Monuments Acts 1930 to 2014 to continue in operation while successor
provisions are being brought fully into operation. An example of this would be provisions enabling
the Record of Monuments and Places to continue to have effect pending the establishment of a
new Register of Monuments.
A person performing a function under this Act shall recognise and take due account of the
following principles in performing that function:
a) that historic heritage is a non-renewable resource of great cultural and scientific
importance which, in addition to its intrinsic value, provides evidence for the development
of society and promotes public understanding and appreciation of all periods of the past;
b) that the first option to be considered should be the protection in situ of historic heritage
and that there ought to be a presumption in favour of this option;
c) that any removal or alteration of historic heritage should be accompanied by all necessary
and appropriate recording of such heritage;
d) that the Valletta Convention should be adhered to as well as any other international
treaty, to which the State is a party, the provisions of which are aimed at promoting or
securing the protection of the archaeological, architectural or other historic heritage;
e) that responsibility for the protection of historic heritage is, as a resource of benefit to all,
shared by all and, accordingly, that those permitted to remove or interfere with such
heritage should, in the normal course, bear the costs of any recording or protective work
necessitated by, or associated with, such removal or interference.
For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared that the destruction, whether in whole or in part
and by whatever means, of a monument to which general protection or special protection applies
shall not prejudice the continuation of such protection to the remainder (if any) of the monument,
including the site, surrounding area and immediate surroundings of the monument.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
33
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
The Historic and Archaeological Heritage and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023 will establish a
Register of Monuments which will replace and supersede the existing Record of Monuments and
Places and the Register of Historic Monuments. The Register shall include
a) prescribed monuments known to the Minister which are deemed appropriate to be
entered in the Register;
b) relevant things of a relevant interest deemed appropriate to be entered in the Register.
A prescribed monument will be a relevant thing of archaeological interest or of other relevant
interest. It may be prescribed by reference to any one or more than one of the following criteria:
(a) age, date or period (including by reference to any terminology relating to periods) that, in
the opinion of the Minister, is or has been in use in archaeology or other relevant
disciplines;
(b) morphology;
(c) condition;
(d) typology (including by reference to typologies which, in the opinion of the Minister, are
or have been in use in archaeology or other relevant disciplines);
(e) the environment in which the relevant thing is situated (including whether or not the
relevant thing is situated under water);
(f) the circumstances in which the relevant thing is found (including the manner of finding);
(g) whether the relevant thing is or is not marked or shown on any—
i. edition of any ordnance map, or
ii. map prescribed for the purposes of this paragraph.
“Relevant thing” means any of the following things, whether situated on, in or under land and
whether or not attached to the surface of the land or forming part of land and whether or not
intentionally or originally in the sites where they respectively are:
a) any artificial structure, construction, deposit, feature or layer (including any building and
any burial or interment);
b) any artificially altered structure, construction, deposit, feature or layer, whether or not
natural in origin;
c) any wreck;
d) any ritual or ceremonial site;
e) any site where an historic event took place, including any other site directly associated
with that event;
f) any battlefield;
g) any site with legendary or mythological associations; RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
34
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
h) any feature, deposit or layer, whether or not natural in origin and whether or not
artificially altered, containing or providing information or evidence relating to the past
environment;
The Register shall be in the form of an electronic database which is easily accessible to members
of the public through public telecommunication networks. The registered monument may include
a surrounding area which is considered reasonably necessary to secure the protection of the
monument or thing.
Where a person finds, or believes that he or she has found a prescribed monument other than a
registered monument, the person shall make a preliminary report Minister or a member of An
Garda Síochána within 72 hours, or in the case of discovery in the course of licensable activity,
that it be reported to the Minister in such a manner as specified in the licence.
Special protection may be applied to a registered monument taking into account whether the
monument is, in terms of such heritage, of special or particular interest, character, integrity,
community or amenity value, whether at a local, regional, national or international level. This
includes
a) a national monument,
b) a wreck of 100 or more years old, or
c) a guardianship monument.
A person shall not carry out works at, on, in, under, to, or within the immediate surroundings of a
monument to which special protection applies, or direct or authorise the carrying out of such
works, other than under and in accordance with a licence. This shall be deemed to apply to a
registered monument in the ownership or guardianship of the Minister or a local authority where
special protection does not otherwise apply to the monument.
General protection applies to
a) a registered monument to which special protection does not apply, and
b) a prescribed monument (not being a registered monument).
A person shall not carry out works at, on, in, under, to, or within the immediate surroundings of a
monument to which general protection applies, or direct or authorise the carrying out of such
works, other than under and in accordance with a licence.
A person shall not, except under and in accordance with a licence, do any of the following at, on,
in, over, under or in the vicinity of a wreck 100 or more years old, a registered monument or
prescribed monument which is under water, or an archaeological object which is underwater:
a) dive or direct or authorise diving;
b) use or possess, or direct or authorise the use or possession of, diving, survey or salvage
equipment;
c) dump or deposit, or direct or authorise the dumping or deposition of, any thing whether
or not it interferes with or causes damage to the thing; RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
35
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
d) interfere, remove or tamper in any way (whether with or without causing damage) with
the thing.
The Minister may prescribe a licence, consent, approval, permission or other authorisation where
a) a licence, consent, approval, permission or other authorisation is required to be granted,
issued or given under an enactment (not being the Act of 2000) for works to be carried
out which may require an EIA, and
b) the Minister is satisfied that such works are capable of being at, on, in, under, to, or within
the immediate surroundings of a monument, and it is reasonable and proportionate to do
so and compatible with the protection of monuments,
The Minister shall consider whether or not the relevant works in respect of which they should be
made subject to conditions and may require all or any of the following:
a) the carrying out of an assessment of heritage interest or potential including an assessment
by way of archaeological excavation, use of detection devices or any form of photographic
or geophysical survey equipment or any other appropriate form of survey or inspection;
b) the recording of the monument as a whole or any part or aspect of it (including its
immediate surroundings) or any objects on, in, under or within it or its immediate
surroundings including recording by way of archaeological excavation, use of detection
devices or any form of photographic or geophysical survey equipment or any other
appropriate form of survey or inspection;
c) the carrying out of any form of monitoring (including archaeological monitoring),
supervision or inspection;
d) the salvaging, collection or protection of any part of the monument (including its
immediate surroundings) or any object on, in, under or within it or its immediate
surroundings and, where appropriate, the preparation of such part or object for
deposition in an appropriate museum or other site for such deposition;
e) the specification of the time period when the relevant works are to be carried out;
f) that the relevant works be done in a specified manner or be funded or carried out by a
specified person or a person falling within a specified category of persons.
The Minister shall make a screening determination for EIA in respect of the proposed relevant
works on the basis of the information provided by the applicant. The Minister shall ensure that,
before the application is determined, proposed relevant works likely to have significant effects on
the environment by virtue of their nature, size or location (or any combination thereof) are made
subject to an EIA. The applicant shall in this case submit to the Minister an EIAR in respect of the
proposed relevant works, having regard to guidelines issued by the Minister.
The Minister may appoint himself or herself, or with the consent of a local authority, appoint the
local authority as the guardian of a registered monument to which special protection applies. A RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
36
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
national monument under the Act of 1930 will be deemed both a registered monument and a
guardianship monument.
Any archaeological object where such object has no known owner shall be vested in the State. An
owner or owner exception of land, not being the State, or a finder of an archaeological object is
deemed not to acquire any rights of ownership to an archaeological object found on, in or under
the land.
Where a person finds, or believes that he or she has found an archaeological object, the person
shall make a preliminary report of the finding of the thing to the Board of the National Museum
of Ireland or a member of An Garda Síochána within 72 hours, in the case of licensable activity, to
the Minister or the Board in such manner as is specified in the licence. A person, other than a
relevant person, shall not interfere with or remove a relevant archaeological object, or cause it to
be interfered with or removed, except under and in accordance with a licence, or where there is
reasonable grounds to believe that it is necessary to remove the thing from the site where he or
she found it for the purposes of the safekeeping of the thing.
“Architectural heritage” means—
a) structures and buildings together with their settings and attendant grounds, fixtures and
fittings,
b) groups of structures and buildings referred to in paragraph (a), and
c) sites,
that are of archaeological, architectural, cultural, historic, scientific, social or technical interest;
A person shall not, other than under and in accordance with a licence—
a) undertake or carry out, or direct or authorise the undertaking or carrying out of,
archaeological excavation,
b) … archaeological monitoring,
c) search for or collect… archaeological objects lying exposed on the surface of land, whether
or not any such object is known to be on, in or under that land,
d) search for… wrecks one hundred or more years old or archaeological objects or prescribed
monuments, or other relevant things of archaeological interest, situated on, in or under
the sea bed or land covered by water…
e) be in possession of a detection device in, at, on, over or above, or within the immediate
surroundings of, a registered monument or a wreck one hundred or more years old, or RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
37
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
f) use… a detection device for the purpose of identifying, locating (including searching for),
investigating, surveying or recording any archaeological object or monument or relevant
thing of archaeological interest…
Anything done by a person in the course of his or her employment shall, in any proceedings
brought under this Act, be treated as done also by that person’s employer, whether or not it was
done with the employer’s knowledge or approval. Anything done by a person as agent for another
person, with the authority (whether express or implied and whether precedent or subsequent) of
that other person shall, in any proceedings brought under this Act, be treated as done also by that
other person.
National Monuments Legislation (1930-2014)
The National Monument Act, 1930 (as amended) provides the formal legal mechanism to protect
monuments in Ireland. Protection of a monument is provided via:
Record of Monuments and Places (RMP);
National Monument in the ownership or guardianship of the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Regional,
Rural & Gaeltacht Affairs or a Local Authority;
National Monument subject to a Preservation Order (or temporary Preservation Order);
Register of Historic Monuments (RHM).
The definition of a monument is specified as:
any artificial or partly artificial building, structure or erection or group of such buildings, structures
or erections;
any artificial cave, stone or natural product, whether forming part of the ground, that has been
artificially carved, sculptured or worked upon or which (where it does not form part of the place
where it is) appears to have been purposely put or arranged in position;
any, or any part of any, prehistoric or ancient tomb, grave or burial deposit, or (ii) ritual, industrial
or habitation site; and
any place comprising the remains or traces of any such building, structure or erection, any cave,
stone or natural product or any such tomb, grave, burial deposit or ritual, industrial or habitation
site.
Under Section 14 of the Principal Act (1930):
It shall be unlawful...
to demolish or remove wholly or in part or to disfigure, deface, alter, or in any manner injure or
interfere with any such national monument without or otherwise than in accordance with the
consent hereinafter mentioned (a licence issued by the Office of Public Works National
Monuments Branch),
or RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
38
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
to excavate, dig, plough or otherwise disturb the ground within, around, or in the proximity to any
such national monument without or otherwise than in accordance...
Under Amendment to Section 23 of the Principal Act (1930):
A person who finds an archaeological object shall, within four days after the finding, make a report
of it to a member of the Garda Síochána...or the Director of the National Museum...
The latter is of relevance to any finds made during a watching brief.
In the 1994 Amendment of Section 12 of the Principal Act (1930), all the sites and ‘places’ recorded
by the Sites and Monuments Record of the Office of Public Works are provided with a new status
in law. This new status provides a level of protection to the listed sites that is equivalent to that
accorded to ‘registered’ sites [Section 8(1), National Monuments Amendment Act 1954] as
follows:
The Commissioners shall establish and maintain a record of monuments and places where they
believe there are monuments and the record shall be comprised of a list of monuments and such
places and a map or maps showing each monument and such place in respect of each county in
the State.
The Commissioners shall cause to be exhibited in a prescribed manner in each county the list and
map or maps of the county drawn up and publish in a prescribed manner information about when
and where the lists and maps may be consulted.
In addition, when the owner or occupier (not being the Commissioners) of a monument or place
which has been recorded, or any person proposes to carry out, or to cause or permit the carrying
out of, any work at or in relation to such monument or place, he shall give notice in writing of his
proposal to carry out the work to the Commissioners and shall not, except in the case of urgent
necessity and with the consent of the Commissioners, commence the work for a period of two
months after having given the notice.
The National Monuments Amendment Act enacted in 2004 provides clarification in relation to the
division of responsibilities between the Minister of Environment, Heritage and Local Government,
Finance and Arts, Sports and Tourism together with the Commissioners of Public Works. The
Minister of Environment, Heritage and Local Government will issue directions relating to
archaeological works and will be advised by the National Monuments Section and the National
Museum of Ireland. The Act gives discretion to the Minister of Environment, Heritage and Local
Government to grant consent or issue directions in relation to road developments (Section 49 and
51) approved by An Bord Pleanála and/or in relation to the discovery of National Monuments.
14A. (1) The consent of the Minister under section 14 of this Act and any further consent or licence
under any other provision of the National Monuments Acts 1930 to 2004 shall not be required
where the works involved are connected with an approved road development.
14A. (2) Any works of an archaeological nature that are carried out in respect of an approved road
development shall be carried out in accordance with the directions of the Minister, which
directions shall be issued following consultation by the minister with the Director of the National
Museum of Ireland.
Subsection 14A (4) Where a national monument has been discovered to which subsection (3) of
this section relates, then the road authority carrying out the road development shall report the
discovery to the Minister subject to subsection (7) of this sectio n, and pending any directions by RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
39
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
the Minister under paragraph (d) of this subsection, no works which would interfere with the
monument shall be carried out, except works urgently required to secure its preservation carried
out in accordance with such measures as may be specified by the Minister.
The Minister will consult with the Director of the National Museum of Ireland for a period not
longer than 14 days before issuing further directions in relation to the national monument.
The Minister will not be restricted to archaeological considerations alone, but will also consider
the wider public interest.
Architectural Heritage (National Inventory) and Historic Monuments (Miscellaneous Provisions)
Act, 1999
This Act provides for the establishment of a national inventory of architectural heritage and
historic monuments.
Section 1 of the act defines “architectural heritage” as:
(a) all structures and buildings together with their settings and attendant grounds, fixtures and
fittings,
(b) groups of such structures and buildings, and,
(c) sites
which are of architectural, historical, archaeological, artistic, cultural, scientific, social or technical
interest.
Section 2 of the Act states that the Minister (for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands) shall
establish the NIAH, determining its form and content, defining the categories of architectural
heritage, and specifying to which category each entry belongs. The information contained within
the inventory will be made available to planning authorities, having regard to the security and
privacy of both property and persons involved.
Section 3 of the Act states that the Minister may appoint officers, who may in turn request access
to premises listed in the inventory from the occupiers of these buildings. The officer is required to
inform the occupier of the building why entry is necessary, and in the event of a refusal, can apply
for a warrant to enter the premises.
Section 4 of the Act states that obstruction of an officer or a refusal to comply with requirements of
entry will result in the owner or occupier being guilty of an offence.
Section 5 of the Act states that sanitary authorities who carry out works on a monument covered
by this Act will as far as possible preserve the monument with the proviso that its condition is not
a danger to any person or property, and that the sanitation authority will inform the Minister that
the works have been carried out.
The provisions in the Act are in addition to and not a substitution for provisions of the National
Monument Act (1930–94), and the protection of monuments in the National Monuments Act is
extended to the monuments covered by the Architectural Heritage (National Inventory) and
Historic Monuments (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (1999). RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
40
Proposed renewable biogas plant,
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
The Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1999
The Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1999, which came into force on 1st January
2000, provides for the inclusion of protected structures into the planning authorities’ development
plans and sets out statutory regulations regarding works affecting such structures, thereby giving
greater statutory protection to buildings. All structures listed in the development plan are now referred
to as Protected Structures and enjoy equal statutory protection. Under the 1999 Act the entire
structure is protected, including a structures interior, exterior, the land lying within the curtilage of the
protected structure and other structures within that curtilage. This Act was subsequently repealed and
replaced by the Planning and Development Act, 2000, where the conditions relating to the protection
of architectural heritage are set out in Part IV of the Act.
Protected Structures, Curtilage & Attendant Grounds
A protected structure is defined in the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act 2000 as any
structure or specified part of a structure, which is included in the planning authorities’ Record of
Protected Structures (RPS). Section 57 (1) of the 2000 Act states that “…the carrying out of works to a
protected structure, or a proposed protected structure, shall be exempted development only if those
works would not materially affect the character of
(a) the structure, or
(b) any element of the structure, which contributes to its special architectural, historical,
archaeological, artistic, cultural, scientific, social or technical interest.
By definition, a protected structure includes the land lying within the curtilage of the protected
structure and other structures within that curtilage and their interiors. The notion of curtilage is not
defined by legislation, but according to Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning
Authorities (2004) and for the purposes of this report it can be taken to be the parcel of land
immediately associated with that structure and which is (or was) in use for the purpose of the
structure.
The attendant grounds of a structure are lands outside the curtilage of the structure but which are
associated with the structure and are intrinsic to its function, setting and/or appreciation. The
attendant grounds of a country house could include the entire demesne, or pleasure grounds, and any
structures or features within it such as follies, plantations, lakes etc.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
APPENDIX 15.6
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
TESTING REPORT
Stream BioEnergy Ireland Limited
VOLUME III
APPENDICES TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
AUGUST 2026
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
Archaeological Testing Report
Monaghan Biogas Plant
Maghernakelly, Drum, Co. Monaghan
ITM: 659043E, 818433N
Licence No. 26E0370
Project Name
Project Address / Location
For
Stream BioEnergy
Planning Ref: Monaghan CoCo 2260018
Catríona Baldwin
Date: 8th July 2026 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 1
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 3
1.1. General .................................................................................................................................. 3
2. Location ................................................................................................................................. 3
3. The Proposed Development .................................................................................................. 4
4. Archaeological and Historical Background ............................................................................ 6
4.1. Prehistoric Period (c. 7000 B.C – A.D. 400) ........................................................................... 6
4.2. Early Medieval Period (A.D. 400 – 1200) ............................................................................... 7
4.3. Medieval Period (A.D. 1200 – 1600) ...................................................................................... 8
4.4. Post-Medieval Period (c. A.D. 1600 – 1800) .......................................................................... 9
4.5. Cartographic Sources ............................................................................................................. 9
4.5.1. Down Survey Map (1656) .................................................................................................. 9
4.5.2. Ordnance Survey (OS) 1834 - 1907 Maps ....................................................................... 10
4.6. Topographical Files of the National Museum of Ireland ..................................................... 12
4.7. Recorded Monuments (RMP / SMR Sites) ........................................................................... 12
4.8. Summary of Previous Investigations in the wider environs ................................................ 13
5. Previous Investiagations within the Development Site ....................................................... 14
5.1. Geophysical Survey (Licence No. 24R0379) ......................................................................... 14
5.2. Archaeological Testing (Licence No. 24E1224) .................................................................... 16
6. Archaeological Testing Results ............................................................................................ 19
6.1. Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 19
6.2. Summary of Test Trenches .................................................................................................. 19
7. Conclusions and Recommendations.................................................................................... 25
7.1. Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 25
7.2. Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 26
8. References ........................................................................................................................... 29
8.1. Online Sources ..................................................................................................................... 29
Plates .............................................................................................................................................. 30
Appendix A: Context Register ......................................................................................................... 35
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
List of Figures
Figure 1: Site Location ...................................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2: Google Earth Imagery (2024) showing the proposed development site .......................... 4
Figure 3: Proposed site layout plan .................................................................................................. 6
Figure 4: Down Survey Map (1656) of the Barony of Dartry .......................................................... 10
Figure 5: First Edition 6inch Ordnance Survey Map (1834) showing proposed development site
outlined in red ................................................................................................................................ 11
Figure 6: 25inch Ordnance Survey Map (1907) showing the proposed development site outlined
in red ............................................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 7: RMP / SMR Sites within 1km of the proposed development site ................................... 13
Figure 8: Geophysical Survey Interpretation results ...................................................................... 15
Figure 9: Test Trench layout (Licence No. 24E1224) ...................................................................... 18
Figure 10: Test Trench Layout ........................................................................................................ 24
Figure 11: Detail of T1 showing archaeological features ............................................................... 26
Figure 12: Detail of AA1 .................................................................................................................. 28
List of Plates
Plate 1: Burnt mound material (C3) within centre of T1, looking south ........................................ 30
Plate 2: Section trough possible trough (C5), T1 ............................................................................ 30
Plate 3: Overview of Test Trench 2 (T2), looking west-northwest ................................................. 31
Plate 4: Overview of Test Trench 4 (T4), looking south ................................................................. 31
Plate 5: Overview of Test Trench 5 (T5), looking east-southeast ................................................... 32
Plate 6: Overview of Test Trench 6 (T6), looking south ................................................................. 32
Plate 7: Overview of Test Trench 8 (T8), looking west ................................................................... 33
Plate 8: Overview of Test Trench 9 (T9), looking south ................................................................. 33
Plate 9: Overview of Test Trench 10 (T10), looking northeast ....................................................... 34
Plate 10: Overview of Test Trench 11 (T11), looking northeast ..................................................... 34 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report details the results of additional archaeological testing carried out at Maghernakelly,
Drum, Co. Monaghan. The additional testing follows on from a programme of geophysical survey
(Licence No. 24R0379) and archaeological testing (Licence No. 24E1224). A number of additional
test trenches were excavated within the proposed development site. These trenches extend into
areas that did not record any features in order to verify the robustness of the geophysical results.
Previously excavated Trench 6 (Licence No. 24E1224; Coen, 2024) was extended in order to reveal
the full extent of the burnt mound (Archaeological Area 1, see section 6). The archaeological
testing has been carried out to inform the cultural heritage chapter of an Environment Impact
Assessment Report for the proposed development.
The greenfield site of approximately 8.8 hectare is immediately west of the R189 Road and south
of the L2280 Road, on lands in the townlands of Maghernakelly and Drumcall, Co. Monaghan.
11 test trenches totalling approximately 360 linear metres were excavated across Fields 1 and 2.
The purpose of the programme of archaeological testing was to verify the robustness of the
geophysical results and as a result, test trenches T2 – T11 were placed in areas were no
archaeological features were identified on the geophysical survey. Previously excavated Trench 6
(Licence No. 24E1224; Coen, 2024) was extended in order to reveal the full extent of the burnt
mound (T1, Archaeological Area 1).
One area archaeological interest (AA1) was identified during the testing. The area, which was
identified during Phase 1 of testing (Coen, 2025; Licence No. 24E1224), was further defined and
its extents confirmed. It comprised a spread of burnt mound material (C3) and a possible
associated trough (C5), both of which were truncated by a modern linear ditch (C4) (Figure 11).
The spread is approximately 3m (east – west) by 2.8m (north – south) and was on average 0.10m
deep.
With the exception of the site of the burnt spread/ fulacht fia located in the northeastern extent
of the site (AA1), no additional archaeological features or finds were identified within the
proposed development area. Given the fragile nature of the fulacht fia and its very limited survival,
in-situ preservation is not considered a viable option. Therefore, it is recommended that AA1 is
archaeologically excavated prior to construction. An area measuring approximately 10m x 10m
around the fulacht fia site should be archaeologically excavated. This will be carried out in advance
of construction, under licence to the National Monuments Service (NMS) of the Department of
Housing, Local Government and Heritage (DHLGH) to ensure the proper recording of the site. No
compounds or other associated infrastructure or works can be located in area containing the
identified subsurface archaeological features, prior to their excavation.
As there remains a potential for small-scale, discrete or isolated features that can escape detection
by the archaeological investigations carried out to date, it is recommended that all ground
disturbance associated with the development be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist.
and will ensure the full recognition of, and the proper excavation and recording of, all
archaeological soils, features, finds and deposits which may be disturbed below the ground
surface. All archaeological issues will have to be resolved to the satisfaction of the DHLGH and the
National Museum of Ireland. The archaeologist will have authority to inspect all excavation to
natural soil level and to temporarily halt the excavation work, if and as necessary, and to ensure
the temporary protection of any features of archaeological importance identified. The
archaeologist will be afforded sufficient time and resources to record and remove any such
features identified. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
2
Please note that all recommendations are subject to approval by the National Monuments
Section of the Heritage and Planning Division, Department of Housing, Local Government and
Heritage.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
3
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. General
This report details the results of additional archaeological testing carried out at Maghernakelly,
Drum, Co. Monaghan. The additional testing follows on from a programme of geophysical survey
(Licence No. 24R0379) and archaeological testing (Licence No. 24E1224). A number of additional
test trenches were excavated within the proposed development site. These trenches extend into
areas that did not record any features in order to verify the robustness of the geophysical results.
Previously excavated Trench 6 (Licence No. 24E1224; Coen, 2024) was extended in order to reveal
the full extent of the burnt mound (Archaeological Area 1, see section 6). The archaeological
testing has been carried out to inform the cultural heritage chapter of an Environment Impact
Assessment Report for the proposed development.
In total, 11 test trenches were excavated across the site, ranging in length from 20m to 50m and
totalling 360 linear metres.
2. LOCATION
The greenfield site of approximately 8.8 hectare is immediately west of the R189 Road and south
of the L2280 Road, on lands in the townlands of Maghernakelly and Drumcall, Co. Monaghan.
Figure 1: Site Location RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
4
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Figure 2: Google Earth Imagery (2024) showing the proposed development site
3. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The development consists of the construction and operation of a Renewable Biogas Plant and
associated infrastructure. The principal elements of the plant comprise a main process building
where the feedstock for the anaerobic digestion (AD) process is received. An odour control system
with a dispersion stack will treat the air from the building. The feedstock passes to the AD tanks
located within a bunded tank farm. There is a combined heat and power (CHP) building where the
electricity for the plant’s energy needs will be generated from the biogas produced in the AD
process. A Biogas Upgrade and Treatment Plant will be installed to produce biomethane (a
renewable natural gas) that will be exported via a Gas Grid Entry Unity to the national gas grid. A
CO2 Liquefaction plant will be installed to capture the carbon dioxide in the biogas, turning it into
liquid CO₂. A Dryer Building is proposed, where the digestate will be dried, and a Pellet Hall will be
constructed, where the digestate, pellets will be stored prior to removal from the site for use as a
natural fertiliser product. Ancillary elements include a gas dome, tanks to store incoming liquid
feedstock, freshwater, firewater, and fuel, a backup gas flare, a backup generator, a plant building,
and a control building. A new site entrance, weighbridges, wheel washes, parking facilities, and all
ancillary development works and services also form part of the development.
As shown in Figure 3, the biogas plant comprises a number of buildings, structures and plant
including:
1 - Administration Building (with associated surface level car parking);
2 - Main Process Building (with associated vehicle turning areas);
3 - Odour Control System (with associated emission stack); RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
5
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
4 - Bunded Tank Farm;
5 - Digestate Treatment Plant (Evaporator);
6 - Digestate Drying Plant;
7 - Pellet Hall (for fertiliser storage);
8 - Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Building (accommodating two CHP Units);
9 - Boiler Unit;
10 - Shared Emission Stack (Digestate Drying Plant, CHP and Boiler Units);
11 - CO2 Liquefaction Plant;
12 - Biogas Upgrade Plant (BUP);
13 - Biogas Treatment Plant (Biological De-sulphurisation Units);
14 - Gas (Holder) Buffer Dome;
15 - Weighbridges and Wheel Washes;
16 - Feedstock Storage Tanks;
17 - Backup Gas Flare;
18 - Fuel Storage Tank;
19 - Gas Grid Entry Unit;
20 - Fire Water Storage Tank;
21 - Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) Storage Tanks;
22 - Freshwater Storage Tank (Underground);
23 - Staff and Visitor Parking;
24 - Control Building;
25 - Plant Room; and
26 - Back-Up generator.
Other integrated elements, though not numbered the plan below include:
Internal road and footway provision;
Engineered stormwater drainage system;
Landscaping and Earthworks; RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
6
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Lighting;
Fencing and security gates; and
Site entrance/exit off the L2280 Drumcall Road with gated frontage. This shall include localised
widening and realignment of this road over c.200m and reconfiguration of the junction with the R189.
Figure 3: Proposed site layout plan
4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
4.1. Prehistoric Period (c. 7000 B.C – A.D. 400)
Evidence for known prehistoric activity surrounding the proposed development site is sparse, with
very few sites or finds being noted in this area. The closest site of potential prehistoric origin is a
stone row (RMP No.: MO017-068) known as the ‘Grey Stones’ which located c. 917m north of the
proposed development, in Drumgole townland. The site is situated on a north-east facing slope
on the summit of a drumlin ridge that runs along an east/north-east to west/south-west
orientation. A fourth stone, standing 5m to the south of the row also follows the same orientation
as the other stones. While dating this type of monument without archaeological excavation can
be extremely difficult, sites such as this are typically considered to be prehistoric in date.
More concrete evidence for prehistoric activity exist in the wider landscape, for example a
megalithic court tomb (RMP No.: MO018-043) in Edergole townland, c. 4.2km north-east of the
proposed site. Court tombs make up around 30% of the classified megalithic tombs identified in RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
7
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Ireland and are defined by the presence of an uncovered court which is generally situated at the
broader of a end of a long trapezoidal cairn that is defined by megalithic kerbstones in front of a
covered burial gallery. These sites have a distinctive distribution pattern and are more commonly
found in the northern third of the island (O’Sullivan and Downey 2019). Court tombs typically date
to the very early part of the Neolithic period, c. 3700-3570 BC, although some examples may also
have been reused in the Chalcolithic / Early Bronze Age (Schulting et al. 2012). The example from
Edergole (RMP No.: MO018-043) is located at the bottom of the west facing slope of a knoll on
the crest of a drumlin ridge running east-west. It has since been incorporated into the northern
bank of a road (L6330), which also runs along the east-west axis of the site. At the east/north-east
of the monument, two jambs surmounted by a large lintel provide access to the burial gallery.
Later and more substantial prehistoric activity in the wider landscape around the proposed
development site is represented by an upstanding section of the Black Pig’s Dyke (RMP No.:
MO021-011), the eastern extent of which is c. 10km from the proposed site. The Black Pig’s Dyke
comprises around a dozen individual linear earthworks which occur across the width of the north
midlands and south Ulster, and it is among the most extensive and best-preserved examples of
this monument type on the island. Folk tradition states that the earthworks were torn into the
landscape by a rampaging giant mystical pig, while in the 20th century the earthworks were
interpreted as the remains of a formerly unified territorial boundary for Ulster known as ‘the Great
Wall of Ulidia’. Today, it is recognised that the interpretation of this monument is much more
complex encompassing multiple phases of remodelling and refurbishment, as well as considerable
variability between the upstanding sections (Ó Drisceoil and Condit 2015). While linear earthworks
such as this may date to the Bronze, the Black Pig’s Dyke mainly dates to the Iron Age (c. 500 BC –
AD 500).
4.2. Early Medieval Period (A.D. 400 – 1200)
The Early Medieval Period is well-represented in the area around the proposed development site
from an archaeological perspective, particularly in relation to settlement evidence. There are a
number of ringforts in the wider landscape around the proposed site (RMP No.: MO022-007001;
MO022-009; MO023-004; MO023-001; MO018-045; MO017-066; MO017-064; MO022-006).
Ringforts are among the most common monuments in Ireland and consist of areas enclosed by an
earthen bank formed by material thrown up from the digging of a concentric ditch on its outside.
They are usually enclosed by a single bank (univallate) while bivallate or trivallate ringforts (i.e.
those enclosed by double or triple rings of banks) are less common. The number of banks and
ditches enclosing these monuments is considered to reflect the status of the site, rather than the
strengthening of its defences (Stout 1997). Variations include the raised or platform rath type, in
which the interior has been artificially raised, often in a number of stages throughout the
occupation of the site and ultimately presenting as a flat-topped mound (Edwards 2005).
Archaeological excavation has shown that most ringforts functioned as defensible family
homesteads, and most were built during the Early Medieval period (5th - 9th century AD).
However, some appear to have evidence of Iron Age activity, while others were inhabited as late
as the 17th century. They are typically found at slightly higher ground, such as the summits and
slopes of small hills and drumlins, affording good views and drainage (Edwards 2005), as is the
case in Monaghan’s drumlin landscape. Excavation within the interior of ringforts has revealed the
remains of circular and rectangular dwelling houses as well as smaller huts probably used to stall
animals, with timber forming the principal building material. The enclosing earthworks would also
have protected domestic livestock from natural predators such as wolves. Specialist activities
appear to have taken place at some of these sites, with a number showing evidence of
metalworking. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
8
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
One of the ringfort sites in the vicinity of the proposed development site (RMP No.: MO022-
007001) also appears to be associated with a souterrain (RMP No.: MO022-007002). Souterrains
are artificial underground or semi-subterranean passages and chambers built of stone and/or
wood, often with entrances within the house, from the farmyard, or from the ditch surrounding
the enclosure (O’Sullivan et al. 2014 [2021]). These sites are typically interpreted as having been
used for storage, for refuge or both, and recent experimental archaeological research has
demonstrated that the conditions within souterrains are suitable for the cold storage of foodstuffs
such as dairy (Meharg 2019). The souterrain in Drumanny (RMP No.: MO022-007002) presents as
a hollow with a diameter of c. 5m on the perimeter of the associated ringfort (RMP No.: MO022 -
007001) and has been interpreted as the site of a collapsed souterrain.
There are also a number of lakes in the wider area around the proposed development site which
give rise to an additional form of Early Medieval settlement – crannogs (RMP No.: MO023-002;
MO022-003; MO017-067; MO022-021). Crannogs (lake settlements) are a distinctively Irish form
of settlement enclosure, typically defined as artificial islets of stone, timber and soil enclosed
within a wooden palisade, but can also include stone cairns without palisades, deliberately
enhanced natural islands and occupation platforms situated along lake shore edges but not
necessarily surrounded by water (O’Sullivan et al. 2014 [2021]).
Archaeological evidence shows that Irish crannogs can vary widely in morphology and
construction and, although typically found in single isolated examples, there are some instances
of crannog clusters along lakes and lakeshores which may indicate individual sites within the
groups where contemporary but may have had differing roles. These sites often provide evidence
for long chronologies of construction, occupation and abandonment, resulting in sites that are
considerably built up over time. Crannogs appear to have had a range of functions and their use
changed over time. Like their dryland counterpart, the ringfort, the size and complexity of their
construction is typically interpreted as a display of social status and power. Some sites appear to
have been seasonal or permanent royal residences, while others functioned as ecclesiastical sites
such as storage places for holy relics or even hermitages. However, for the most part they are the
dwellings of the moderately wealthy, representing more remote and easily defensible
counterparts to the ringfort (O’Sullivan et al. 2014 [2021]).
4.3. Medieval Period (A.D. 1200 – 1600)
Archaeological evidence for activity in the area around the proposed development site is sparse.
The Anglo-Normans invaded Ireland in 1169, taking Dublin a year later. They came under the
leadership of Gilbert de Clare, otherwise known as Strongbow. He led the invasion at the request
of Dermot McMurrough, the dispossessed king of Leinster. At this time the study area formed part
of the kingdom of Airghialla, which was under the control of the O’Carrolls. Attempts by the Anglo-
Normans to conquer this area were slow to start. As with elsewhere in the country, the initial
penetration was marked by the erection of a series of earthwork castles, such as the motte and
bailey in Clones (RMP No.: MO011-008001), c. 20km north-west of the proposed site.
As English rule became more solidified in following decades, the barony of Dartree (in which the
proposed development site is located), together with the baronies of Cremorne and Farney were
part of the grant of Ardee made to Peter Pippard c. 1190 (Otway-Ruthven 1968). By the mid-14th
century, the area was under the control of the Gaelic Irish MacMahon family who remained in
power there until the end of the 16th century (Ó Dufaigh and Duffy 1999). In 1591 a process of
settlement commenced in Monaghan aimed at abolishing landholding under Irish law and
eliminating the rule of the MacMahons. As a result of the 1591 settlement, Monaghan was
excluded from the later Plantation of Ulster (Duffy 1981). RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
9
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
4.4. Post-Medieval Period (c. A.D. 1600 – 1800)
There is also little archaeological evidence for activity in the study area for much of the Post-
Medieval period. It is not until the 19th century that we have substantial records from the area.
In his Topographical Dictionary of Ireland, Lewis (1837) describes the parish of Ematris, in which
the proposed development site is located. He records that the parish is home to 7541 inhabitants
and that the soils of the region are comprised of rich shallow loam above deep stiff clay which is
very difficult to cultivate. The primary industries of the area are described as weaving linen and
agriculture. Lewis (1837) also notes a number of gentlemanly seats within the parish, including
the New Park estate where the proposed development site is located. Another nearby estate,
Forest View, is depicted in the First Edition 6” mapping (1834), just over 1km south-west of the
proposed site.
The 25” Ordnance Survey mapping of the area, produced in 1908, shows the presence of an
Orange Hall on the opposite site of the road to the northern boundary of the proposed
development. Orange Halls are the meeting places the Orange Order, an international Protestant
fraternal order, best known for its annual celebration of William of Orange’s victory at the Battle
of the Boyne in 1690 on the 12th of July. It is unclear when this Orange Hall was built, but it is
recorded on both the 25” and Last Edition 6” (1910) mapping for the area. Monaghan, Cavan and
Donegal are the only counties of Ulster that remained in the Irish Free State, and later the Republic
of Ireland, after partition in 1921. In 1911, more than one-fifth of the population in these counties
was Protestant (Fitzpatrick 2002), meaning the Orange Halls played an important role in the social,
political and religious life of this segment of the population. In 1921, 57 halls were known in
Monaghan and by 1965, although the numbers had declined 40 remained with an estimated 700
members (Fitzpatrick 2002).
As these numbers suggest, following partition Orange demonstration continued to be held across
Monaghan, Donegal and Cavan, although this came to an end in Monaghan in 1931. Information
about a planned armed interference with the annual Monaghan Orange parade by local
Republicans put an end to county demonstrations, but smaller parades from the Orange Halls to
the local church were planned. By the middle of the 20th century, most southern Orange members
attended the demonstrations in Northern Ireland rather than host their own, as continues to be
the case today (Walker 2012). The presence of an Orange House in the area of the proposed
development is an important aspect of this cultural heritage and is of local historical interest.
4.5. Cartographic Sources
4.5.1. Down Survey Map (1656)
The Down Survey of 1656-58 was, at the time, the most detailed cartographic survey in the world,
undertaken in order to measure the land forfeited from the Catholic population to be
redistributed amongst merchant adventurers and loyal English soldiers. The ‘Barony Map of Dartry
(Dartree)’ shows the lands in and around Maghernakelly townland, where the proposed
development site is found (Figure 4). The land is recorded as comprising 23 plantation acres of
unprofitable land and 61 plantation acres of profitable land, all of which was forfeited. The
unprofitable land appears to largely consist of ‘bogg (bog) common’ in the north-east of the
townland. This is part of a larger stretch of bog that runs along a north-east/south-west axis to the
north of the townland.
The Down Survey also records the contemporary land ownership of each parcel of land mapped.
In 1641, the townland was in the ownership of a Protestant named Thomas Burnett who also
appears to have owned a total of 30 townlands within the barony of Dartree. By 1670 the land RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
10
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
had changed hands and Maghernakelly is recorded as being in the ownership of a Protestant
named Richard Dawson. Dawson is also recorded as having owned 22 townlands in Dartree barony
and 2 townlands in the barony of Cremorne.
Figure 4: Down Survey Map (1656) of the Barony of Dartry
4.5.2. Ordnance Survey (OS) 1834 - 1907 Maps
The first edition Ordnance Survey (OS) 6” map of 1834 provides the earliest complete and accurate
survey of the study area. On this map, the proposed site appears to form part of the northern
extent of the New Park estate (Figure 5). New Park House, outbuildings and gardens, which at this
time was occupied by Dacre Hamilton (Lewis 1837), are depicted to the south of the proposed
development site. To the south-west of the proposed development site a fort is shown and is
consistent with the location of the hilltop enclosure (RMP No.: MO022-008) recorded by the
Record of Monuments and Places. The road layout depicted in the area around the proposed site
is also consistent with the modern layout shown in later aerial and satellite imagery.
In this edition of the historical mapping, the site occupies parts of three fields. This was parkland
that formed part of the designed landscape of the New Park estate and estate planning is evident
in the rows of trees depicted within and along the boundary of the proposed site. The northern
boundary of the proposed development site forms the townland boundary, which at this time is
marked by a road (consistent with the existing L6330 road). RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
11
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Figure 5: First Edition 6inch Ordnance Survey Map (1834) showing proposed development site outlined in red
The Ordnance Survey 25” maps were produced from the 1890s and into the early 20th century at
a scale of 25-inches-to-a-mile. The enhanced resolution of these maps can often provide more
detail about an area. The 25” maps for the present study area were produced in 1908. There has
been little change overall in the c. 70 years since the area was last surveyed, although the biggest
development has been the considerable subdivision of land within the proposed site and in the
wider landscape around it which has resulted in a greater number of individual fields that are
depicted (Figure 6). The land within the proposed site now comprises five fields and the previous
estate plantation is not depicted in this edition, indicating that the former parkland has been given
over to agriculture.
New Park House remains to the south of the proposed site, and a gate lodge has been added to
the estate. An Orange Hall is now depicted to the north of the proposed site and the area to the
north-east is now named as ‘Black Kesh’, perhaps referring to a local bridge or crossing. The road
network shown has not changed significantly since the previous edition of the mapping.
The Last Edition of the 6” OS mapping for the study area was produced in 1910, only two years
after the 25” mapping and very little changed in the area during this time. As a result, this edition
of the OS mapping is not shown here. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
12
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Figure 6: 25inch Ordnance Survey Map (1907) showing the proposed development site outlined in red
4.6. Topographical Files of the National Museum of Ireland
The topographical files do not record any stray finds within the proposed development site nor
within the wider vicinity of it (within 1km; National Museum of Ireland Finds Database 2010).
4.7. Recorded Monuments (RMP / SMR Sites)
There are no recorded archaeological monuments (RMP/SMR sites) within or immediately
adjacent to the site. There are five recorded monuments located within approximately 1km of the
proposed development representing activity in the landscape from the prehistoric to the early
medieval periods.
Table 1: Recorded Monuments within 1km of the Proposed Development Site
RMP / SMR No. Class Townland ITM E ITM N
MO017-068 Stone Row Drumgole 658853 819100
MO022-007001 Ringfort _Rath Drumanny 658449 817767
MO022-007002 Souterrain Drumanny 658465 817783
MO022-008 Hilltop Enclosure Maghernakelly 658783 818147
MO022-009 Ringfort – Rath Maghernakelly 659198 817720
The nearest of these is a large oval hillfort enclosure (RMP MO022-008), situated on top of a
drumlin c. 175m to the south-west. It is depicted on the first edition 6” OS map (1834) as an
embanked enclosure and survives above ground, measuring 107m by 69m. These sites are
typically dated to the Iron Age, but excavated examples indicate that at least some have their
origins in the Bronze Age.
Another indicator of prehistoric (possibly Bronze Age) activity is the stone row recorded c. 917m
to the north (RMP MO017-068). There are also two upstanding ringforts are located just over a
kilometre south and south-west of the proposed development (RMP MO022-009 & MO022-RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
13
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
007001), one of which has an associated souterrain (MO022-007002). These and other relevant
archaeological sites in the wider landscape are discussed in the context of the archaeological and
historical background
Figure 7: RMP / SMR Sites within 1km of the proposed development site
4.8. Summary of Previous Investigations in the wider environs
There has been only one previous archaeological investigation within 1km of the site.
Archaeological test excavations were carried out at a site in Maghernakelly, c. 635m south-west
of the proposed development site, in December 2006 (Licence No.: 06E1132; Excavations.ie Ref.:
2006:1676). The site was located on the grounds of a disused mushroom factory and had been
granted planning permission for the construction of two residential properties. The site was also
located within the Zone of Notification surround a ringfort – rath (RMP No.: MO022-009). A total
of seven trenches were excavated; however no features, deposits or artefacts of archaeological
significance were identified at the site.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
14
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
5. PREVIOUS INVESTIAGATIONS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT SITE
5.1. Geophysical Survey (Licence No. 24R0379)
A geophysical survey (Licence No. 24R0379) was carried out within the proposed development
between 17th-19th September 2024 (Licence No.: 24R0379; Leigh 2024). The survey area included
both fields within the proposed development: Area A to the west and Area B to the east. The main
aim of the survey was to identify any geophysical responses that may represent the remains of
unknown archaeology within the application area (Figure 8).
A series of electricity poles runs through both fields. These have resulted in localised magnetic
disturbance, evident in the survey results, but have not affected the overall interpretation.
8 areas or features were highlighted in the survey. Numbers 1 and 2 were interpreted as
geophysical anomalies often representative of burnt mounds or fulachta fia. These are prehistoric
sites usually comprising of sub-soil cut pits or troughs filled with burnt stone and charcoal.
Numbers 3 and 5 likely represent earlier field boundaries. Numbers 6 and 8 are likely of geological
origin. Numbers 4 and 7 contain anomalies that may represent pits of archaeological origin. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
15
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Figure 8: Geophysical Survey Interpretation results RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
16
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
5.2. Archaeological Testing (Licence No. 24E1224)
Archaeological test excavation was carried out within the proposed renewable biogas plant site
between 30th June – 1st July 2025 under Licence No.: 24E01224. The test excavation sought to
confirm the archaeological nature of the anomalies identified on the geophysical survey and to
confirm their nature and extent, in so far as was possible, within the constraints of the proposed
development boundary.
A total of 9 test trenches were excavated, the majority of which targeted anomalies identified in
the geophysical survey. Almost all of the geophysical signals corresponded to subsoil cut features
though some variations were identified (Error! Reference source not found.).
A single area of archaeological interest was identified during the course of testing and termed
Archaeological Area (AA1). It comprised an archetypal burnt mound deposit, F10. Burnt mounds,
sometimes also termed fulachta fiadh, are prehistoric sites that present as charcoal stained soils
with frequent heat-affected stone. Burnt mounds developed as heated stone was placed in a
water filled pit or trough to heat or boil water for one or a variety of domestic, ritual or industrial
purposes. Troughs can sometimes be lined with wood or other material, evidence for structures
can survive while mounds of the discarded heated stone and associated charcoal usually build up
around the trough. Relatively common sites in Ireland, they were most frequently used during the
Bronze Age period (c. 2200 – 800 BC).
The burnt mound deposit was truncated by the modern ditch F09 that was recorded on the early
OS maps. It revealed that the deposit F10, visible on the surface of the trench as an irregular
deposit with angular outlines, also filled a subsoil cut feature. With straight sides and a flattish
base, the feature was 0.25m in depth. The surface deposit was recorded for 2.8m north-
west/south-east and between 0.5m and 1.4m in width as it extended out of the trench to the
north-east. Given the dimensions and morphology, the subsoil cut feature likely represents a
trough: a water-filled pit where the heated stone was placed for the burnt mound process. Any
associated mound, formed from the discarded heated stone, was thought likely to have been
dispersed by the action of ploughing or other agricultural practices over the millennia.
Table 2: Results of 24E1224 Testing
Trench
no.
Geophysical
Anomaly
Dimensions
(L x W x D)
Orientation Findings
T1 1 48m x 1.80m x 0.30m -
0.40m
Northwest –
Southeast
Contains brick making
residue F3 in location of
geophysical anomaly 1. No
archaeology found.
T2 2 30m x 1.80m x 0.30m -
0.40m
Northwest –
Southeast
Contains brick making
residue F4 in location of
geophysical anomaly 2. No
archaeology found.
T3 3 21m x 1.80m x 0.25m
– 0.35m
Northeast –
Southwest
No features in location of
curvilinear geophysical
anomaly. Contains ditch F5 in
location of linear geophysical
anomaly 3 (former field
boundary). No archaeology
found.
T4 3, 4 30m x 1.80m x 0.30m
– 0.40m
East - West Contains ditch F6 in location
of geophysical anomaly 3 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
17
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Trench
no.
Geophysical
Anomaly
Dimensions
(L x W x D)
Orientation Findings
(former field boundary) &
brick making residue F7 in
location of rectilinear
geophysical anomalies 4. No
archaeology found.
T5 21m x 1.80m x 0.30m
– 0.50m
Northwest –
southeast
Contains brick residue F8 in
location of geophysical
anomaly.
T6 5 20m x 1.80m x 0.25m
– 0.35m
North-
northwest –
South-southeast
Contains ditch F9 (former
field boundary) in location of
geophysical anomaly 5 &
burnt mound deposit &
trough F10 in location of
geophysical ‘pit’ anomaly.
T7 5 20m x 1.80m x 0.30m
– 0.40m
Northwest –
Southeast
Contains ditch F11 (former
field boundary, same as ditch
F9 in Trench 6) in proximity
to geophysical anomaly 5. No
archaeology found.
T8 6, 7 30m x 1.80m x 0.35m
– 0.50m
Northeast –
Southwest
Contains brick making
residue F12 in location of
geophysical anomaly 7. No
feature for ‘natural’ anomaly
6. No archaeology found.
T9 32m x 1.80m x 0.30m
– 0.40m
East - West No archaeology found.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
18
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Figure 9: Test Trench layout (Licence No. 24E1224)
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
19
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
6. ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING RESULTS
Archaeological testing was carried out on 29th June 2026. The test trenches were mechanically
excavated using a 13-tonne tracked excavator fitted with a 1.8m wide toothless grading bucket
under strict archaeological direction. Trenches were set out using a GPS device.
11 test trenches totalling approximately 360 linear metres were excavated across Fields 1 and 2.
The purpose of the programme of archaeological testing was to verify the robustness of the
geophysical survey results and therefore, test trenches T2 – T11 were placed in areas where no
archaeological features were identified on the geophysical survey. Previously excavated Trench 6
(Licence No. 24E1224; Coen, 2024) was extended in order to reveal the full extent of the burnt
mound (T1, Archaeological Area 1).
Three of the proposed test trenches (T12 – T15) in Field 3, as detailed in the licence application
method statement, were not excavated as this area (which was intended for soil storage) has since
been excluded from the proposed development application.
The natural subsoil varied across the site, from compact orange-brown sandy clays on the brow
of the hill to yellow and grey mottled clayey sands and grey clays down slope to the north.
6.1. Methodology
All trenches were excavated to the surface of archaeological or potential archaeological deposits
or to the underlying natural subsoil, whichever was encountered first. Any potential
archaeological features were cleaned and sectioned where necessary, to establish their nature
extent and character. Photographs, plans and trench recording sheets were used to record any
features of potential archaeological interest.
6.2. Summary of Test Trenches
Table 3: Summary of Test Trench 1 (T1)
General Description
Orientated east-northeast – west-southwest, T1 measured 20m long by 1.80m wide and was 0.35m
deep. The remains of a burnt mound (C3) or fulacht fia occupied the centre of the trench. The burnt
mound deposit measured approximately 3m (east – west) and was on average 0.10m deep (Plate 1) It
comprised a dark grey – black sandy silt with frequent inclusions of heat-affected stone and occasional
inclusions of charcoal. A possible trough (C5) was identified beneath the burnt mound deposit (Plate 2).
The trough, which measures approximately 0.60m (east – west) and 0.30m deep, displayed a U-shaped
profile that incorporated a sharp upper break of slope, straight sides and a flat base. It was filled with
burnt mound material.
C3 and C5 were truncated by a linear ditch (C4) that was recorded on the early OS maps. Measuring
1.90m wide and at least 0.40m deep, C4 displayed a V-shaped in profile with straight sides and a crushed
stone-filled drain near base of ditch.
The natural subsoil was an orange – brown sandy clay with occasional inclusions of small, sub-angular
stone.
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C1 0.00m –
0.35m Humic mid brown layer Topsoil
C3 0.35m –
0.45m
Burnt mound material comprising a dark grey – black
sandy silt with frequent inclusions of heat-affected
stone and occasional inclusions of charcoal
Burnt Mound RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
20
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
General Description
Orientated east-northeast – west-southwest, T1 measured 20m long by 1.80m wide and was 0.35m
deep. The remains of a burnt mound (C3) or fulacht fia occupied the centre of the trench. The burnt
mound deposit measured approximately 3m (east – west) and was on average 0.10m deep (Plate 1) It
comprised a dark grey – black sandy silt with frequent inclusions of heat-affected stone and occasional
inclusions of charcoal. A possible trough (C5) was identified beneath the burnt mound deposit (Plate 2).
The trough, which measures approximately 0.60m (east – west) and 0.30m deep, displayed a U-shaped
profile that incorporated a sharp upper break of slope, straight sides and a flat base. It was filled with
burnt mound material.
C3 and C5 were truncated by a linear ditch (C4) that was recorded on the early OS maps. Measuring
1.90m wide and at least 0.40m deep, C4 displayed a V-shaped in profile with straight sides and a crushed
stone-filled drain near base of ditch.
The natural subsoil was an orange – brown sandy clay with occasional inclusions of small, sub-angular
stone.
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C4 0.35m –
0.85m
Linear ditch with V-shaped profile with straight sides
and a stone-filled drain at the base Drainage ditch
C5 0.35m –
0.65m
Possible trough, 0.60m (east – west) by 0.30m (north
– south), straight sides and flat base, filled with burnt
mound material
Possible trough
C3 0.35m+ Orange – brown sandy clay with occasional inclusions
of small, sub-angular stone Natural subsoil
Table 4: Summary of Test Trench 2 (T2)
General Description
Orientated northeast – southwest, T2 measured 40m long by 1.80m wide and varied in depth from 0.25m
in the northeastern extent to 0.30m in the southwestern extent (Plate 3). The natural subsoil was a yellow-
grey mottled clayey sand with occasional inclusions of small stones.
No finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were identified.
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C1 0.00m –
0.25m/0.30m Humic mid brown layer Topsoil
C2 0.25m/0.30m
+
Yellow and grey mottled clayey sand with occasional
stone inclusions. Natural Subsoil
Table 5: Summary of Test Trench 3 (T3)
General Description
Orientated northeast – southwest, T3 measured 30m long by 1.80m wide and was 0.35m deep . The
natural soil was a yellow-grey mottled clayey sand with occasional inclusions of small stones and small
pockets of peaty material. A roughly east – west running stone drain transected the northeastern extent
of the trench.
No finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were identified.
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C1 0.00m –
0.35m Humic mid brown layer Topsoil
C2 0.35m+ Yellow and grey mottled clayey sand with occasional
stone inclusions. Natural Subsoil RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
21
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Table 6: Summary of Test Trench 4 (T4)
General Description
Orientated north – south, T4 measured 50m long by 1.80m wide and was 0.30m deep (Plate 4). The
natural subsoil was an orange – brown sandy clay with occasional inclusions of small, sub-angular stone.
No finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were identified.
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C1 0.00m –
0.30m Humic mid brown layer Topsoil
C2 0.30m+ Orange – brown sandy clay with occasional stone
inclusions. Natural Subsoil
Table 7: Summary of Test Trench 5 (T5)
General Description
Orientated east – west, T5 measured 30m long by 1.80m wide and was 0.25m deep (Plate 5). The natural
subsoil was an orange – brown sandy clay with occasional inclusions of small, sub-angular stone.
No finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were identified.
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C1 0.00m –
0.25m Humic mid brown layer Topsoil
C2 0.25m+ Orange – brown sandy clay with occasional stone
inclusions. Natural Subsoil
Table 8: Summary of Test Trench 6 (T6)
General Description
Orientated north – south, T6 measured 30m long by 1.80m wide and was 0.35m deep (Plate 6). The
natural subsoil was an orange – brown sandy clay with occasional inclusions of small, sub-angular stone,
Two stone drains, one northwest – southeast and the other northeast – southwest, transected the
trench.
No finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were identified.
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C1 0.00m –
0.35m Humic mid brown layer Topsoil
C2 0.35m+ Orange – brown sandy clay with occasional stone
inclusions. Natural Subsoil
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
22
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Table 9: Summary of Test Trench 7 (T7)
General Description
Orientated north – south, T7 measured 40m long by 1.80m wide and was 0.30m deep. The northern
extent was a yellow and grey mottled clayey sand while the southern extent was an orange – brown
sandy clay with occasional inclusions of small, sub-angular stone.
No finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were identified.
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C1 0.00m –
0.30m Humic mid brown layer Topsoil
C2 0.30m+
Yellow and grey mottled clayey sand with occasional
stone inclusions varying to orange – brown sandy
clay
Natural Subsoil
Table 10: Summary of Test Trench 8 (T8)
General Description
Orientated northeast – southwest, T8 measured 30m long by 1.80m wide and was 0.35m deep (Plate 7).
The natural subsoil was an orange – brown sandy clay with occasional inclusions of small, sub-angular
stone. A northeast – southwest running stone drain occupied the northeast extent of the trench.
No finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were identified.
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C1 0.00m –
0.35m Humic mid brown layer Topsoil
C2 0.35m+ Orange – brown sandy clay with occasional stone
inclusions. Natural Subsoil
Table 11: Summary of Test Trench 9 (T9)
General Description
Orientated North – South, T9 measured 30m long by 1.80m wide and was 0.30m deep (Plate 8). The
natural subsoil varied within the trench. The northern extent was a yellow and grey mottled clayey sand
while the southern extent was an orange – brown sandy clay with occasional inclusions of small, sub-
angular stone.
No finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were identified. O
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C1 0.00m –
0.30m Humic mid brown layer Topsoil
C2 0.30m+
Yellow and grey mottled clayey sand with occasional
stone inclusions varying to orange – brown sandy
clay
Natural Subsoil
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
23
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Table 12: Summary of Test Trench 10 (T10)
General Description
Orientated northeast - southwest, T10 measured 30m long by 1.80m wide and 0.30m deep (Plate 9). The
natural subsoil was an orange – brown sandy clay with occasional inclusions of small, sub-angular stone.
No finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were identified.
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C1 0.00m –
0.30m Humic mid brown layer Topsoil
C2 0.30m+ Orange – brown sandy clay with occasional stone
inclusions. Natural Subsoil
Table 13: Summary of Test Trench 11 (T11)
General Description
Orientated northeast – southwest, T11 measured 30m long by 1.80m wide and was on average 0.25m
deep (Plate 10). The natural subsoil was an orange – brown sandy clay with occasional inclusions of small,
sub-angular stone.
No finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were identified.
Context
No. Depth Description Interpretation
C1 0.00m –
0.25m Humic mid brown layer Topsoil
C2 0.25m+ Orange – brown sandy clay with occasional stone
inclusions. Natural Subsoil
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
24
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Figure 10: Test Trench Layout RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
25
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1. Conclusions
One area archaeological interest (AA1) was identified during the testing. The area, which was
identified during Phase 1 of testing (Coen, 2025; Licence No. 24E1224), was further defined and
its extents confirmed. It comprised a spread of burnt mound material (C3) and a possible
associated trough (C5), both of which were truncated by a modern linear ditch (C4) (Figure 11).
The spread is approximately 3m (east – west) by 2.8m (north – south) and was on average 0.10m
deep. Burnt mounds, sometimes also termed fulachta fiadh, are prehistoric sites that present as
charcoal stained soils with frequent heat-affected stone. Burnt mounds developed as heated
stone was placed in a water filled pit or trough to heat or boil water for one or a variety of
domestic, ritual or industrial purposes. Troughs can sometimes be lined with wood or other
material, and evidence for structures can survive while mounds of the discarded heated stone and
associated charcoal usually build up around the trough. Relatively common sites in Ireland, they
were most frequently used during the Bronze Age period (c. 2200 – 800 BC).
No finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were identified in any of the other test
trenches.
Table 14: Summary of testing results
Trench
no.
Dimensions
(L x W x D)
Orientation Findings
T1 20m x 1.80m x 0.35m East-northeast – West-
southwest
Remains of a fulacht fia
with possible trough
T2 30m x 1.80m x
0.25m/0.30m Northeast – Southwest No archaeology found
T3 40m x 1.80m x 0.35m Northeast – Southwest No archaeology found
T4 50m x 1.80m x 0.30m North – South No archaeology found
T5 30m x 1.80m x 0.25m East – West No archaeology found
T6 40m x 1.80m x 0.35m North – South No archaeology found
T7 30m x 1.80m x 0.30m North - South No archaeology found
T8 30m x 1.80m x 0.35m North – South No archaeology found
T9 30m x 1.80m x 0.30m North – South No archaeology found
T10 30m x 1.80m x 0.30m Northeast - Southwest No archaeology found
T11 30m x 1.80m x 0.25m Northeast – Southwest No archaeology found RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
26
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Figure 11: Detail of T1 showing archaeological features
7.2. Recommendations
With the exception of the site of the burnt spread/ fulacht fia located in the northeastern extent
of the site (AA1), no additional archaeological features or finds were identified within the
proposed development area. Given the fragile nature of the fulacht fia and its very limited survival,
in-situ preservation is not considered a viable option. Therefore, it is recommended that AA1 is
archaeologically excavated prior to construction. An area measuring approximately 10m x 10m
around the fulacht fia site should be archaeologically excavated. This will be carried out in advance
of construction, under licence to the National Monuments Service (NMS) of the Department of
Housing, Local Government and Heritage (DHLGH) to ensure the proper recording of the site. No
compounds or other associated infrastructure or works can be located in area containing the
identified subsurface archaeological features, prior to their excavation.
As there remains a potential for small-scale, discrete or isolated features that can escape detection
by the archaeological investigations carried out to date, it is recommended that all ground
disturbance associated with the development be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist.
and will ensure the full recognition of, and the proper excavation and recording of, all
archaeological soils, features, finds and deposits which may be disturbed below the ground
surface. All archaeological issues will have to be resolved to the satisfaction of the DHLGH and the
National Museum of Ireland. The archaeologist will have authority to inspect all excavation to
natural soil level and to temporarily halt the excavation work, if and as necessary, and to ensure
the temporary protection of any features of archaeological importance identified. The
archaeologist will be afforded sufficient time and resources to record and remove any such
features identified.
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
27
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Please note that all recommendations are subject to approval by the National Monuments
Section of the Heritage and Planning Division, Department of Housing, Local Government and
Heritage. RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
28
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Figure 12: Detail of AA1 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
29
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
8. REFERENCES
Coen, L. 2024 Archaeological testing report, Monaghan AD, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan,
Licence No. 24E1224. Unpublished Report for Courtney Deery Heritage Consultancy.
Duffy, P. 1981 “Patterns of Landownership in Gaelic Monaghan in the Late Sixteenth Century”,
Clogher Record 10(3), 304-322.
Duffy, S. 1995 “The first Ulster plantation: John de Courcy and the men of Cumbria” in T. B. Barry,
Robin Frame, and Katharine Simms (eds), Colony and frontier in medieval Ireland: essays
presented to J. F. Lydon, 1-27. London: Hambledon Press.
Edwards, N. 2005 “The archaeology of early medieval Ireland, c. 400-1169” in D. Ó Cróinín (ed.) A
New History of Ireland 1: Prehistoric and Early Ireland, 235-370. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Joyce, P.W. 1910a The Origin and History of Irish Names and Places, Vol. 1. Dublin: M.H. Gill and
Son.
Joyce, P.W. 1910b The Origin and History of Irish Names and Places, Vol. 2. Dublin: Talbot Press.
Joyce, P.W. 1920 The Origin and History of Irish Names and Places, Vol. 3. Dublin: Educational
Company of Ireland.
Lewis, S. 1837 A topographical dictionary of Ireland, 2 vols. London. Lewis and Co.
Meharg, T. 2019 “Going Underground: An Experimental Archaeological Investigation of an Early
Medieval Irish Souterrain”, EXARC Journal 2019/02.
Ó Drisceoil, C. and Condit, E. 2015 “The Black Pig’s Dyke – Power Lines in the Landscape”,
Archaeology Ireland Heritage Guide No. 68.
Ó Dufaigh, S. and Duffy, J. 1999 “Medieval Monaghan: The Evidence of the Placenames”, Clogher
Record 16(3), 7-28.
O’Sullivan, A.; McCormick, F.; Kerr, T.; and Harney, L. 2014[2021] Early Medieval Ireland, AD 400 -
1100: The evidence from archaeological investigations. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy.
O’Sullivan, M. and Downey, L. 2019 “Court Tombs”, Archaeology Ireland 33(1), 35-38.
Otway-Ruthven, A. J. 1968. A history of medieval Ireland. London.
Schulting, R.; Murphy, E.; Jones, C.; and Warren, G. 2012 “New dates from the north and a
proposed chronology for Irish court tombs”, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 112C, 1-60,
Stout, G., 1997. The Irish Ringfort. Dublin: Four Courts Press.
8.1. Online Sources
www.archaeology.ie
www.downsurvey.tcd.ie
www.excavations.ie
www.heritagemaps.ie
www.osi.ie RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
30
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
PLATES
Plate 1: Burnt mound material (C3) within centre of T1, looking south
Plate 2: Section trough possible trough (C5), T1 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
31
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Plate 3: Overview of Test Trench 2 (T2), looking west-northwest
Plate 4: Overview of Test Trench 4 (T4), looking south RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
32
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Plate 5: Overview of Test Trench 5 (T5), looking east-southeast
Plate 6: Overview of Test Trench 6 (T6), looking south
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
33
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Plate 7: Overview of Test Trench 8 (T8), looking west
Plate 8: Overview of Test Trench 9 (T9), looking south RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
34
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
Plate 9: Overview of Test Trench 10 (T10), looking northeast
Plate 10: Overview of Test Trench 11 (T11), looking northeast RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
35
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
APPENDIX A: CONTEXT REGISTER
Context
No. Feature/Other Description Trench
1 Topsoil Humic mid brown layer All
2 Natural Subsoil Mid-orange brown sandy clay varying to yellow and grey mottled
clayey sand All
3 Burnt mound
material
Burnt mound deposit measuring approximately 3m east – west and
was on average 0.10m deep It comprised a dark grey – black sandy
silt with frequent inclusions of heat-affected stone and occasional
inclusions of charcoal.
T1
4 Linear ditch
Modern linear ditch truncating C3, V-shaped in profile, straight
sides, not bottomed, crushed stone-filled drain near base of ditch;
filled with friable brown silt with occasional stone inclusions.
T1
5 Possible
trough
Possible trough identified beneath the burnt mound deposit. The
trough, which measures approximately 0.60m (east – west) and
0.30m deep, displayed a U-shaped profile that incorporated a sharp
upper break of slope, straight sides and a flat base. It was filled with
burnt mound material.
T1 RECEIVED: 28/08/2026
36
Archaeological testing report, Maghernakelly, Co. Monaghan
Licence No. 26E0370
RECEIVED: 28/08/2026