Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2660154 - F.I. Received Doc. - Other AssessmentsPhone: 049-4371447/9Fax: 049-4371451E-mail: info@clw.ie The Mews,23 Farnham Street,Cavan,Co. CavanCLW Environmental Planners Ltd. Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204J Planning Department,Monaghan County Council,County Offices,The Glen,Monaghan.14th September 2026 RE: Planning application for Alan Niblock.Development Address ~ Enagh, Rockcorry Co. Monaghan.Your Ref: 26/60154 Dear Sir/Madame I refer to the planning application for development on an existing poultry farm, made on behalf of Mr.Alan Niblock and your subsequent correspondence in relation to same dated 10th June last. Please finddetailed below the response to the issues raised. 1. Section 15.22.8 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 states that all developmentproposals in flood risk areas should be supported with a site-specific Flood Risk Assessment (FRA), inaccordance with the DECLG, The Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines for PlanningAuthorities (2009) and Departmental Circular PL2/2014. The Office of Public Works (OPW) PreliminaryFlood Risk Assessment (PFRA) maps indicate that part of the application site is vulnerable to pluvialflooding events. In this regard, the Applicant shall submit a Flood Risk Assessment for the proposed development,completed by a competent professional with hydrological experience, confirming that thedevelopment:Will not be at risk of floodingWill not exacerbate flooding in the immediate vicinity or wider area.Will not obstruct or impede important flow pathsWill not result in residual risks to the area and/or development that cannot be managed to anacceptable level. The flood risk assessment shall also clearly demonstrate proposed management of any residual risks. Please refer to enclosed report from Traynor environmental addressing same. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Phone: 049-4371447/9Fax: 049-4371451E-mail: info@clw.ie The Mews,23 Farnham Street,Cavan,Co. CavanCLW Environmental Planners Ltd. Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204J 2.The proposed development is considered insufficient in terms of the environmental informationprovided. In this regard, the applicant is requested to: A. Submit a revised agricultural planning application to include the correct applicant’s name andaddress. Please refer to updated Agricultural application for enclosed. B. Clarify whether storm water will discharge to a soak-pit as stated in Section 1.1 of the ProposedDevelopment Description, and if so, demonstrate that the proposed soak-pit design is suitablefor ground conditions and will present no environmental risk to water quality.C. Submit revised proposals for the storm water drainage system to take account of theDepartment of Housing, Local Government and Heritage guidance document on Nature-basedSolutions to the Management of Rainwater and Surface Water Runoff in Urban Areas. Please refer to enclosed report from Traynor Environmental addressing both points above. D. Clarify the volumes and measurements of all proposed soiled water tanks. As per the Agricultural development form submitted tanks are to be 15.9m3 capacity (Precast tanks asper Carlow Precast attached. E. Submit a revised site layout plan demonstrating the following;All proposed surface/storm water drainage systems (outlined in blue).The directional flow of all surface water pipelines.Proposed nature-based solutions for surface water.All associated discharge points and outfalls.All proposed effluent / soiled water drainage systems (outlined in red).All soiled water storage tanks including volumes and dimensions of same. Please refer to updated site plan enclosed. F. Submit details on the outlet for poultry manure from the proposed development. The addresson the letter submitted with the application is Derrykinard, Swans Cross, Co. Monaghan whichis inconsistent with the proposed development address. The letter shall also clarify thefrequency of poultry manure collections from the proposed development. The address on the letter referred to is correct in that it refers to the applicant’s postal address, whichis directly adjoining the proposed poultry farm site. As satisfactory manure storage is to be providedmanure removal frequency will be at the discretion of the applicant/contractor. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Phone: 049-4371447/9Fax: 049-4371451E-mail: info@clw.ie The Mews,23 Farnham Street,Cavan,Co. CavanCLW Environmental Planners Ltd. Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204J G. Taking account of the land to be used for the proposed development, demonstrate that theremaining spread lands have capacity for all proposed wash waters, including proposedimported wash waters, so as to not result in a stocking rate of greater than 170kg N/Ha. As per the Agricultural development form submitted. Stocking rate = 150 kg Organic N/Ha *Applicant’sbrother also has an application for a similar proposed development resulting in a total of 120 m3 soiledwater cumulative. 120 M3 soiled water will increase this to c. 160KgN/Ha/yr. This was based on anarea of 14.79 Ha. The applicants’ site equates to 1.33 Ha. Reducing the available area by the 1 Ha (to allow for the factthat a section of the site will remain as agricultural land) the stocking rate would increase to c. 170.Should both proposed developments be approved and constructed the applicant has committed toreducing bovine stock numbers to remain within the requirements of S.I. 588 of 2025. H. Submit a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for agreement. This planshall be sufficient to demonstrate that adequate measures will be in place for the construction phaseto ensure there is no discharge of polluting matter/sediment laden waters to any waters. TheConstruction and Environmental Management Plan shall take account of best practice and theguidance produced by Inland Fisheries Ireland titled “Guidelines on Protection of Fisheries duringConstruction Works in and Adjacent to Waters 2016” and shall include the identification of potentialpathways to the groundwater aquifer and the Dromore River. The CEMP shall be prepared by a suitablyqualified person and shall include the location details of the monitoring points where daily visualchecks and weekly surface water monitoring (physical& chemical parameters) shall be carried out. Please refer to enclosed CEMP. Should you have any queries in relation to this, or, require any further information please do not hesitateto contact me at the above number. Yours Faithfully, Paraic Fay B.Agr.Sc. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 COMHAIRLE CONTAE MHUINEACHÁINMONAGHAN COUNTY COUNCIL Planning Section, County Offices, The Glen, Monaghan H18 YT50Tel:047 30532 Fax:047 76276 E mail:planning@monaghancoco.ie SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING APPLICATION FORMFOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT Guidance Notes for completing this formPlease complete in black ink, as appropriate, using block capitals.Q8 & Q9 - All existing and proposed storage facilities should be included. The type of store (refer to A, B, C, D and Ebelow), the type of waste (refer to 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 below) and the dimensions and capacity of storage facilitiesmust also be included.Q11 - List all lands that are owned/leased or controlled by the applicant. Any lands not owned by the applicantshould be indicated as such and a written legal agreement or contract submitted to support the application. Theinformation required is similar to the information normally entered on the Area Aid application form.Q12 - In columns “A & B” enter the maximum number of stock that are housed and outwintered currently on farmand in columns “C & D” enter the maximum number of stock that will be housed and outwintered after thecompletion of the development.Q17 – Application of soiled water to lands must adhere to Article 18 (5) of the EU ( Good Agricultural Practice forProtection of Waters) Regulations 2017 in relations to quantities and irrigation rates for landspreading soiled waters.The following information shall be submitted on a site location map (1/2500 scale):-- Land to receive slurry outlined in brown- All dwelling houses within 100 metres of the proposed development marked by the initials D.H with names ofoccupants if other than applicant- All potable water supplies within 100 metres of the development marked by the initials P.W- All watercourses (drains, streams and ponds) marked by a yellow line; expansive waters such as lakes shadedyellow- All hedgerows outlined by a green lineThe following information shall be submitted on a site layout plan (1/500 scale):-- All buildings within the farmyard complex existing and proposed- Existing and proposed slurry and effluent holding facilities- Concreted yards and aprons- Storm drainage Section A: General Details 1. Applicant:Alan Niblock _______________________ 2. Location of Development:Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. 3. Nature of Proposed Works:Mr. Derek Niblock intends to apply for planning permission to construct 1 No.poultry house and 1 No. Manure store together with all ancillary structures (to include meal storage bin(s) andsoiled water tank(s)) and site works (to include new/upgraded site entrance) associated with the abovedevelopment at Enagh Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. 4. Distance between development and nearest third party dwelling house:>300______metres 5. Area of farm _______c. 14.79_ hectares/acres**Delete as appropriate 6. Floor/Footprint area of proposed farm buildings/tanks/stores/yards:c. 3764.36 square metres 7. Will any proposed soiled water storage facility be above or below ground? Above Below N/A Application FormAAFFor Official Use Application Ref: Date Received: X REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 8. Detail Existing Waste Organic Fertiliser Storage Facilities Below:Type of Waste OrganicFertiliserStorage Facility*Type of Farm WasteOrganic Fertiliser **Length (m)Width (m)Depth (m)Capacity(LxWxD)=m3 Weeks Storage *A) Uncovered Tanks B) Covered Tanks C) Roofed Slatted Tanks D)Dungstead E)Litter Store**1) Slurry 2) Farm Yard Manure 3) Poultry Litter 4) Soiled Water 5) Washings 6) Spent Compost 7) Other 9. Detail Proposed Waste Organic Fertiliser Storage Capacity Below:Type of Waste OrganicFertiliser Storage Facility*Type of WasteOrganic Fertiliser **Length (m)Width (m)Depth (m)Capacity(LxWxD)=m3 Weeks Storage B (Pre cast Tank) FrontStreet 4 15.9 >26 weeks B (Pre cast Tank) RearConcrete Apron 15.9 >26 weeks E 3 23.775 11.55 2.4 660 >26 weeks *A) Uncovered Tanks B) Covered Tanks C) Roofed Slatted Tanks D) Dungstead E) Litter Store**1) Slurry 2) Farm Yard Manure 3) Poultry Litter 4) Soiled Water 5) Washings 6) Spent Compost 7) Other 10(a). Has a Nutrient Management Plan been prepared for the holding? Yes No 10(b). If Yes has a laboratory analysis report of soil fertility been submitted with the application? Yes No(Soil P index 3 used in accordance with provisions of S.I. 113 of 2022 as amended)Complete the following sections B and C as appropriate/relevant and sign declaration in Section D at end of this form Section B: Cattle, Sheep and Horses N/A 11. Lands Available for Slurry Spreading:Townland(in CAPITALS)Owned (o)Rented (r)Land Parcel Identification Number Area inHectaresSee Attached Area Aid Maps 12. Detail Stock Numbers on Farm Below:Column A -ExistingHoused Animals Column B - ExistingOutwintered Animals Column C - ProposedHoused Animals Column D - ProposedOutwintered AnimalsDairy Cows Suckler Cows Please refer to extract from Applicant N and P statement below which aggregates allbovine livestock on the farm for 2025 to a stocking density expressed in Kg organic N/Ha.Limit as per S.I. 558 of 2025 = 170 Kg organic N/HaCattle (18-24 months old) Cattle (12-18 months old) Cattle (6-12 months old) Cattle (0-6 months old) Lowland Ewe Mountain Ewe Lamb-finishing Horses X X REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Section C: Poultry, Pigs and Mushrooms 13. Detail Bird Places Below:Bird Type Existing Bird Numbers FollowingDevelopment Proposed Total Bird Numbers FollowingDevelopmentBroilers Broiler/Breeders Pullets Layers 38,950 Barn Hens Ducks Turkeys Other 14. Detail Pig Places Below:Pig Type Existing Pig Numbers BeforeDevelopment Proposed Total Pig Numbers Following Development Breeding Unit (Sows) Integrated unit (Sows) Finishing Unit (Pigs) Other 15. Washwaters(a) Storage Tank Capacity:31.8.(b) Nitrogen and Phosphorus content of Washwaters: 1 .37 KgN N/A KgP 60 M3/Year produced (c) Destination for washwaters: Own spreadlands() 14.79 ha farmed by Applicant Other (Please specify) 16. (a)Nitrogen and Phosphorus content of manure: AS per SI 558 of 2025 kgN/1000 bird places /annum AS per SI 558 of 2025 kgP/1000 birds places /annum Total P(kg) _ Total N (kg) (b) Nitrogen and Phosphorus content of pig slurry: kgN/Sow place kgP/Sow place Total P(kg) Total N (kg) (c) Nitrogen and Phosphorus content of spent compost: kgN kgP Total P(kg) Total N (kg) 17. Own farm stocking rate if applicable:=150Kg Organic N/HA (as per 2025 N and P)KgN/Ha*Applicant’s brother also has an application for a similar proposed development resulting in a total of 120 m3 soiledwater cumulative to be applied to these lands. 120 M3 soiled water will increase this to c. 160KgN/Ha/yr. 18. Have maps of spread lands within Co. Monaghan for wash water application been submitted with the application?(Maps to be 1:50,000 aerial photography with land parcels outlined in red) Yes No 19(a). If free range unit, has a letter of approval for paddock area from the Department of Agriculture, Food & Marinebeen submitted? Yes No 19(b). If No have calculations for stocking rate and details of land suitability been provided? Yes No 20. Have maps of spread lands for manure /spent compost application within Co. Monaghan been submitted? X REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 (Maps to be 1:50,000 aerial photography with land parcels outlined in red) Yes No 21. Has a signed letter of agreement from a registered contractor for the collection of poultry manure / spent compostfrom this facility been submitted? Yes No 22. Spreadlands for Poultry Manure / Spent Compost/Pig Slurry application within Co. MonaghanFarmer Name & Address HerdNumber Townland CurrentStocking RateKg/N/Ha Disposal SystemUsed Land Parcel Number Soiled water to be allocated to applicant’s lands as detailed on maps below. 23. Final destination for Poultry Manure / Spent Compost/ Pig Slurry (lands or facilities outside Co. Monaghan)Farmer Name & Address Facility Name & Address Townland Current Stocking RateKg/N/Ha All organic fertiliser moved off site by registered contractor in accordance with S.I. 588 of 2025, as amended. 24. Is this development within the same poultry production complex or within 100m of an existing poultry productioncomplex? Yes No 25. Has an application been made for an EPA Integrated Pollution Prevention Control (IPPC) Licence?Yes No 26. Has a letter from a registered contractor been submitted with the application regarding collection of dead birds?Yes No Section D: Declaration I certify that the information given above is correct: Signature:Name in Capitals:PARAIC FAY Date:21/04/2026 __ Agent Name:Paraic Fay X X X X X REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Alan Niblock Area Aid Maps REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 26/448 TE 14th September 2026 Monaghan County Council Planning Department Dublin Street Monaghan Re: Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended). Planning and Development Regulations 2001 (as amended). 26/60154 - permission to construct 1 No. poultry house and 1 No. Manure store together with all ancillary structures (to include meal storage bin(s) and soiled water tank(s)) and site works (to include new/upgraded site entrance) associated with the above development at Enagh [DED: Lisnaveane], Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan at Enagh Rockcorry Co. Monaghan. Dear Sir/Madam, I refer to your letter dated 10th June 2026, we now comment as follows: Item 1. Section 15.22.8 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 states that all development proposals in flood risk areas should be supported with a site-specific Flood Risk Assessment (FRA), in accordance with the DECLG, The Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2009) and Departmental Circular PL2/2014. The Office of Public Works (OPW) Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA) maps indicate that part of the application site is vulnerable to pluvial flooding events. In this regard, the Applicant shall submit a Flood Risk Assessment for the proposed development, completed by a competent professional with hydrological experience, confirming that the development: • Will not be at risk of flooding • Will not exacerbate flooding in the immediate vicinity or wider area. • Will not obstruct or impede important flow paths • Will not result in residual risks to the area and/or development that cannot be managed to an acceptable level. The flood risk assessment shall also clearly demonstrate proposed management of any residual risks. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 2 Response – Traynor Environmental Ltd. has prepared a Site-Specific Flood Risk Assessment (SSFRA) for the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. The SSFRA has been prepared having regard to the matters raised in the Further Information request and considers fluvial, pluvial/surface-water, groundwater, drainage-related and residual flood risks. The assessment concludes that the proposed development is at low risk of flooding, will not materially increase flood risk within the immediate vicinity or wider area, and will not obstruct or impede an identified important flood-flow pathway. Residual risks, including those associated with exceptional rainfall, drainage exceedance, blockage or restricted conveyance, have also been considered and are capable of being managed to an acceptable level through the proposed surface-water attenuation and flow-control measures, appropriate site grading and exceedance routing, finished floor level and ongoing maintenance of the drainage infrastructure. Full details are provided in the accompanying Site-Specific Flood Risk Assessment. This wording matches the FRA particularly well because the report expressly considers residual/exceedance risk and the Source–Pathway–Receptor relationship rather than relying solely on OPW mapping. It also correctly recognises the minor open drain as a potential source while concluding that no significant fluvial pathway to the proposed development has been identified. Item 2. The proposed development is considered insufficient in terms of the environmental information provided. In this regard, the applicant is requested to: a) Submit a revised agricultural planning application to include the correct applicant’s name and address. b) Clarify whether storm water will discharge to a soak-pit as stated in Section 1.1 of the Proposed Development Description, and if so, demonstrate that the proposed soak-pit design is suitable for ground conditions and will present no environmental risk to water quality. c) Submit revised proposals for the storm water drainage system to take account of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage guidance document on Nature-based Solutions to the Management of Rainwater and Surface Water Runoff in Urban Areas. d) Clarify the volumes and measurements of all proposed soiled water tanks. e) Submit a revised site layout plan demonstrating the following; i. All proposed surface/storm water drainage systems (outlined in blue). ii. The directional flow of all surface water pipelines. iii. Proposed nature-based solutions for surface water. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 3 iv. All associated discharge points and outfalls. v. All proposed effluent / soiled water drainage systems (outlined in red). vi. All soiled water storage tanks including volumes and dimensions of same. Response – Traynor Environmental Ltd. has prepared a revised Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) Assessment and Surface Water Management Strategy, together with a revised site drainage layout and supporting surface-water drainage and attenuation calculations for the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. Surface water from the proposed development will not discharge to a soak pit. The revised drainage strategy provides for the collection, appropriate treatment and attenuation of surface-water runoff prior to controlled discharge to the existing open drain. The proposed attenuation system will provide a minimum storage capacity of 184 m³, with discharge restricted by a Hydro-Brake to the calculated pre- development greenfield QBar rate of 12.7 L/s. The supporting drainage calculations assess events up to and including the 1-in-100-year rainfall event with a 20% climate-change allowance and do not rely upon infiltration to ground. The revised surface-water strategy also incorporates nature-based SuDS principles through the retention of existing permeable and vegetated areas where practicable, together with appropriate treatment measures, attenuation and controlled discharge. Clean surface water is maintained separately from wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water. The revised site layout identifies the proposed surface/storm-water drainage system in blue, associated flow directions, nature-based SuDS measures, treatment and attenuation infrastructure and the proposed outfall. The separate effluent/soiled-water drainage system is identified in red, together with the proposed soiled-water storage tanks and their respective capacities and dimensions. Full details are provided in the accompanying SuDS Assessment and Surface Water Management Strategy, revised site drainage layout and supporting surface-water drainage and attenuation calculations. Should you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely, Nevin Traynor BSc Env, HDIP IT, Cert SHWW, IAH REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 26/448 TE 14th September 2026 Alan Niblock c/o Moffet Architectural Corlea, Ballybay, Co. Monaghan Re: Comprehensive Sustainable Drainage Systems Assessment and Surface Water Management Strategy for Agricultural Development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. Dear Sir/Madam, Traynor Environmental Ltd. has been retained by the applicant to prepare a comprehensive Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) Assessment and Surface Water Management Strategy for the proposed agricultural development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. This report has been prepared having regard to the principles of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS), the CIRIA SuDS Manual C753 and relevant guidance for the management of rainwater and surface - water runoff. The assessment considers runoff quantity and quality, pollution prevention, receiving water receptors and the segregation and management of clean surface water and soiled water. The surface-water management strategy has been developed having regard to the existing site conditions, proposed development layout and existing drainage characteristics. The strategy incorporates the controlled collection, treatment and attenuation of surface-water runoff prior to discharge, together with appropriate SuDS measures intended to manage runoff rates and protect the receiving water environment. Surface-water runoff from the proposed development will be collected through a dedicated drainage network and conveyed through the proposed treatment and attenuation infrastructure. Discharge from the attenuation system will be controlled by a Hydro-Brake flow-control device, with the design discharge restricted to the calculated greenfield QBar rate of 12.7 L/s. The hydraulic assessment identifies QBar as 12.7 L/s and uses this value as the design flow for the proposed Hydro-Brake. The proposed drainage strategy provides for the separate management of clean surface water and soiled water. Clean roof water and uncontaminated surface runoff will be collected through the dedicated surface-water drainage system and conveyed through the proposed SuDS and attenuation infrastructure prior to controlled discharge. Wash water, soiled water and potentially contaminated runoff will be separately collected and directed to the dedicated soiled-water storage system. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The following sections provide details of the site conditions, SuDS assessment, proposed drainage arrangements, hydraulic assessment and measures incorporated to protect groundwater and receiving surface waters. Introduction Traynor Environmental Ltd. has been appointed to prepare a comprehensive Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) Assessment and Surface Water Management Strategy for the proposed agricultural development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. The proposed development comprises the construction of 1 No. poultry house and 1 No. manure store, together with all associated ancillary structures, including meal storage bin(s) and soiled-water tank(s), and associated site works including a new/upgraded site entrance, drainage infrastructure, landscaping and associated works. This reflects the development description contained in the Further Information request for Planning Application 26/60154. The purpose of this report is to assess the proposed management of surface water arising from the development and to demonstrate that clean surface water and potentially contaminated water will be managed through separate drainage systems. The assessment considers runoff quantity and quality, pollution prevention, receiving water receptors, hydraulic control and the application of Sustainable Drainage Systems principles. The proposed drainage strategy provides for the collection of clean roof water and uncontaminated surface runoff through a dedicated surface-water drainage network. Surface-water runoff will be managed through the proposed SuDS treatment and attenuation system prior to controlled discharge from the site. The attenuation system will temporarily store surface-water runoff generated during rainfall events before discharge through the proposed Hydro-Brake flow-control chamber. The hydraulic design adopts a maximum controlled discharge of 12.7 L/s, corresponding to the calculated greenfield QBar for the site. Soiled water, wash water and potentially contaminated runoff arising from the operation of the poultry development will be separately collected and directed to the dedicated soiled-water storage infrastructure. The clean surface-water and soiled-water drainage systems will therefore operate independently, preventing potentially contaminated water from entering the clean surface -water drainage system. The proposed drainage strategy has been developed to control the rate and quality of surface-water runoff generated by the development, provide appropriate attenuation and treatment, and protect the receiving drainage network and downstream surface-water receptors. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Site Location The proposed development is located at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, within a rural agricultural setting comprising predominantly agricultural lands and dispersed rural development. The submitted site location drawing identifies the proposed poultry development and illustrates the relationship of the site to the surrounding agricultural landholding and local road network. The subject site comprises agricultural lands upon which the proposed poultry house, manure store and associated agricultural infrastructure are to be constructed. The proposed development has been designed having regard to the existing site topography, surrounding agricultural land uses and the operational requirements of the poultry enterprise. The proposed surface-water management strategy has been developed having particular regard to the separation of clean and soiled water, the existing drainage characteristics of the site and the protection of the receiving surface-water environment. Clean roof water and uncontaminated surface runoff from the proposed development will be collected through a dedicated surface-water drainage system. Runoff will be conveyed through the proposed treatment and attenuation infrastructure prior to controlled discharge from the site. Soiled water, wash water and potentially contaminated runoff arising from the operation of the poultry development will be collected separately and directed to the dedicated soiled-water drainage and storage system. This arrangement will maintain a clear separation between clean surface water and potentially contaminated water. During washing operations, or at other times when external hardstanding areas may contain soiling or contaminants, wash water and contaminated runoff will be directed to the soiled-water storage system. No soiled water, wash water or potentially contaminated runoff will be permitted to enter the clean surface-water drainage system. The location of the proposed development and surrounding lands is illustrated in Figure 1 – Site Location Map. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Figure 1: Site Location Site Description and Drainage Context The proposed development is located at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, within a rural agricultural setting. The site and surrounding lands are predominantly agricultural in character, with dispersed rural residential development and agricultural holdings within the wider area. The proposed development comprises the construction of 1 No. poultry house and 1 No. manure store, together with associated ancillary structures, including meal storage bin(s), soiled -water storage tank(s), a new/upgraded site entrance and associated site works and drainage infrastructure. The site layout, existing topography, drainage characteristics and proposed development footprint have been considered in the development of the surface-water management strategy. The drainage design provides for the collection of surface-water runoff generated by the proposed development and its conveyance through a dedicated surface-water drainage network towards the proposed treatment and attenuation infrastructure. Clean roof water and uncontaminated surface-water runoff will be managed separately from poultry- house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water. Runoff from areas REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 where there is a potential risk of sediment or hydrocarbon contamination will receive appropriate treatment prior to entering the attenuation system. Soiled water, wash water and other potentially contaminated runoff will be collected separately and directed to the dedicated soiled-water storage system, with no such flows permitted to enter the clean surface-water drainage network. A dedicated attenuation system is proposed to provide temporary storage of surface-water runoff generated during rainfall events prior to controlled discharge from the site. The hydraulic assessment has been undertaken using Flow+ hydraulic modelling and incorporates the applicable design rainfall conditions together with a 20% climate-change allowance for the 1 in 100-year design assessment. The allowable discharge from the proposed attenuation system has been established having regard to the calculated greenfield QBar runoff rate for the site. The hydraulic assessment identifies a positively drained site area of 1.330 ha and calculates a greenfield QBar of 12.7 L/s. This rate has consequently been adopted as the design discharge for the proposed flow-control arrangement. Surface water will discharge from the attenuation system by gravity through a dedicated flow-control chamber incorporating a Hydro-Brake, with the proposed unit designed to restrict discharge to a maximum rate of 12.7 L/s under the applicable design conditions. The attenuation system has been hydraulically modelled in conjunction with the upstream drainage network and proposed flow-control arrangement. The proposed attenuation structure is modelled with dimensions of approximately 20.52 m × 8.89 m × 1.44 m, with an adopted storage porosity of 70%. No infiltration contribution has been incorporated into the hydraulic model, and the performance of the system therefore relies upon attenuation storage and controlled discharge rather than infiltration to the surrounding ground. The drainage strategy has been developed having regard to the site-specific infiltration characteristics and the hydraulic requirements of the proposed development. Site infiltration testing identified relatively slow infiltration characteristics, with the water level taking approximately 15 hours to fall between the 75% and 25% effective test levels. Accordingly, the proposed surface-water strategy does not rely upon infiltration as the principal means of managing runoff generated by the development. The proposed drainage arrangement instead provides for the collection and appropriate treatment of surface-water runoff, temporary attenuation during rainfall events and subsequent controlled discharge through the proposed Hydro-Brake flow-control chamber. Hydraulic modelling of the proposed drainage system demonstrates that the attenuation and flow-control arrangement can accommodate the assessed 1 in 100-year rainfall event including the 20% climate-change allowance without predicted flooding from the modelled drainage system. Appropriate pollution-prevention measures will be incorporated within the drainage system, including silt and sediment control and hydrocarbon interception for runoff from relevant trafficked areas. Clean REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 surface water and potentially contaminated agricultural water will remain hydraulically separated throughout the drainage arrangement. The drainage strategy has therefore been developed to control the rate and quality of runoff leaving the developed site, provide temporary attenuation of stormwater during significant rainfall events, minimise the potential for increased downstream hydraulic loading and provide appropriate protection of groundwater and receiving surface waters. The design also responds to the Planning Authority's request for a stormwater drainage proposal identifying the drainage network, direction of flow, nature- based measures and associated discharge/outfall locations. The proposed site layout, surface-water drainage network, treatment infrastructure, attenuation system, flow-control arrangement, soiled-water drainage system and drainage outfall are illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 2: Site Layout Proposed Development The proposed development comprises the construction of 1 No. poultry house and 1 No. manure store at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, together with associated ancillary structures, including meal storage bin(s), underground soiled-water storage tank(s), concrete apron areas, a new/upgraded site entrance, drainage infrastructure and associated site works. The development corresponds with the works described under Planning Reference 26/60154. The development will result in the creation of new roof and hardstanding areas and consequently an increase in the volume and rate of surface-water runoff generated during rainfall events. A dedicated surface-water drainage system is therefore proposed to collect, treat, attenuate and control the discharge of surface water arising from the development. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The drainage strategy has been designed to provide clear segregation between clean surface water and soiled water associated with the operation and cleaning of the poultry development. Clean roof water and uncontaminated surface-water runoff will be collected through the proposed surface-water drainage network and conveyed towards the proposed attenuation system. Runoff from concrete apron and trafficked areas, where there is a potential risk of sediment or hydrocarbon contamination, will receive appropriate pre-treatment prior to entering the attenuation system. This will include silt and sediment control and Class 1 petrol/oil interception where appropriate. Poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water will be separately collected and directed to the dedicated underground soiled-water storage system. No soiled water or potentially contaminated runoff will be permitted to enter the clean surface-water drainage network, attenuation system or receiving drainage outfall. The proposed attenuation system will provide temporary storage of surface-water runoff during rainfall events prior to controlled discharge. The allowable discharge rate has been established from the calculated greenfield QBar runoff rate for the site, based on a positively drained site area of 1.330 ha. The resulting greenfield QBar is 12.7 L/s, which has been adopted as the maximum design discharge from the proposed attenuation system. Following attenuation, surface water will discharge by gravity through a flow-control chamber incorporating a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device, restricting discharge to a maximum rate of 12.7 L/s, before being conveyed to the existing drainage outfall. The proposed attenuation and flow-control arrangement has been assessed through hydraulic modelling of the drainage network, including the applicable design rainfall conditions and a 20% climate -change allowance for the 1 in 100-year design event. The hydraulic modelling demonstrates that the proposed drainage system provides the necessary temporary storage and controlled discharge without predicted flooding from the modelled drainage network under the assessed design conditions. Planning Status and Purpose of this Report A planning application has been submitted to Monaghan County Council under Planning Reference 26/60154 for the construction of 1 No. poultry house and 1 No. manure store, together with ancillary structures including meal storage bin(s), soiled-water tank(s), a new/upgraded site entrance and associated site works at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. Following its assessment of the application, Monaghan County Council requested Further Information in relation to the proposed surface-water drainage arrangements. In particular, the Planning Authority requested clarification regarding the proposed means of stormwater disposal and demonstration that the drainage solution is suitable for the site ground conditions and will not present an environmental risk to water quality. The Planning Authority also requested stormwater drainage proposals incorporating REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 consideration of nature-based solutions and site layout identifying the drainage network, direction of flow and associated discharge/outfall locations. The proposed surface-water management strategy has therefore been developed having regard to the proposed development layout, site-specific infiltration characteristics, existing drainage pathways, the proposed positively drained areas and the requirement to protect groundwater and downstream surface-water receptors. Site-specific infiltration testing identified relatively slow infiltration characteristics, with the water level taking approximately 15 hours to fall between the 75% and 25% effective test levels. Having regard to these infiltration characteristics and the hydraulic requirements of the proposed development, the drainage strategy does not rely upon infiltration as the principal means of managing surface-water runoff. The proposed strategy instead provides for the collection and appropriate treatment of surface -water runoff prior to temporary storage within a dedicated attenuation system and subsequent controlled discharge to the existing receiving drainage system. The allowable discharge rate from the attenuation system has been established having regard to the greenfield runoff characteristics of the site. The hydraulic assessment identifies a positively drained site area of 1.330 ha and establishes a corresponding greenfield QBar runoff rate of 12.7 L/s. The proposed attenuation system and flow-control arrangement have therefore been designed on the basis of a maximum controlled discharge rate of 12.7 L/s. The hydraulic performance of the proposed drainage network has been assessed using Flow+ hydraulic modelling. The assessment incorporates the applicable design rainfall conditions and includes a 20% allowance for climate change for the 1 in 100-year design event. The proposed attenuation structure has been incorporated directly into the hydraulic model together with the upstream drainage network and downstream flow-control arrangement. The modelled attenuation structure has approximate dimensions of 20.52 m × 8.89 m × 1.44 m, with an adopted storage porosity of 70%. No infiltration contribution has been incorporated into the hydraulic model, providing a conservative assessment whereby runoff is managed through temporary storage and controlled discharge. Following attenuation, surface water will discharge by gravity through a flow-control chamber incorporating a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device. The proposed flow- control device will restrict the maximum discharge from the attenuation system to 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated greenfield QBar runoff rate for the site. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The hydraulic modelling demonstrates that the proposed attenuation and flow-control arrangement can accommodate the assessed 1 in 100-year rainfall event including the 20% climate-change allowance without predicted flooding from the modelled drainage system. The drainage strategy also incorporates appropriate runoff-treatment and pollution-prevention measures. Runoff from areas presenting a potential sediment or hydrocarbon risk will be subject to silt and sediment control and Class 1 petrol/oil interception prior to entering the attenuation system. Clean roof water represents a lower pollution-risk runoff source and will be collected through the dedicated surface-water drainage network. Soiled water, poultry-house wash water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water will be collected through a separate drainage system and directed to the dedicated underground soiled-water storage facilities. Such water will not be permitted to enter the clean surface-water drainage network, attenuation system or receiving drainage outfall. The purpose of this report is to provide a comprehensive Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) Assessment and Surface Water Management Strategy for the proposed development and to demonstrate that the proposed drainage arrangement provides an appropriate means of managing surface-water runoff having regard to the site-specific conditions and the matters raised by Monaghan County Council. The assessment considers runoff quantity and quality, site-specific infiltration characteristics, greenfield runoff rates, pollution prevention, source control, treatment, attenuation, controlled discharge, exceedance management, nature-based drainage principles and the protection of groundwater and downstream surface-water receptors. The proposed drainage infrastructure, including the surface-water drainage network, treatment measures, attenuation system, flow-control chamber, soiled-water drainage system and existing drainage outfall, is illustrated on the accompanying site drainage layout. Receiving Watercourses and Drainage Pathways The proposed surface-water management strategy for the development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan has been developed having regard to the existing drainage characteristics of the site, surrounding topography, identified drainage features, groundwater vulnerability, the proposed impermeable development area and the downstream surface-water environment. An existing drainage ditch runs along the northern boundary of the site and forms part of the local surface-water drainage network. The proposed controlled surface-water discharge from the development will be directed to this existing northern boundary drainage ditch. The northern boundary drainage ditch flows towards the EPA Flow Network (Indicative) associated with River Waterbody Code IE_NW_36D020700. The relevant mapped segment is Segment Code 36_1419, REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 identified by the EPA as Stranoodan 36 (EPA Code 36S48). This represents the relevant downstream surface-water drainage pathway for the purposes of the proposed development. The proposed development will introduce additional impermeable surfaces associated with the proposed poultry development and concrete apron areas. The total design impermeable catchment is 4,688 m², comprising 3,764 m² of roof area, 580 m² of front concrete apron and 344 m² of rear concrete apron. In the absence of attenuation and flow control, runoff generated from these impermeable surfaces would have the potential to increase the rate and volume of surface-water runoff entering the receiving drainage network during rainfall events. The proposed drainage strategy therefore provides for the collection, treatment and attenuation of runoff prior to controlled discharge. Clean roof water will be collected through dedicated gutters, downpipes and surface -water drainage pipework. Rainfall runoff from the concrete apron and trafficked areas will be collected through the proposed drainage channels and associated pipework. Runoff from concrete apron and trafficked areas presents a greater potential for sediment, suspended solids and trace hydrocarbon contamination associated with vehicle and machinery movements. Appropriate silt and sediment control and Class 1 petrol/oil interception will therefore be provided for relevant runoff prior to entering the attenuation system. Following collection and appropriate treatment, surface-water runoff will be conveyed to the proposed attenuation system. The attenuation system will temporarily store stormwater during rainfall events and regulate the rate at which runoff is released from the developed site. The allowable discharge rate has been established from the calculated greenfield QBar runoff rate for the positively drained site area. On the basis of a positively drained area of 1.330 ha, the calculated greenfield QBar is 12.7 L/s. This rate has therefore been adopted as the maximum controlled discharge from the proposed attenuation system. Discharge will occur through a flow-control chamber incorporating a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device, configured to restrict discharge to a maximum of 12.7 L/s. During rainfall events where inflow exceeds the permitted discharge rate, excess runoff will be temporarily retained within the attenuation system and subsequently released through the flow-control device as hydraulic capacity becomes available. The attenuation system and associated drainage network have been assessed through hydraulic modelling incorporating the applicable design rainfall conditions and a 20% climate-change allowance for the 1 in 100-year design event. The attenuation structure, upstream drainage network and REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 downstream flow-control arrangement have been considered together to demonstrate the hydraulic performance of the proposed system. Following attenuation and flow control, treated surface water will discharge to the existing drainage ditch along the northern site boundary. The receiving ditch will therefore receive a restricted discharge corresponding with the calculated greenfield runoff rate rather than unrestricted runoff from the proposed impermeable surfaces. From the northern boundary ditch, surface water will continue through the existing drainage network towards the Stranoodan 36 flow network (IE_NW_36D020700). A fundamental component of the drainage strategy is the segregation of clean surface water from poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water. Such water will be collected separately and directed to the dedica ted underground soiled-water storage system. No soiled water or potentially contaminated agricultural water will be permitted to enter the surface-water attenuation system or northern boundary drainage ditch. This separation is also a core element of the drainage strategy described elsewhere in the report. The combination of source segregation, sediment control, hydrocarbon interception where required, attenuation and controlled discharge provides a multi-stage approach to protecting the northern boundary drainage ditch and downstream Stranoodan 36 surface-water network. During rainfall events exceeding the design capacity of the formal drainage system, exceedance runoff will be managed having regard to the existing and proposed site topography. Overland flows will, insofar as practicable, be directed away from buildings, neighbouring property, soiled-water infrastructure and areas where potentially contaminating material could be mobilised. Overall, the proposed drainage strategy establishes a managed hydraulic connection between the proposed development and the existing northern boundary drainage ditch. Surface-water runoff will be collected, appropriately treated and attenuated within the site before being released at a controlled maximum rate of 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated greenfield QBar runoff rate. The ditch subsequently drains towards the Stranoodan 36 flow network (IE_NW_36D020700). This arrangement will control post-development runoff and minimise the potential for adverse hydraulic or water-quality effects on the existing drainage network and downstream surface-water environment. Surface Water Drainage The proposed surface-water management strategy for the development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan has been developed using the principles of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) to ensure that runoff generated by the proposed development is appropriately collected, treated, attenuated and discharged while protecting groundwater, surface water and downstream environmental receptors. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The drainage strategy has been informed by the proposed development layout, existing site topography and drainage pathways, site-specific ground conditions, groundwater vulnerability, the extent of the proposed impermeable catchment and the location of the existing drainage ditch along the northern site boundary. The proposed development incorporates a total design impermeable catchment of approximately 4,688 m². This comprises 3,764 m² of roof area, 580 m² of front concrete apron and 344 m² of rear concrete apron. The proposed surface-water drainage strategy incorporates the following principal elements: • collection of clean roof water through dedicated gutters, downpipes and surface -water drainage pipework; • collection of rainfall runoff from the proposed concrete apron and trafficked areas through drainage channels and associated pipework; • complete segregation of poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water from the clean surface-water drainage system; • appropriate silt and sediment control; • Class 1 petrol/oil interception for runoff from relevant trafficked areas where a hydrocarbon pollution risk exists; • conveyance of collected and appropriately treated runoff to the proposed attenuation system; • temporary storage of stormwater within the attenuation system; • controlled discharge through a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device, at a maximum rate of 12.7 L/s; • discharge of treated and attenuated surface water to the existing drainage ditch along the northern site boundary; and • separate collection and storage of soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water. Clean roof runoff represents a relatively low pollution-risk source and does not inherently require hydrocarbon treatment. Runoff from the concrete apron and trafficked areas presents a greater potential for sediment and hydrocarbon contamination and will therefore receive treatment appropriate to its pollution risk. Following collection and treatment, surface water will enter the proposed attenuation system. The system will provide temporary hydraulic storage during rainfall events and restrict the rate at which runoff is released from the developed site. The maximum controlled discharge has been established from the calculated greenfield QBar runoff rate of 12.7 L/s, based on a positively drained site area of 1.330 ha. The proposed attenuation system and flow-control arrangement have been hydraulically modelled together to assess their performance during the applicable design rainfall events. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The immediate receiving surface-water feature is the existing drainage ditch along the northern site boundary. This ditch drains towards the EPA-mapped Stranoodan 36 river waterbody, identified as IE_NW_36D020700, Segment Code 36_1419 and EPA Code 36S48. Breakdown of Site Areas The proposed drainage strategy for the development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan has been developed having regard to the different runoff characteristics and potential pollution risks associated with the proposed roof and concrete apron areas. The proposed roof area will form a permanent clean roof-water catchment, while runoff from the concrete apron areas will be collected separately and provided with appropriate treatment prior to entering the proposed surface-water attenuation system. The principal roof area comprises: Surface Area Total Clean Roof Water Catchment 3,764 m² A conservative runoff coefficient of 1.0 (100%) is adopted for the roof catchment for drainage assessment purposes. This assumes that rainfall falling on the roof surface is collected through the proposed gutters and downpipes and conveyed to the dedicated surface-water drainage system. The proposed development also incorporates concrete apron areas comprising: Surface Area Rear Concrete Apron 344 m² Front Concrete Apron 580 m² Total Concrete Apron Area 924 m² For the purposes of the attenuation assessment, a conservative runoff coefficient of 1.0 (100%) is adopted for the full identified impermeable catchment. This assumes that rainfall falling on the roof and concrete surfaces becomes runoff to the proposed surface-water drainage system, without allowance for incidental losses or infiltration. The resulting design catchment adopted for the surface-water attenuation assessment is therefore: Total Design Impermeable Catchment = 4,688 m² This comprises: 3,764 m² roof area + 580 m² front concrete apron + 344 m² rear concrete apron = 4,688 m² REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The use of the full 4,688 m² impermeable catchment provides a conservative basis for the hydraulic assessment by allowing the attenuation system to accommodate runoff generated from the full identified roof and concrete apron areas during rainfall events. The proposed poultry-house roof comprises a permanent clean surface-water catchment. Rainfall falling on the roof will be collected through the proposed gutter and downpipe system and conveyed through the dedicated surface-water drainage network towards the proposed attenuation system. Rainfall runoff from the front and rear concrete apron areas will be collected through the proposed drainage channels and associated surface-water pipework. As these areas may be subject to vehicle movements and consequently present a greater potential for sediment and hydrocarbon contamination than the roof catchment, runoff will receive appropriate silt and hydrocarbon treatment prior to entering the attenuation system. Following collection and treatment, surface-water runoff from the 4,688 m² design impermeable catchment will be conveyed to the proposed attenuation system. The attenuation system will provide temporary storage during rainfall events before controlled discharge to the existing drainage ditch running along the northern boundary of the site. The northern boundary drainage ditch forms part of the local surface-water drainage pathway and flows towards the EPA-mapped Stranoodan 36 surface-water network (River Waterbody Code IE_NW_36D020700; Segment Code 36_1419; EPA Code 36S48). The proposed drainage strategy therefore provides attenuation and controlled discharge prior to runoff entering this receiving drainage network. Poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water will not be permitted to enter the surface-water attenuation system. These flows will be separately collected and directed to the dedicated soiled-water storage system for subsequent management in accordance with the proposed agricultural operations. Accordingly, the hydraulic assessment of the attenuation system is conservatively based upon the full 4,688 m² impermeable stormwater catchment, while the drainage design provides separate pollution - control measures appropriate to the source and quality of the collected runoff. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Table 1: Breakdown of Impermeable Areas Surface Area (m²) Runoff Classification Drainage Management Proposed Poultry House Roof 3,764 Clean roof runoff Dedicated surface-water drainage system Total Roof Area 3,764 Clean roof runoff Dedicated surface-water drainage system Front Concrete Apron 580 Yard/trafficked runoff Collection and treatment prior to attenuation Rear Concrete Apron 344 Yard/trafficked runoff Collection and treatment prior to attenuation Total Concrete Apron Area 924 Surface-water runoff requiring appropriate treatment Silt/hydrocarbon treatment prior to attenuation Total Design Impermeable Catchment 4,688 — Attenuation assessment catchment Table 2: Breakdown of Impermeable Areas The total impermeable area is approximately 4,688m². A runoff coefficient of 1.0 has been adopted in accordance with BRE 365. The 600-minute storm duration governs the design as it produces the maximum storage requirement.”. Inflow From: Area (m2) Runoff Volume (m3) Concrete Apron Area 3764 184.73712 Proposed Roof Area 924 45.34992 Total inflow from 4688 230.08704 SuDS Management Train The proposed surface-water management strategy for the development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan has been developed in accordance with the principles of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) and the CIRIA SuDS Manual (C753). The strategy seeks to manage both the quantity and quality of surface-water runoff while protecting groundwater, the existing receiving drainage network and downstream surface-water receptors. The SuDS management train is based on the segregation of clean surface water from soiled agricultural water at source, followed by appropriate treatment, attenuation, flow control and controlled discharge. Clean roof water from the proposed poultry development will be collected through dedicated gutters, downpipes and surface-water drainage pipework. Rainfall runoff from the proposed front and rear concrete apron areas will be collected through dedicated drainage channels and conveyed towards the proposed surface-water treatment and attenuation system. Poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water associated with the operation and cleaning of the development will be collected separately and REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 conveyed to the dedicated soiled-water storage facilities. Such water will not be permitted to enter the surface-water attenuation system, the northern boundary drainage ditch or the receiving surface-water environment. Runoff from the concrete apron and trafficked areas may contain sediment, suspended solids or trace hydrocarbons associated with vehicle and machinery movements. Appropriate pre-treatment will therefore be provided for runoff from these areas prior to entering the attenuation system. Clean roof water represents a lower pollution-risk runoff source and does not inherently require hydrocarbon treatment. The proposed SuDS management train comprises: • Prevention – segregation of clean surface water from poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water; • Source Control – collection and management of roof water and apron runoff close to the areas in which it is generated; • Treatment Stage 1 – appropriate silt and sediment removal measures for runoff from concrete apron and trafficked areas; • Treatment Stage 2 – Class 1 petrol/oil interceptor treatment for runoff from concrete apron and trafficked areas where a potential hydrocarbon pollution risk exists; • Site Control – temporary storage of surface-water runoff within the proposed attenuation system; • Flow Control – restriction of discharge from the attenuation system through a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device, to a maximum design discharge of 12.7 L/s; • Controlled Discharge – discharge of treated and attenuated surface water to the existing drainage ditch running along the northern boundary of the site, which forms part of the local drainage pathway towards Stranoodan 36 (IE_NW_36D020700); and • Exceedance Management – management of overland runoff during rainfall events exceeding the design capacity of the formal drainage system. The attenuation system forms the principal site-control measure for the developed impermeable surfaces. The identified design impermeable catchment comprises 3,764 m² of roof area, 580 m² of front concrete apron and 344 m² of rear concrete apron, giving a total impermeable development catchment of 4,688 m². Accordingly: • Total Roof Area = 3,764 m² • Total Concrete Apron Area = 924 m² • Total Design Impermeable Catchment = 4,688 m² The allowable discharge from the attenuation system has been established separately from the greenfield runoff assessment. Using the IH124 methodology, the hydraulic assessment establishes a greenfield QBar of 12.7 L/s for a positively drained site area of 1.330 ha. The proposed Hydro-Brake flow- control arrangement has therefore been designed to restrict discharge from the attenuation system to a maximum rate of 12.7 L/s. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 During rainfall events where inflow to the attenuation system exceeds the controlled discharge rate, runoff will be temporarily retained within the attenuation system and subsequently released through the flow-control chamber as storage capacity becomes available. The attenuation system and associated drainage network have been hydraulically modelled for a range of storm durations and return periods, including the 1 in 100-year event with a 20% climate-change allowance. The modelling demonstrates that the proposed attenuation and flow-control arrangement can accommodate the assessed design event without predicted flooding from the modelled drainage system. Following attenuation and flow control, treated surface water will discharge to the existing drainage ditch along the northern site boundary. This ditch flows towards the mapped surface -water network associated with Stranoodan 36, identified by River Waterbody Code IE_NW_36D020700, Segment Code 36_1419 and EPA Code 36S48. The proposed management train therefore provides multiple stages of runoff management and pollution prevention before surface water leaves the developed site. This approach controls both the quality and rate of surface-water discharge and minimises the potential for adverse effects on the northern boundary drainage ditch, receiving drainage network and downstream surface-water environment. SuDS Features Selection Hierarchy The selection of SuDS measures for the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry has been undertaken having regard to the principles of the CIRIA SuDS Manual (C753), the rural agricultural nature of the site, proposed development layout, site topography, ground conditions, groundwater vulnerability, operational requirements, available space and the existing surface-water drainage network. The selected drainage strategy adopts a combination of prevention, source control, treatment, attenuation, flow control and controlled discharge, together with the retention of existing permeable and vegetated areas where practicable. The primary pollution-prevention measure is the segregation of clean surface water from poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water. These potentially contaminated waters will be separately collected and contained within the dedicated soiled-water storage system rather than being permitted to enter the surface-water drainage network. Clean roof water represents a relatively low pollution-risk runoff source and does not inherently require hydrocarbon treatment. Runoff from the 580 m² front concrete apron and 344 m² rear concrete apron has a greater potential to contain sediment, suspended solids and hydrocarbons associated with vehicle and machinery movements and will therefore receive appropriate treatment prior to entering the attenuation system. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The proposed attenuation system has been selected as the principal site-control measure. It will provide temporary storage of runoff generated from the developed impermeable surfaces and regulate the rate at which surface water is released to the northern boundary drainage ditch. Discharge from the attenuation system will be controlled by a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device, restricting discharge to the calculated greenfield QBar rate of 12.7 L/s. This provides a defined hydraulic control between the proposed development and the existing receiving drainage network. Concentrated infiltration has not been adopted as the principal means of surface-water disposal. Instead, the proposed strategy provides for the collection, treatment and attenuation of runoff followed by controlled discharge to the existing surface-water drainage pathway. Nature-based measures have also been considered as part of the SuDS hierarchy. The active agricultural nature of the proposed development and the requirement to maintain suitable operational, servicing and access areas around the poultry development limit the practical application of features such as open ponds, extensive swales and rain gardens within the operational footprint. This rationale is consistent with the SuDS selection approach set out in the draft report. Nevertheless, existing permeable and vegetated areas outside the positively drained development footprint will be retained insofar as practicable. Rainfall falling on these areas will therefore continue to drain naturally at source rather than being unnecessarily incorporated into the formal surface-water drainage network. The proposed combination of source segregation, treatment, attenuation, flow control, retention of existing permeable areas and controlled discharge is considered appropriate and proportionate to the nature and scale of the proposed development at Enagh. Table 3: Hierarchy of Selected SuDS Features SuDS Measure Used Selection / Elimination Rationale Source Control Clean Roof Water Collection Yes Runoff from the 3,764 m² roof area will be collected through dedicated gutters, downpipes and surface-water drainage pipework. Surface Water / Soiled Water Separation Yes Poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water will be separately collected and will not be permitted to enter the surface-water attenuation system or northern boundary drainage ditch. Soakaway / Concentrated Infiltration No Concentrated infiltration has not been selected as the principal means of surface- water disposal. The proposed strategy instead provides attenuation and controlled discharge to the existing surface-water drainage pathway. Permeable / Vegetated Areas Yes Existing permeable and vegetated areas outside the positively drained 4,688 m² impermeable development catchment will be retained insofar as practicable, allowing rainfall to continue to drain naturally at source. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Swales No The layout and operational requirements of the poultry development limit the practical use of swales as the principal means of managing runoff from the developed impermeable catchment. Filter Strips No Runoff from the principal impermeable surfaces will be collected through defined roof and apron drainage systems; filter strips would therefore provide limited additional benefit within the proposed drainage arrangement. Site Control Attenuation System Yes Provides temporary storage of surface-water runoff generated from the 4,688 m² design impermeable catchment and reduces the peak rate of discharge from the development. Hydro-Brake / Flow Control Yes Restricts discharge to the calculated greenfield QBar of 12.7 L/s. Northern Boundary Drainage Ditch Yes Receives treated and attenuated surface water following flow control. The ditch runs along the northern site boundary and forms part of the drainage pathway towards Stranoodan 36 (IE_NW_36D020700). Treatment Measures Silt / Sediment Control Yes Reduces sediment, debris and suspended solids in runoff from the concrete apron and trafficked areas prior to attenuation and discharge. Class 1 Petrol/Oil Interceptor Yes Provides hydrocarbon treatment for runoff from the concrete apron and trafficked areas where a potential hydrocarbon pollution risk exists. Clean roof water does not inherently require hydrocarbon treatment. Soiled-Water Storage Yes Poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water will be separately contained within dedicated storage facilities and excluded from the surface-water drainage system. Nature-Based / Conveyance Measures Constructed Wetland No Not considered necessary or proportionate given the nature and scale of the development and the proposed combination of source control, treatment, attenuation and controlled discharge. Pond No Not considered necessary given the proposed underground attenuation system and controlled discharge arrangement. Exceedance Management Overland Exceedance Routing Yes Surface water generated during events exceeding the design capacity of the drainage system will be directed away from buildings and sensitive areas along appropriate overland flow routes, insofar as practicable. Nature-Based Solutions Consideration has been given to the incorporation of nature-based surface-water management measures within the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, having regard to the principles of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS), the rural agricultural setting of the site and the operational requirements of the proposed poultry development. The proposed development incorporates approximately 4,688 m² of identified impermeable surfaces, comprising approximately 3,764 m² of roof area, 580 m² of front concrete apron and 344 m² of rear concrete apron. The remaining surrounding agricultural, grassed and vegetated areas will remain permeable insofar as practicable. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The operational areas associated with the poultry development are required to accommodate access, vehicle movements, turning, servicing and other agricultural activities. These requirements limit the extent to which open SuDS features such as ponds, rain gardens or extensive swales can practicably be incorporated within the active development area. Notwithstanding these constraints, the drainage strategy has been developed to retain natural drainage processes wherever reasonably practicable. Impermeable surfaces will be limited to those required for the proposed development, while rainfall falling on surrounding undeveloped agricultural and vegetated areas will continue to drain naturally at source rather than being unnecessarily intercepted by the formal surface-water drainage system. Particular consideration has also been given to the existing drainage ditch along the northern boundary of the site. This ditch provides an established surface-water drainage pathway and ultimately forms part of the drainage network associated with Stranoodan 36 (IE_NW_36D020700). The proposed drainage strategy seeks to utilise this existing drainage pathway while ensuring that runoff generated by the development is appropriately managed before discharge. Surface-water runoff generated from the proposed impermeable development area will therefore be collected, treated where required and conveyed to the proposed attenuation system. The attenuation system will temporarily store runoff during rainfall events and regulate its release through the proposed Hydro-Brake to a maximum design rate of 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated greenfield QBar. The proposed drainage strategy consequently incorporates nature-based surface-water management principles through the retention of existing permeable and vegetated areas, continued natural drainage of undeveloped land, management of runoff close to source, pollution prevention, attenuation and controlled discharge to the established surface-water drainage pathway. The selected measures are considered proportionate to the nature and scale of the proposed development and provide an appropriate balance between the operational requirements of the poultry development and the objectives of Sustainable Drainage Systems. Assessment Under the Four Pillars of SuDS Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) are commonly assessed against four principal objectives: water quantity, water quality, biodiversity and amenity. The proposed drainage strategy for the development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan has been developed to achieve the benefits reasonably practicable under each of these objectives, while recognising the rural agricultural setting and operational requirements of the proposed poultry development. The principal benefits of the proposed drainage strategy relate to the management of surface -water quantity and quality. Surface-water runoff generated from the proposed 4,688 m² impermeable development catchment, comprising approximately 3,764 m² of roof area, 580 m² of front concrete REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 apron and 344 m² of rear concrete apron, will be collected and conveyed through the proposed surface-water drainage system. Runoff requiring treatment will be appropriately treated prior to attenuation and controlled discharge. Following attenuation, surface water will be discharged through a flow-control chamber incorporating a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device. The maximum design discharge will be restricted to 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated greenfield QBar runoff rate for the site. The controlled discharge will be conveyed to the existing drainage ditch running along the northern boundary of the site, which forms part of the drainage pathway towards Stranoodan 36 (IE_NW_36D020700). Poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water will be managed independently of the surface-water drainage system. These waters will be collected through the dedicated soiled-water drainage network and directed to the proposed underground soiled-water storage facilities. They will not be permitted to enter the surface-water attenuation system or receiving northern boundary drainage ditch. The proposed attenuation and treatment infrastructure is principally engineered and therefore provides limited direct biodiversity and amenity benefits. However, the retention of surrounding agricultural, grassed and vegetated areas, continuation of natural drainage outside the developed impermeable footprint and protection of water quality within the receiving drainage network provide indirect environmental benefits. The performance of the principal SuDS measures incorporated within the proposed development is summarised in Table 4. Table 4: Assessment of Proposed SuDS Measures Under the Four Pillars of SuDS 4 Pillars of SuDS SuDS Feature Quantity Quality Biodiversity Amenity Clean Roof Water Collection Good Good Poor Poor Surface-Water / Soiled- Water Separation Good Good Moderate Poor Silt / Sediment Control Moderate Good Poor Poor Class 1 Petrol/Oil Interceptor Moderate Good Poor Poor Attenuation System Good Moderate Poor Poor Controlled Discharge to Northern Boundary Drainage Ditch Good Moderate Poor Poor Retention of Permeable / Vegetated Areas Moderate Moderate Good Moderate REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Retention of Existing Northern Boundary Drainage Pathway Moderate Moderate Good Moderate Overland Exceedance Management Good Moderate Moderate Moderate Dedicated Soiled-Water Storage Moderate Good Moderate Poor The assessment demonstrates that the proposed drainage strategy provides particular benefits in relation to water quantity and water quality. In relation to water quantity, the proposed attenuation system will provide temporary storage for runoff generated from the developed impermeable surfaces during rainfall events. Rather than allowing runoff from the proposed roof and concrete surfaces to discharge directly and unrestricted to the existing drainage network, stormwater will be temporarily retained within the attenuation system and subsequently released at a controlled rate. The allowable discharge has been established using the IH124 greenfield runoff methodology. The hydraulic assessment adopts a positively drained site area of 1.330 ha and establishes a corresponding greenfield QBar of 12.7 L/s. Discharge from the attenuation system will therefore be regulated through the proposed Hydro-Brake flow-control chamber to a maximum design rate of 12.7 L/s. This arrangement will control the rate of runoff leaving the developed site and minimise the potential for adverse hydraulic loading within the receiving drainage network. In relation to water quality, a fundamental component of the proposed drainage strategy is the segregation of clean surface water from poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water. Clean roof water from the approximately 3,764 m² roof catchment represents a relatively low pollution - risk runoff source and will be collected through the proposed gutters, downpipes and dedicated surface- water drainage system. Runoff from the approximately 924 m² of concrete apron area, comprising the 580 m² front apron and 344 m² rear apron, has a greater potential to contain sediment, suspended solids or hydrocarbons associated with vehicle movements and agricultural activities. Runoff from these areas will therefore be subject to appropriate silt and sediment control and Class 1 petrol/oil interception where required before entering the attenuation system. Poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water will be separately collected and directed to the dedicated underground soiled-water storage facilities. These waters will not be discharged to the attenuation system, northern boundary drainage ditch or receiving surface-water environment. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 In relation to biodiversity, the principally engineered nature of the attenuation and treatment infrastructure limits the opportunity for direct habitat creation. Nevertheless, surrounding agricultural, grassed and vegetated areas will remain permeable insofar as practicable. Rainfall falling outside the proposed impermeable development footprint will therefore continue to drain naturally at source, maintaining existing drainage processes across the undeveloped portions of the site. The retention of the existing northern boundary drainage ditch as the receiving drainage pathway also avoids the unnecessary creation of an alternative off-site drainage route. Treatment and attenuation of development runoff before controlled discharge to this ditch will assist in protecting water quality within the downstream drainage network associated with Stranoodan 36 (IE_NW_36D020700). In relation to amenity, the nature of the proposed agricultural development and the requirement to maintain functional access, servicing and vehicle-movement areas limit opportunities for amenity- focused SuDS features. The proposed drainage measures are therefore primarily intended to provide effective hydraulic control and water-quality protection while retaining existing permeable and vegetated areas where practicable. Overall, the proposed drainage strategy provides an appropriate and proportionate response to the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry. The strategy combines clean and soiled -water segregation, treatment of higher-risk yard runoff, attenuation of surface-water runoff, controlled discharge at the calculated greenfield QBar of 12.7 L/s, retention of surrounding permeable areas and controlled discharge to the existing northern boundary drainage ditch, thereby addressing the four principal objectives of SuDS while protecting the receiving surface-water environment. Attenuation System A dedicated surface-water attenuation system is proposed as the principal site-control SuDS measure for the management of surface-water runoff generated by the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. The attenuation system will receive surface-water runoff generated from the proposed impermeable development area following collection and, where required, appropriate treatment. The identified impermeable development catchment comprises: The contributing impermeable catchment comprises: Surface Area Proposed Roof Area 3,764 m² Front Concrete Apron 580 m² Rear Concrete Apron 344 m² Total Design Impermeable Catchment 4,688 m² REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 A conservative runoff coefficient of 1.0 (100%) is adopted for the identified impermeable surfaces, whereby rainfall falling on the positively drained roof and concrete surfaces is assumed to contribute runoff to the proposed surface-water drainage system without allowance for incidental infiltration or other losses. The proposed attenuation system and associated surface-water drainage network have been subject to a detailed hydraulic assessment using Flow+ hydraulic modelling. The assessment considers a range of rainfall durations and return periods and incorporates a 20% climate-change allowance within the design assessment. The allowable discharge from the proposed development has been established using the IH124 greenfield runoff methodology. For the purposes of determining the pre-development greenfield runoff characteristics, a positively drained site area of 1.330 ha, SAAR of 1,004 mm, Soil Index of 5 and SPR of 0.53 have been adopted. The resulting greenfield QBar is 12.7 L/s, which has been adopted as the maximum design discharge from the proposed attenuation system. Discharge from the attenuation system will be controlled through a dedicated flow-control chamber incorporating a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device. The proposed Hydro- Brake has been hydraulically designed for a discharge of 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated greenfield QBar. The proposed attenuation structure has been represented within the hydraulic model with approximate dimensions of: • Length: 20.520 m • Width: 8.890 m • Depth: 1.440 m • Adopted Porosity: 70% No infiltration contribution has been incorporated into the hydraulic model. The attenuation assessment therefore assumes that runoff entering the storage structure is managed through temporary storage and controlled discharge rather than relying upon infiltration to the surrounding ground. During rainfall events where inflow exceeds the permitted 12.7 L/s discharge rate, runoff will be temporarily stored within the attenuation structure and subsequently released through the proposed Hydro-Brake as the storm event subsides. The hydraulic model assesses the performance of the drainage system for rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100-year return-period event with a 20% climate-change allowance. For the 1 in 100- year plus climate-change assessment, the critical event for the attenuation structure is identified as the 120-minute winter storm. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 During this critical event, the hydraulic model predicts a peak attenuation storage volume of approximately 177.13 m³. The model predicts no flooding from the attenuation structure or the modelled drainage network, with discharge through the flow-control arrangement restricted to approximately 12.7 L/s. It should be noted that surcharge is predicted within parts of the drainage network during the extreme design event. However, the hydraulic model predicts zero flood volume, demonstrating that the modelled drainage and attenuation system retains runoff within the drainage infrastructure during the assessed design event. The attenuation system therefore provides temporary storage of stormwater generated during periods where the rate of inflow exceeds the permitted discharge rate, before releasing stored runoff at the controlled greenfield QBar rate. Runoff from the front and rear concrete apron and other relevant trafficked areas will be subject to appropriate pre-treatment prior to entering the attenuation system. This will include silt and sediment control and Class 1 petrol/oil interception where required, thereby reducing the potential for sediment, hydrocarbons and associated pollutants to enter the attenuation system and receiving drainage network. Clean roof runoff represents a relatively low pollution-risk source and does not present the same hydrocarbon pollution risk as runoff from trafficked areas. The drainage arrangement will therefore provide treatment appropriate to the source and pollution risk of the collected runoff. Poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water will be managed separately through the dedicated soiled-water drainage and storage system and will not be permitted to enter the surface-water attenuation system. Following attenuation and flow control, treated surface water will discharge to the existing drainage ditch running along the northern boundary of the site. This ditch forms part of the local surface -water drainage pathway towards the Stranoodan 36 surface-water network (River Waterbody Code IE_NW_36D020700; Segment Code 36_1419). The existing report correctly identifies this receiving pathway. The final proprietary attenuation-system configuration, including the internal storage arrangement, structural requirements, stone surround or equivalent storage medium, cover requirements and maintenance access, will be subject to detailed supplier design. The final system shall provide not less than the effective hydraulic storage represented within the approved hydraulic model and shall be capable of operating in accordance with the modelled 12.7 L/s maximum controlled discharge rate. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Runoff Quality Assessment The proposed surface-water management strategy for the development at Enagh has been designed to ensure that runoff generated from the proposed impermeable surfaces is appropriately managed and treated according to its pollution risk, while preventing poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water from entering the surface-water attenuation system or receiving drainage network. The principal low pollution-risk runoff source associated with the development comprises rainfall falling on the approximately 3,764 m² of proposed roof area. Roof water will be collected through dedicated gutters, downpipes and surface-water drainage pipework and conveyed towards the proposed attenuation system. Surface-water runoff from the proposed concrete apron and trafficked areas, comprising approximately 580 m² at the front of the proposed building and 344 m² at the rear, may contain sediment, suspended solids or trace hydrocarbons associated with vehicle, machinery and servicing activities. Appropriate pre-treatment will therefore be provided for runoff from these areas prior to entry to the attenuation system. Silt and sediment control measures will provide primary treatment by intercepting sediment, debris and suspended solids. Runoff from trafficked areas where a potential hydrocarbon pollution risk exists will additionally pass through a Class 1 petrol/oil interceptor, or equivalent approved unit, prior to entering the attenuation system. Clean roof water does not present the same hydrocarbon pollution risk as runoff from trafficked surfaces and does not inherently require petrol/oil interceptor treatment. The proposed drainage arrangement therefore applies treatment according to the source and pollution risk of the collected runoff. Poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water associated with the operation and cleaning of the proposed development will be collected separately and conveyed to the dedicated underground soiled-water storage system. Such water will not be permitted to enter the surface-water attenuation system, northern boundary drainage ditch or receiving surface-water environment. Following collection and appropriate treatment, surface-water runoff will enter the proposed attenuation system. The system will provide temporary hydraulic storage before runoff is discharged through a flow- control chamber incorporating a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device, restricting discharge to a maximum design rate of 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated greenfield QBar runoff rate. Following attenuation and flow control, surface water will discharge to the existing drainage ditch along the northern site boundary, which provides the receiving drainage pathway from the site towards the Stranoodan 36 network (IE_NW_36D020700). REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The proposed treatment train therefore comprises pollution prevention and segregation at source, sediment control, hydrocarbon treatment where required, attenuation and controlled discharge. Collectively, these measures will minimise the potential for sediment, hydrocarbons and other contaminants to be conveyed from the developed site to the existing northern boundary drainage ditch and downstream surface-water network. Treatment Train Assessment The proposed surface-water drainage system incorporates multiple stages of runoff management and treatment in accordance with the principles of the CIRIA SuDS Manual (C753). The treatment train is designed to prevent pollution at source, provide treatment appropriate to the pollution risk associated with each runoff source, temporarily store stormwater and control the rate of discharge from the developed site. The proposed treatment train is summarised in Table 5. Table 5: Treatment Train SuDS Stage Measure Function Prevention Surface-water / soiled-water separation Prevents poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water from entering the surface-water system Source Control Roof and hardstanding drainage collection Collects and manages surface-water runoff close to its source Treatment Stage 1 Silt / sediment control Removes sediment, debris and suspended solids from collected runoff Treatment Stage 2 Class 1 Petrol/Oil Interceptor Provides hydrocarbon treatment for runoff from concrete apron and trafficked areas where a pollution risk exists Site Control Attenuation system Temporarily stores runoff from the 4,688 m² impermeable catchment and reduces peak surface-water discharge rates Flow Control Hydro-Brake or equivalent Restricts discharge from the attenuation system to a maximum design rate of 12.7 L/s Controlled Discharge Existing northern boundary drainage ditch Provides the defined discharge pathway for treated and attenuated surface water towards the Stranoodan 36 drainage network Exceedance Overland exceedance routing Provides for management of runoff during events exceeding the design capacity of the formal drainage system Clean roof water represents a relatively low pollution-risk runoff source and will be collected through the dedicated roof drainage system. Hydrocarbon treatment is therefore principally required for runoff generated from the concrete apron and trafficked areas rather than uncontaminated roof runoff. Runoff from the proposed 924 m² of concrete apron area, comprising 580 m² at the front and 344 m² at the rear, has a greater potential to contain sediment, suspended solids or trace hydrocarbons associated REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 with vehicle and machinery movements. Runoff from these areas will therefore receive appropriate silt and sediment treatment and, where a hydrocarbon pollution risk exists, will pass through the proposed Class 1 petrol/oil interceptor prior to entering the attenuation system. Poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water will be collected separately and directed to the dedicated underground soiled-water storage system. Such water will not be permitted to enter the surface-water attenuation system or receiving surface-water environment. Following appropriate treatment, surface water will enter the proposed attenuation system, where runoff will be temporarily stored before controlled discharge at a maximum design rate of 12.7 L/s. The controlled discharge will be conveyed to the existing drainage ditch along the northern site boundary, which flows towards the Stranoodan 36 network (IE_NW_36D020700). The proposed treatment train therefore combines pollution prevention, source control, sediment removal, hydrocarbon treatment where required, attenuation and controlled discharge, providing a multi-stage approach to the management of both runoff quantity and runoff quality for the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry. Impact on Habitat and Water Quality The proposed surface-water management strategy for the development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan has been developed to minimise the potential for the development to adversely affect groundwater, local habitats, the existing drainage ditch along the northern site boundary and the downstream surface-water environment. The principal pollution-prevention measure incorporated into the drainage design is the segregation of clean surface water from poultry-house wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water. Potentially contaminated agricultural water will be collected through a separate drainage system and directed to the dedicated underground soiled-water storage facilities. Such water will not be permitted to enter the surface-water drainage or attenuation system. Clean roof water from the proposed development will be collected through dedicated gutters, downpipes and surface-water drainage pipework. Runoff from the proposed front and rear concrete apron and trafficked areas will be subject to appropriate pre-treatment prior to entering the attenuation system. Silt and sediment control measures will reduce the potential for sediment, debris and suspended solids to be conveyed through the drainage network. Where runoff originates from concrete apron or trafficked areas presenting a potential hydrocarbon pollution risk, additional treatment will be provided by a Class 1 petrol/oil interceptor, or equivalent approved unit. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Following collection and appropriate treatment, surface water will be conveyed to the proposed attenuation system. The attenuation system will provide temporary storage of runoff generated from the developed impermeable surfaces prior to controlled discharge. Discharge from the attenuation system will be restricted through a flow-control chamber incorporating a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device, to a maximum design rate of 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated greenfield QBar runoff rate. This arrangement will prevent unrestricted discharge of stormwater from the proposed development to the receiving drainage network. Following attenuation and flow control, treated surface water will discharge to the existing drainage ditch running along the northern boundary of the site. The ditch provides an existing surface -water drainage pathway from the site and flows towards the Stranoodan 36 surface-water network (River Waterbody Code IE_NW_36D020700; Segment Code 36_1419; EPA Code 36S48). The proposed drainage strategy therefore incorporates a combination of pollution prevention, surface - water/soiled-water segregation, sediment control, hydrocarbon treatment where required, attenuation and controlled discharge. These measures are intended to minimise the potential for pollutants or elevated peak runoff rates to adversely affect groundwater, the northern boundary drainage ditch, local habitats or the downstream Stranoodan 36 surface-water network. The potential impacts and associated mitigation measures are summarised in Table 6. Table 6: Impact on Habitat and Water Quality Receptor Potential Impact Proposed Mitigation Residual Impact Groundwater Accidental release of hydrocarbons or contaminated agricultural water Separate soiled-water collection and storage; segregation of clean and potentially contaminated drainage; sediment control; hydrocarbon interception for relevant trafficked runoff Low Existing Northern Boundary Drainage Ditch Sediment or hydrocarbon contamination and increased peak runoff Silt and sediment control; Class 1 petrol/oil interception where required; attenuation; controlled discharge at 12.7 L/s Low Stranoodan 36 (IE_NW_36D020700) Indirect deterioration in downstream water quality or increased hydraulic loading Pollution prevention at source; appropriate runoff treatment; attenuation and controlled discharge prior to entering the northern boundary drainage ditch Low Local Habitats Sediment, contaminated runoff or mobilisation of pollutants Segregation and containment of potentially contaminated agricultural water; sediment control; appropriate surface-water treatment; retention of surrounding vegetated areas where practicable Low Downstream Surface-Water Environment Increased peak flow or deterioration in runoff quality Attenuation, appropriate treatment measures and controlled discharge at the calculated greenfield QBar of 12.7 L/s Low REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Having regard to the proposed drainage controls, the development incorporates a multi-stage approach to limiting both hydraulic and water-quality impacts. The separation and containment of potentially contaminated agricultural water, treatment of runoff according to its pollution risk, attenuation of stormwater and restriction of discharge to the calculated greenfield QBar of 12.7 L/s will minimise the potential for adverse effects on groundwater, local habitats, the existing northern boundary drainage ditch and downstream Stranoodan 36 surface-water network. Petrol / Oil Interceptor The proposed surface-water drainage network will collect rainfall runoff from the proposed roof area, front and rear concrete apron areas and associated positively drained impermeable surfaces. Runoff from the concrete apron and trafficked areas may contain trace hydrocarbons, oils, sediment or suspended solids associated with vehicle, machinery and servicing activities. A Class 1 petrol/oil interceptor, or equivalent approved unit, will therefore be incorporated into the drainage treatment train for runoff from areas where a hydrocarbon pollution risk exists, prior to discharge to the proposed attenuation system. The interceptor will provide an additional pollution-prevention measure by reducing the risk of hydrocarbons and oils associated with vehicle and machinery movements being conveyed to the attenuation system, northern boundary drainage ditch and downstream surface-water network. Appropriate silt and sediment control will be provided upstream of, or in conjunction with, the interceptor to reduce the quantity of sediment, debris and suspended solids entering the unit and subsequently the attenuation system. Clean roof water from the approximately 3,764 m² proposed roof area represents a relatively low hydrocarbon pollution-risk source and does not inherently require treatment through a petrol/oil interceptor. The drainage arrangement will therefore, where practicable, maintain separation between clean roof runoff and runoff requiring hydrocarbon treatment, with flows combining downstream of the relevant treatment stage prior to attenuation. The principal areas potentially requiring hydrocarbon treatment comprise the proposed 580 m² front concrete apron and 344 m² rear concrete apron, giving a combined concrete apron area of approximately 924 m². The final catchment directed through the interceptor will be determined by the detailed drainage layout and the extent of trafficked surfaces presenting a credible hydrocarbon pollution risk. The interceptor will be selected and sized having regard to the contributing catchment routed through the unit, anticipated hydraulic loading, drainage configuration and manufacturer's design requirements. The selected unit will be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations and relevant applicable standards. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Following appropriate treatment, runoff will be conveyed to the proposed attenuation system, where surface water will be temporarily stored before controlled discharge through the proposed flow-control chamber at a maximum design rate of 12.7 L/s. Treated and attenuated surface water will subsequently discharge to the existing drainage ditch along the northern site boundary, which forms part of the drainage pathway towards the Stranoodan 36 network (IE_NW_36D020700). The interceptor will be located to permit safe and practical access for inspection, maintenance and emptying. Accumulated oil, silt and debris will be removed as required in accordance with the manufacturer's operation and maintenance recommendations to maintain the effective performance of the unit. A typical detail of a Class 1 Petrol/Oil Interceptor is presented in Figure 3. Figure 3: Cross Section of a Class 1 By-Pass Petrol/Oil Interceptor REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Figure 4: Enlarged View of Proposed Surface Water Drainage Layout Surface-water runoff from the proposed roof areas, concrete apron areas and associated positively drained impermeable surfaces will be collected through the dedicated surface-water drainage network and conveyed towards the proposed treatment and attenuation system. Runoff from the concrete yard and trafficked areas will be managed through the proposed drainage arrangement to ensure that runoff presenting a potential sediment or hydrocarbon pollution risk receives appropriate treatment prior to entering the attenuation system. During normal clean-water conditions, runoff from these areas will be conveyed through the proposed treatment system, including appropriate silt and sediment control and the NSBE015 By-Pass Petrol Interceptor, or similar approved, as indicated on the proposed site-services layout. During poultry-house washing operations, or where soiled water is present on the concrete yard areas, the drainage arrangement will provide for the diversion of wash water and potentially contaminated runoff to the dedicated underground washings/soiled-water storage system. This will prevent poultry- house wash water, soiled water or other potentially contaminated agricultural water from entering the clean surface-water drainage network, attenuation system or receiving drainage outfall. Clean roof water represents a relatively low pollution-risk runoff source and does not inherently require hydrocarbon treatment. Roof runoff will therefore be collected through the dedicated roof-water drainage system and conveyed towards the proposed attenuation system, together with appropriately treated clean surface-water runoff from the relevant hardstanding areas. The proposed attenuation system comprises a StormTech polypropylene tunnel attenuation tank, or similar approved system, as indicated on the proposed site-services layout. The attenuation system will REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 provide a minimum effective storage capacity of 184 m³ and will temporarily retain surface-water runoff during rainfall events before releasing stored water at a controlled rate. The attenuation system has been hydraulically assessed as part of the proposed surface-water drainage network. The hydraulic model incorporates a 20% climate-change allowance and assesses the performance of the proposed system for rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100-year return-period event. The attenuation system is modelled without reliance upon infiltration to the surrounding ground, with runoff instead managed through temporary storage and controlled discharge. Discharge from the attenuation system will pass through the proposed flow-control chamber incorporating a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device. As indicated on the proposed drainage layout, the Hydro-Brake will restrict the maximum design discharge to 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated greenfield QBar runoff rate adopted for the site. Following attenuation and flow control, treated surface water will be conveyed through the proposed downstream drainage pipework to the proposed outfall to the open drain, as indicated on the drainage layout. The receiving drain forms part of the existing surface-water drainage pathway from the site towards the downstream Stranoodan 36 surface-water network (IE_NW_36D020700). The proposed arrangement therefore provides a clear treatment and hydraulic management train comprising source segregation, sediment and hydrocarbon treatment where required, attenuation, flow control and controlled discharge. Poultry-house wash water, soiled water and potentially contaminated agricultural runoff will be separately contained and will not be permitted to discharge to the proposed attenuation system or receiving open drain. Design Parameters The proposed surface-water attenuation system has been designed to accommodate runoff generated by the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, while controlling the rate of discharge to the existing surface-water drainage network. The attenuation strategy does not rely upon infiltration for disposal of the design runoff. Surface water generated from the positively drained development areas will instead be collected through the dedicated surface-water drainage network, appropriately treated where required and temporarily stored within the proposed attenuation system before being released through a flow-control chamber incorporating a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device. The hydraulic performance of the proposed surface-water drainage system has been assessed using Flow+ hydraulic modelling. The model incorporates the proposed drainage network, attenuation storage structure, flow-control device and downstream outfall and assesses the performance of the system over a range of storm durations and return periods. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The allowable discharge rate has been derived using the IH124 greenfield runoff methodology. For the pre-development greenfield runoff assessment, a positively drained area of 1.330 ha, Standard Average Annual Rainfall (SAAR) of 1,004 mm, Soil Index of 5 and Standard Percentage Runoff (SPR) of 0.53 have been adopted. The resulting calculated greenfield mean annual flood flow, QBar, is 12.7 L/s. This rate has been adopted as the maximum design discharge from the proposed attenuation system and forms the design basis for the proposed Hydro-Brake flow-control device. The hydraulic model uses the FSR rainfall methodology, with an M5-60 rainfall depth of 16.600 mm and Ratio-R of 0.310. A 20% climate-change allowance has been incorporated into the design assessment. Storm durations ranging from 15 minutes to 1,440 minutes have been assessed for return periods of 1, 10, 30 and 100 years. The principal hydraulic design parameters are summarised below. Table 7: Attenuation Design Parameters Design Parameter Adopted Value Hydraulic modelling software Flow+ Rainfall methodology FSR M5-60 16.600 mm Ratio-R 0.310 Climate-change allowance 20% Design return period 1 in 100 year Greenfield runoff methodology IH124 Positively drained area used for greenfield assessment 1.330 ha SAAR 1,004 mm Soil Index 5 SPR 0.53 Calculated greenfield QBar 12.7 L/s Maximum controlled discharge 12.7 L/s Attenuation system StormTech polypropylene tunnel tank or similar approved Minimum attenuation capacity shown on drainage layout 184 m³ Infiltration contribution in hydraulic model 0 Critical 1 in 100-year +20% CC event 120-minute winter storm Peak modelled attenuation storage utilisation 177.13 m³ Predicted flooding during critical design event 0.000 m³ Required Attenuation Storage Volume The attenuation requirement for the proposed development has been determined through dynamic hydraulic modelling of the proposed surface-water drainage network rather than through a simplified rainfall-volume calculation. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The hydraulic model considers the interaction between rainfall-generated runoff, the proposed drainage pipework, attenuation storage and the Hydro-Brake flow-control device over a range of storm durations. This allows the critical storm duration to be identified while accounting for the progressive filling and emptying of the attenuation system during each rainfall event. The proposed attenuation structure has been represented within the hydraulic model with the following principal parameters: Table 8: Modelled Attenuation Structure Parameter Modelled Value Length 20.520 m Width 8.890 m Depth 1.440 m Porosity 70% Invert Level 96.741 m Base Infiltration Coefficient 0.00000 m/hr Side Infiltration Coefficient 0.00000 m/hr Infiltration Safety Factor 2.0 Approximate Time to Half Empty 140 minutes No infiltration contribution has been incorporated into the hydraulic model. The design therefore demonstrates the performance of the attenuation system on the basis of temporary storage and controlled discharge, without relying upon infiltration into the underlying ground. The proposed drainage layout identifies a StormTech polypropylene tunnel attenuation tank, or similar approved, with a minimum capacity of 184 m³. The final proprietary attenuation arrangement shall provide not less than the effective storage capacity represented by the hydraulic design. 1 in 100-Year plus Climate-Change Assessment The hydraulic model has assessed a range of storm durations to determine the critical event for the proposed attenuation system. For the 1 in 100-year return period including a 20% climate-change allowance, the critical event is identified as the 120-minute winter storm. During the critical event, the model predicts a peak attenuation-tank depth of approximately 1.425 m and a peak storage utilisation of approximately 177.13 m³. At the critical point in the storm, the model predicts an attenuation-tank inflow of approximately 77.3 L/s, while the downstream Hydro-Brake restricts discharge to the design rate of 12.7 L/s. The difference between the instantaneous inflow and controlled outflow is temporarily accommodated within the proposed attenuation system. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Table 9: Critical Hydraulic Model Results Parameter Modelled Result Design event 1 in 100 year + 20% climate change Critical storm 120-minute winter Peak attenuation depth 1.425 m Peak attenuation storage utilisation 177.13 m³ Peak attenuation-tank inflow 77.3 L/s Hydro-Brake design discharge 12.7 L/s Flood volume from attenuation tank 0.000 m³ Modelled system flooding 0.000 m³ The model indicates that surcharge occurs within parts of the drainage network during the extreme design event. However, no flooding is predicted, with a modelled flood volume of 0.000 m³. The occurrence of surcharge within a closed drainage system during an extreme rainfall event does not in itself constitute flooding, provided flows remain contained within the drainage infrastructure. The results therefore demonstrate that the proposed attenuation and flow-control arrangement provides sufficient hydraulic performance to accommodate the assessed 1 in 100-year rainfall event including the 20% climate-change allowance, while maintaining the controlled discharge at the calculated greenfield QBar rate. Lower Return-Period Assessment The hydraulic model also assesses the performance of the proposed drainage system for the 1 -year, 10-year and 30- year return-period events, each incorporating the adopted 20% climate-change allowance. The modelling indicates that runoff is retained within the proposed drainage infrastructure for each of the assessed events, with no predicted flooding. Surcharge is predicted at certain locations within the drainage network for some events; however, the associated modelled flood volume remains 0.000 m³. The proposed Hydro-Brake provides a consistent hydraulic control at the downstream end of the attenuation system, with discharge limited to approximately the calculated 12.7 L/s greenfield QBar. Accordingly, the proposed attenuation system has been demonstrated through hydraulic modelling to provide an appropriate level of surface-water management across the assessed range of return periods, including the critical 1 in 100-year plus 20% climate-change event. Table 10: Summary of Hydraulic Design Design Assessment Design Outcome Greenfield QBar 12.7 L/s Proposed maximum controlled discharge 12.7 L/s Proposed minimum attenuation capacity 184 m³ 1-year +20% climate change No predicted flooding 10-year +20% climate change No predicted flooding 30-year +20% climate change No predicted flooding 100-year +20% climate change No predicted flooding Critical 100-year +20% storm 120-minute winter event Peak modelled storage utilisation 177.13 m³ REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flow Control and Discharge Surface water generated from the positively drained impermeable surfaces associated with the proposed development will be collected through the dedicated surface-water drainage network and appropriately treated, where required, before entering the proposed attenuation system. Discharge from the attenuation system will occur by gravity through a flow -control chamber incorporating a Hydro- Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device. The allowable discharge rate has been established using the IH124 greenfield runoff methodology. For the pre - development greenfield runoff assessment, a positively drained site area of 1.330 ha, SAAR of 1,004 mm, Soil Index of 5 and SPR of 0.53 have been adopted. The resulting calculated greenfield mean annual flood flow, QBar, is 12.7 L/s. Accordingly, the maximum design discharge from the attenuation system will be restricted to: Q = 12.7 L/s The proposed Hydro-Brake has been incorporated directly into the Flow+ hydraulic model with a design flow of 12.7 L/s. The flow-control device therefore regulates discharge from the attenuation system to the calculated greenfield QBar rather than permitting unrestricted post-development runoff to enter the receiving drainage network. During rainfall events where the rate of runoff entering the attenuation system exceeds the controlled discharge rate, the excess runoff will be temporarily retained within the attenuation system. Stored runoff will subsequently be released through the flow-control device as the storm event subsides and storage capacity becomes available. The hydraulic model assesses the attenuation storage and flow-control device as an integrated drainage system over a range of storm durations and return periods. For the 1 in 100-year event including a 20% climate-change allowance, the critical event for the attenuation structure is identified as the 120-minute winter storm. During this critical event, the attenuation structure reaches a peak modelled storage utilisation of approximately 177.13 m³, with a peak modelled inflow of approximately 77.3 L/s. Notwithstanding this substantially higher instantaneous inflow, discharge from the system is regulated by the Hydro-Brake to approximately 12.7 L/s. The model predicts no flooding from the attenuation structure or modelled drainage network during the critical design event. Surcharge occurs within parts of the drainage network during the extreme event; however, the modelled flood volume remains 0.000 m³. The proposed drainage layout identifies a StormTech polypropylene tunnel attenuation tank, or similar approved, with a minimum capacity of 184 m³. The proposed storage provision therefore exceeds the peak attenuation storage utilisation identified by the hydraulic model. The final Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved flow-control device, shall be selected and configured to provide the modelled 12.7 L/s design discharge under the applicable hydraulic head. The final unit specification shall be confirmed in accordance with the manufacturer's detailed design requirements and shall be consistent with the approved hydraulic model. Following attenuation and flow control, treated surface water will discharge through the proposed drainage outfall to the existing open drain. This drain forms part of the local surface-water drainage pathway towards the Stranoodan 36 surface-water network (IE_NW_36D020700). REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 The combination of attenuation storage and controlled discharge will therefore ensure that runoff generated by the proposed development is collected, appropriately treated, temporarily stored and released to the receiving drainage system at a controlled rate corresponding with the calculated pre-development greenfield QBar. Ground Conditions and Attenuation Installation The proposed attenuation strategy is based upon storage and controlled discharge and does not rely upon infiltration to the surrounding ground to achieve the required hydraulic performance. No infiltration contribution has therefore been incorporated into the hydraulic model. The modelled attenuation structure adopts both a base infiltration coefficient of 0.00000 m/hr and a side infiltration coefficient of 0.00000 m/hr. Surface water entering the attenuation system is consequently assumed to be managed entirely through temporary storage and subsequent controlled discharge through the proposed flow-control device. This approach is appropriate having regard to the site-specific ground conditions and ensures that the demonstrated hydraulic performance of the attenuation system is not dependent upon the infiltration characteristics of the underlying soil or weathered rock. The proposed drainage layout identifies a StormTech polypropylene tunnel attenuation tank, or similar approved, with a minimum capacity of 184 m³. The final proprietary attenuation system shall provide the effective storage capacity required to replicate or exceed the hydraulic performance represented within the Flow+ model. The final formation level, excavation depth, cover requirements, structural arrangement and installation details of the attenuation system shall be confirmed during detailed design having regard to the proposed drainage invert levels, site ground conditions, structural loading requirements and proprietary system manufacturer's recommendations. Should groundwater, rock or other unforeseen ground conditions be encountered during excavation, the installation arrangement shall be reviewed by the project engineer and attenuation-system supplier. Any necessary structural, waterproofing, anchoring or other installation measures shall be incorporated into the final construction detail. As the hydraulic performance of the proposed drainage strategy does not depend upon infiltration to the surrounding ground, variations in the underlying infiltration characteristics will not reduce the storage performance upon which the hydraulic assessment is based. Conclusion of Attenuation Assessment The surface-water drainage and attenuation system for the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan has been assessed through detailed Flow+ hydraulic modelling incorporating the proposed drainage network, attenuation structure, Hydro-Brake flow-control device and downstream discharge arrangement. The allowable discharge has been established using the IH124 greenfield runoff methodology, based on a positively drained pre-development area of 1.330 ha. The calculated greenfield QBar is 12.7 L/s, which has been adopted as the maximum design discharge from the proposed attenuation system. The hydraulic assessment incorporates the applicable FSR rainfall parameters and a 20% climate-change allowance and considers a range of storm durations and return periods up to and including the 1 in 100-year event. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 For the 1 in 100-year event including the 20% climate-change allowance, the critical attenuation event is identified as the 120-minute winter storm. During this event, the model predicts a peak attenuation storage utilisation of approximately: 177.13 m³ The proposed drainage layout identifies a StormTech polypropylene tunnel attenuation tank, or similar approved, providing a minimum attenuation capacity of 184 m³. Discharge from the attenuation system will be regulated through the proposed Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device, to a maximum design rate of: 12.7 L/s The hydraulic model predicts no flooding during the critical 1 in 100-year plus 20% climate-change event. While surcharge is predicted within parts of the drainage network under the extreme design condition, flows remain contained within the modelled drainage infrastructure and the predicted flood volume is 0.000 m³. The proposed system therefore provides a managed surface-water drainage solution comprising collection, appropriate pollution treatment, attenuation, flow control and controlled discharge. Stormwater generated during rainfall events will be temporarily accommodated within the attenuation system while the controlled outlet regulates the rate at which stored runoff is released to the receiving drainage network. The final proprietary attenuation-system design shall provide a minimum attenuation capacity of 184 m³, or such greater effective storage as may be required to replicate the approved hydraulic model, and shall be configured to operate in conjunction with a maximum controlled discharge of 12.7 L/s. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Figure 5: Site Layout Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan showing Location of Attenuation Tank. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Figure 6: Cross-Section of Proposed Stormwater Attenuation System Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. NB: • A silt trap and Class 1 by-pass petrol/oil interceptor shall be provided for runoff from the concrete apron and other relevant trafficked hardstanding areas prior to discharge to the attenuation system. Clean roof water represents a lower pollution-risk runoff source and does not require hydrocarbon treatment. • The proposed attenuation system shall provide a minimum effective hydraulic storage volume of 260.48 m³ and shall be designed and installed in accordance with the proprietary system manufacturer's requirements and relevant applicable standards. • Discharge from the attenuation system shall pass through a flow-control chamber incorporating a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device, restricting the maximum surface- water discharge rate to 2.0 L/s. • Following attenuation and flow control, treated surface water shall discharge to the existing drainage ditch running along the northern boundary of the site. This ditch forms part of the local drainage pathway towards the Stranoodan 36 surface-water network (Waterbody Code IE_NW_36D020700). • Only clean roof water and appropriately treated surface-water runoff shall enter the attenuation system. Soiled water, poultry-house wash water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water shall be collected separately within the dedicated soiled-water drainage and storage system and shall not enter the clean surface-water drainage system, attenuation system or receiving drainage ditch. • The attenuation system, silt trap, Class 1 by-pass petrol/oil interceptor, flow-control chamber, inspection chambers and associated drainage pipework shall remain accessible for inspection and maintenance. The silt trap and interceptor shall be inspected, maintained and emptied as required to ensure their continued effective operation. • The final attenuation-system type, configuration, excavation dimensions, formation level, cover depth, structural requirements and inlet/outlet arrangements shall be confirmed by the proprietary system supplier at detailed-design stage. The final design shall demonstrate provision of not less than 260.48 m³ of effective hydraulic storage and compliance with the maximum controlled discharge rate of 2.0 L/s. • The attenuation system shall be designed on the basis of the 4,688 m² total contributing impermeable catchment, comprising 3,764 m² of roof area, 580 m² of front concrete apron and 344 m² of rear concrete apron. Should you have any queries on this, do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely Nevin Traynor BSc. Env, H.Dip I.T, Cert SHWW, EPA/FAS Cert. For Traynor Environmental Ltd Encl – Appendices A-E REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 SOAKAWAY TESTING TO BRE DIGEST 365 SITE AT ENAGH, ROCKCORRY, CO. MONAGHAN COMPLETED BY TRAYNOR ENVIRONMENTAL LTD APPENDIX A – TRIAL PIT LOG REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Trial Pit Number TP A Traynor Environmental Ltd Unit 6, Belturbet Business Park Creeny Belturbet Co. Cavan Sheet 1 of 1 Client Alan Niblock Job Number: 26/448 TE Logged By NT Method 13 ton digger Ground Level Start Date 13.08.26 Description Legend Reduced Level Depth Water Strike (m) Installation Backfill Sample Test Notes TOPSOIL: Dark brown, slightly silty/clayey topsoil with grass roots and occasional angular to sub-angular stone fragments. Generally loose to moderately compact with a crumb structure. - 0.00m- 0.35m - - - - - CLAY/SILT: Grey-brown to brown, firm to stiff, locally wet clayey SILT / silty CLAY containing occasional gravel and stone fragments. Material becomes wetter with depth, with visible seepage/groundwater accumulation towards the base of the excavation. - 0.40m- 1.50m - - - - - Trial Pit Completed at 1.50m BGL. Remarks: Groundwater: None Encountered Winter Groundwater: None Encountered Bedrock: None Encountered Pit Dimensions Length: 2.30m Width: 1.30m Photo REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 SOAKAWAY TESTING TO BRE DIGEST 365 SITE AT ENAGH, ROCKCORRY, CO. MONAGHAN COMPLETED BY TRAYNOR ENVIRONMENTAL LTD APPENDIX B – SITE PHOTOGRAPHS REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Photographs From the Soakaway Test No. 1 Side View Of Soakaway Test Hole No 1 Prior To Test Front View Of Soakaway Test Hole No 1 Prior To Test Filling of Soakaway Hole Removed from Soakaway REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 SOAKAWAY TESTING TO BRE DIGEST 365 SITE AT ENAGH, ROCKCORRY, CO. MONAGHAN COMPLETED BY TRAYNOR ENVIRONMENTAL LTD APPENDIX C – MET EIREANN RAINFALL RETURN PERIODS REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 SOAKAWAY TESTING TO BRE DIGEST 365 SITE AT ENAGH, ROCKCORRY, CO. MONAGHAN COMPLETED BY TRAYNOR ENVIRONMENTAL LTD APPENDIX D – MAPS USED AS PART OF THE DESK STUDY REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Maps Used As Part of the EPA Site Suitability Assessment Groundwater/Aquifer Map From the GSI Groundwater Aquifer Map Site is classified as PI – Poor Aquifer - Bedrock which is Generally Unproductive except for Local Zones Vulnerability Map The site is classified as Low groundwater vulnerability. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Bedrock Map From the GSI Bedrock Map Site is classified as Silurian Metasediments and Volcanics Teagasc Subsoil Map From the Teagasc Subsoil Map Site is classified as Sandstone and shale till (Lower Palaeozoic) REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 SOAKAWAY TESTING TO BRE DIGEST 365 SITE AT ENAGH, ROCKCORRY, CO. MONAGHAN COMPLETED BY TRAYNOR ENVIRONMENTAL LTD APPENDIX E – PI INSURANCE DETAILS REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT FOR PROPOSED NEW POULTRY DEVELOPMENT AT ENAGH ROCKCORRY CO. MONAGHAN Prepared for Alan Niblock Prepared by Traynor Environmental Ltd Reference Number 26.448 TE Date of Issue 14th September 2026 Belturbet Business Park, Creeny. Belturbet, Co Cavan T: + 353 49 9522236 E: nevin@traynorenv.com www.traynorenvironmental.ie REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 2 Issue Date Details Prepared by Checked/Approved by 1 14th September 2026 Final Report Francis Mc Mahon Environmental Consultant Nevin Traynor Environmental Scientist Project Title: Flood Risk Assessment Client: Alan Niblock Office Reference: 26.448 TE Status: Final Report Date: 14th September 2026 Technical Reviewer Signature Nevin Traynor Environmental Scientist Date: 14th September 2026 Traynor Environmental Belturbet Business Park Creeny Belturbet Co. Cavan H14AY94 Tel: 049 9522236 Email: info@traynorenvironmental.ie © This Report is the copyright of Traynor Environmental Ltd. Any unauthorized reproduction or usage by any person other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 3 CONTENT 1.0 INTRODUCTION 4 1.1 Terms of Reference 4 1.2 Statement of Authority 4 1.3 Purpose 4 1.4 Approach to the Assessment 4 2.0 DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DETAILS 6 2.1 Site Location and Boundary 6 2.2 Affecting Waterbodies 8 2.3 Site Description 8 2.4 Development Proposals 9 2.5 Vulnerability Classification 11 3.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION REVIEW 12 3.1 Office of Public Works 12 3.2 Monaghan County Council 15 3.3 Internet / Media Search 15 3.4 Site Walkover Survey 16 4.0 LEVEL 1 – FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT 17 4.1 Potential Sources of Flooding 17 4.2 Classification of Flood Zones 17 4.3 Fluvial Sources 18 4.4 Pluvial Flooding 19 4.5 Coastal Flooding 20 5.0 LEVEL 2 – INITIAL FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT 20 5.1 Vulnerability Classification 20 5.2 Local Drainage Network and Surface-Water Management 21 5.3 Source – Pathway – Receptor – Risk 22 5.4 Arterial Drainage Scheme and Benefiting Lands 24 5.5 Climate Change Allowance 25 6.0 LEVEL 3 – DETAILED FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT 26 6.1 Detailed Fluvial Flood Risk Assessment 26 6.2 Assessment of Flood Mapping and Site Topography 27 6.3 Discussion of Findings 28 6.4 Proposed Finished Floor Level 29 6.5 Access and Egress 29 6.6 Other Flooding 29 6.7 Exacerbation of Flooding 30 6.8 Residual Risk 31 6.9 Justification Test 31 6.10 Emergency Access and Egress 31 7.0 REPORT CONCLUSION 32 8.0 REFERENCES 34 REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 4 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Terms of Reference This Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) was prepared on behalf of Alan Niblock in support of a planning application for a proposed poultry development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. The proposed development site is hereafter referred to as "the site". 1.2 Statement of Authority This report and assessment have been prepared and reviewed by qualified professionals with appropriate experience in the fields of flood risk, surface water drainage, and hydraulic modelling studies. The key staff members involved in this project are as follows: • Nevin Traynor (Hons) BSc – Environmental Scientist with experience in flood risk assessment, hydrology and hydraulic modelling. • Francis Mc Mahon (Hons) MSc Engineer specialising in hydrology, flood risk assessment, drainage, and SuDS, and a recognised industry professional providing training courses on these topics to the public and private sectors in Ireland. 1.3 Purpose This assessment is intended to produce a detailed site-specific FRA (SSFRA) to ensure that all relevant issues related to flooding are addressed. This Stage 3 FRA will assess the adequacy of existing information and present analysis undertaken to supplement existing data. The assessment will ultimately determine potential sources of flooding at the site and their associated risk to life and prop erty. It will also determine the suitability of the site for future development based on relevant flood risk management planning policy guidelines and propose appropriate design and mitigation measures, where appropriate, to be considered as part of the development proposal. 1.4 Approach to the Assessment This Flood Risk Assessment has been undertaken using a risk-based approach having regard to the nature and scale of the proposed development and the flood-risk information available for the site at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. Potential flooding from fluvial, pluvial/surface-water, groundwater and drainage-related sources has been considered. The assessment also considers residual and exceedance risk associated with events exceeding the design capacity of the proposed drainage infrastructure. The assessment follows the Source–Pathway–Receptor approach, whereby potential sources of flooding are identified together with the pathways by which floodwater could reach the proposed development and the receptors that may consequently be affected. Particular consideration has been given to the existing open drainage channel in the vicinity of the site, the wider receiving drainage network, available OPW flood-risk information, historical flood records and the relationship between these features and the proposed development. Existing and proposed site levels have also been considered in assessing whether a credible flood pathway exists towards the proposed poultry house, manure store and associated infrastructure. Surface-water runoff generated by the development is considered separately having regard to the proposed surface-water drainage, attenuation and controlled-discharge arrangements. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 5 1.4.1 Status of Available Flood-Risk Information The assessment has been informed by the best available flood-risk and hydrological information for the site and surrounding catchment, including OPW Floodinfo mapping, National Indicative Fluvial Mapping (NIFM), historical flood-event information, available topographical information, site observations and relevant hydrological datasets. No site-specific FSU node or calculated design flood level is available for the minor open drainage channel in the vicinity of the proposed development. Furthermore, surveyed channel cross-sections suitable for undertaking a site-specific open-channel flood- level calculation are not available. An available FSU hydrological node has been identified on the larger receiving stream. However, this node is located upstream of the point at which the minor site drainage pathway joins the receiving stream and therefore represents a separate and substantially larger contributing catchment. Hydrological information associated with this node has consequently been considered as supporting catchment information only and has not been directly transferred to the minor drainage channel for the purpose of calculating a site-specific flood level. Accordingly, a site-specific hydraulic model has not been undertaken as part of this assessment. The assessment of fluvial flood risk is instead based on the available OPW flood-risk information, historical flood records, available hydrological information, site topography and the identification of potential flood pathways between the local drainage network and the proposed development. This approach is considered proportionate to the nature of the proposed agricultural development and the flood-risk information available for the site. 1.4.2 Planning Guidelines The requirements for Flood Risk Assessments are principally set out in the Office of Public Works (OPW) and Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government publication The Planning System and Flood Risk Management – Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2009) and the accompanying Technical Appendices. Relevant climate-change guidance and current flood- risk information published by the OPW have also been considered. Planning policy applicable to the proposed development is set out in the Monaghan County Development Plan and associated flood-risk management policies. These policies seek to avoid inappropriate development in areas at significant risk of flooding and to ensure that new development does not increase flood risk elsewhere. The Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines adopt a risk-based approach through the identification of Flood Zones A, B and C: • Flood Zone A – where the probability of river flooding is greater than 1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP), or 1 in 100 in any year, and the probability of coastal flooding is greater than 0.5% AEP, or 1 in 200. • Flood Zone B – where the probability of river flooding is between 0.1% and 1% AEP, or between 1 in 1,000 and 1 in 100, and the probability of coastal flooding is between 0.1% and 0.5% AEP, or between 1 in 1,000 and 1 in 200. • Flood Zone C – where the probability of river and coastal flooding is less than 0.1% AEP, or 1 in 1,000. The Guidelines advocate a precautionary approach to flood-risk management through application of the Sequential Approach, whereby development should, where practicable, be directed towards areas of lower flood risk. The suitability of development within each Flood Zone is considered having regard to the vulnerability of the proposed development and the requirements of the Guidelines. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 6 Flood Zones are principally concerned with fluvial and coastal flooding and do not, in themselves, represent all potential so urces of flood risk. Accordingly, this assessment also considers potential flooding associated with surface -water runoff, local drainage infrastructure, groundwater and residual or exceedance events. Climate change has also been considered as part of the assessment. In particular, the proposed surface-water drainage system has been assessed for rainfall events up to and including the 1-in-100-year event incorporating a 20% climate-change allowance. A review of available flood-risk information has been undertaken for the Enagh site, including OPW Floodinfo and National Indicative Fluvial Mapping, historical flood-event information, available topographical information, site observations and relevant hydrological information. The assessment considers the minor open drainage channel in the vicinity of the development and its relationship with the lar ger receiving drainage network. As no site-specific design flood level or suitable surveyed channel cross-sections are available for the minor drainage channel, the assessment does not seek to derive an artificial flood level by transferring flows from the available FSU node. Instead, flood risk is assessed using the available mapped flood information, historical records, site topogra phy and the identification of credible flood pathways to the proposed development. 2.0 DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DETAILS 2.1 Site Location and Surrounding Environment The subject site is located within the townland of Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, in a predominantly rural agricultural setting. The site forms part of an existing agricultural landholding and is situated within an area characterised principally by agricultural grassland, farm holdings, agricultural buildings and dispersed rural residential development. The proposed development comprises the construction of 1 No. poultry house and 1 No. manure store, together with associated ancillary structures including meal storage bin(s), underground soiled-water storage tank(s), concrete apron and hardstanding areas, a new/upgraded site entrance, surface-water drainage infrastructure, landscaping and associated site works. The proposed development is the subject of Planning Application Ref. 26/60154. The surrounding land use is predominantly agricultural, with improved agricultural grassland forming the principal habitat within and surrounding the site. Other features characteristic of the local rural environment include field boundaries, hedgerows, treelines, drainage ditches and agricultural lands. An existing open drainage ditch is located adjacent to the site and forms part of the established local surface-water drainage network. This drainage feature provides the receiving pathway for the proposed controlled surface -water discharge from the development and ultimately drains towards the Stranoodan 36 surface-water network (River Waterbody Code IE_NW_36D020700). The relationship between the proposed development, existing drainage features and surrounding topography is considered further within the flood-risk assessment presented in the following sections. The site is to be accessed via the proposed new/upgraded agricultural entrance, as indicated on the accompanying planning drawings. The proposed development will introduce additional roof and hardstanding areas within the site. Surface-water runoff generated from these areas will be managed through a dedicated drainage system incorporating appropriate treatment, attenuation and flow control prior to discharge to the existing receiving drainage network. The potential implications of the proposed development for surface-water and flood risk are assessed within this report. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 7 Figure 1: Site Location Map (Site Pinned) Figure 2: Site Location Map (Application Site Outlined in Red) REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 8 2.2 Affected Waterbodies The proposed development site is located at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, within a predominantly rural agricultural catchment characterised by agricultural lands, field boundaries, hedgerows and local drainage features. An existing open drainage ditch is located adjacent to the site and forms part of the established local surface-water drainage network. This drainage feature represents the immediate receiving pathway for the proposed controlled surface-water discharge from the development. The local drainage pathway ultimately connects with the EPA-mapped surface-water network associated with Stranoodan 36, identified as River Waterbody Code IE_NW_36D020700, Segment Code 36_1419 and EPA Code 36S48. The existing open drain and downstream Stranoodan 36 network are therefore the principal surface-water receptors relevant to the proposed development. The proposed development will introduce additional roof and hardstanding surfaces. In the absence of appropriate surface- water management measures, these impermeable surfaces have the potential to increase the rate and volume of runoff generated during rainfall events. A dedicated surface-water drainage system is therefore proposed to collect, appropriately treat and attenuate runoff prior to controlled discharge to the existing receiving drainage network. The proposed drainage strategy is based on attenuation and controlled discharge and does not rely upon infiltration to ground for disposal of the design runoff. Surface water will be temporarily stored within the proposed attenuation system before being discharged through a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device. The allowable discharge has been established from the pre-development greenfield runoff characteristics of the site, with a calculated QBar of 12.7 L/s adopted as the maximum design discharge from the attenuation system. The supporting surface- water drainage and attenuation calculations incorporate a 20% climate-change allowance and assess the performance of the proposed drainage system for rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100-year return-period event. The proposed controlled discharge arrangement will ensure that runoff from the developed site is not discharged unrestricted to the receiving drainage network, thereby limiting the potential for the development to increase surface-water flood risk downstream. No significant risk from coastal flooding is anticipated due to the inland location of the site. Potential flood risk associated with the existing surface-water network, overland surface-water runoff, groundwater, drainage infrastructure and other relevant sources is considered further within the subsequent sections of this Flood Risk Assessment. 2.3 Site Description The site under consideration is located at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan and comprises agricultural lands proposed for the construction of a new poultry development. The site is situated within a predominantly rural agricultural landscape characterised by agricultural grassland, hedgerows, field boundaries, agricultural holdings and local road infrastructure. The proposed development comprises the construction of 1 No. poultry house and 1 No. manure store, together with associated ancillary agricultural infrastructure and site-development works. The proposal is the subject of Planning Application Ref. 26/60154. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 9 The principal characteristics of the site and proposed development can be summarised as follows: • The site comprises agricultural lands within the townland of Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. • The surrounding land use is predominantly agricultural and rural in character. • The proposed development comprises 1 No. poultry house and 1 No. manure store together with associated ancillary structures. • Associated works include meal storage bin(s), underground soiled-water storage tank(s), concrete apron and hardstanding areas, a new/upgraded site entrance, drainage infrastructure, landscaping and associated site works. • Existing drainage features within and adjacent to the site form part of the local rural surface-water drainage network. • An existing open drain provides the receiving pathway for the proposed controlled surface-water discharge from the development. • The receiving drainage pathway ultimately connects towards the Stranoodan 36 surface-water network (IE_NW_36D020700). • Clean surface water will be maintained separately from wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water. • Surface-water runoff from the proposed developed areas will be collected and appropriately treated, where required, prior to attenuation. • Discharge from the attenuation system will be restricted to a maximum design rate of 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated pre-development greenfield QBar. • The proposed attenuation strategy does not rely upon infiltration to ground to achieve the required surface-water management performance. Ground levels referenced within this Flood Risk Assessment are based on the available site layout and topographical information prepared in support of the planning application. The relationship between the proposed development, surrounding ground levels, existing drainage features and potential surface-water flow pathways has been considered as part of the assessment of flood risk. The proposed development will incorporate a dedicated surface-water management system designed to prevent unrestricted runoff from the newly developed impermeable surfaces entering the existing receiving drainage network. Surface water will be collected and temporarily attenuated before being released at a controlled rate. The proposed surface-water drainage strategy therefore ensures that the development does not rely upon uncontrolled discharge or infiltration to dispose of runoff generated from the proposed impermeable surfaces. The potential for flooding from fluvial sources, pluvial and surface-water runoff, groundwater, existing drainage infrastructure and other relevant sources is assessed in the subsequent sections of this report. 2.4 Development Proposals The proposed development comprises the construction of 1 No. poultry house and 1 No. manure store at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, together with associated ancillary agricultural infrastructure and site-development works. The development includes meal storage bin(s), underground soiled-water storage tank(s), concrete apron and hardstanding areas, a new/upgraded site entrance, surface-water drainage infrastructure, landscaping, utility services and all associated ancillary works necessary to facilitate the proposed poultry enterprise. The proposed development is the subject of Planning Application Ref. 26/60154. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 10 The site layout has been developed having regard to the existing topography, surrounding agricultural land uses, existing drainage pathways and the operational requirements of the proposed development. The construction of the poultry house, manure store and associated hardstanding areas will introduce additional impermeable surfaces and will therefore alter the existing surface-water runoff characteristics within the developed portion of the site. A dedicated surface-water drainage system is proposed to ensure that this runoff is appropriately managed. Clean roof water will be collected through the proposed roof drainage system and directed to the surface-water drainage network. Runoff from concrete apron and trafficked areas will be subject to appropriate pollution-control measures, including silt and sediment control and hydrocarbon interception where required, prior to entering the attenuation system. Wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water will be maintained separately from the clean surface-water drainage system and directed to dedicated underground storage facilities. Such water will not be permitted to enter the clean surface-water drainage network, attenuation system or receiving surface-water outfall. Surface-water runoff will be temporarily stored within the proposed attenuation system before controlled discharge through a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device. The allowable discharge rate has been established using the IH124 greenfield runoff methodology. The supporting drainage calculations establish a pre-development greenfield QBar of 12.7 L/s, which has been adopted as the maximum design discharge from the proposed attenuation system. The proposed drainage layout provides for a StormTech polypropylene tunnel attenuation tank, or similar approved system, with a minimum capacity of 184 m³. The supporting surface-water drainage and attenuation calculations incorporate a 20% climate-change allowance and assess the proposed system for rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100-year return- period event. The attenuation strategy does not rely upon infiltration to the surrounding ground. Runoff will instead be managed through temporary storage and subsequent controlled discharge to the existing receiving drainage network. Following attenuation and flow control, treated surface water will discharge through the proposed outfall to the existing open drain. The combination of collection, treatment, attenuation and controlled discharge will ensure that runoff generated by the development is appropriately managed and that post-development surface-water discharge is regulated. The proposed development has been considered within this Flood Risk Assessment in accordance with the principles of The Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines for Planning Authorities (DoEHLG/OPW, 2009). The assessment considers both the susceptibility of the proposed development to flooding and the potential for the development to increase flood risk elsewhere. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 11 2.5 Vulnerability Classification In accordance with The Planning System and Flood Risk Management – Guidelines for Planning Authorities (DoEHLG/OPW, 2009), the vulnerability of the proposed development must be considered together with the applicable flood zone when assessing the suitability of the development from a flood-risk perspective. The proposed development comprises 1 No. poultry house and 1 No. manure store, together with associated agricultural infrastructure including meal storage bin(s), underground soiled-water storage tank(s), concrete apron and hardstanding areas, access arrangements, surface-water drainage infrastructure and ancillary site works. The proposed development is agricultural in nature and does not incorporate highly vulnerable uses such as residential accommodation, hospitals, schools, emergency-service facilities or other uses where the consequences of flooding would be particularly significant. For the purposes of this Flood Risk Assessment, the proposed poultry house, manure store and associated agricultural infrastructure are therefore considered to represent Less Vulnerable Development. The Sequential Approach has been applied through consideration of the available OPW flood-risk information, site topography, local drainage characteristics and the potential sources and pathways of flooding relevant to the proposed development. The principal potential sources considered within this assessment comprise fluvial flooding associated with the minor open drainage channel and wider receiving drainage network; pluvial and surface-water flooding arising from intense rainfall and overland runoff; groundwater flooding; flooding associated with existing or proposed drainage infrastructure; and residual flood risk associated with events exceeding the adopted drainage design standard. The available OPW flood-risk mapping indicates that the proposed development site lies outside the mapped medium- and low-probability fluvial flood extents. The compatibility of the proposed development with the applicable flood zone is considered further within the subsequent sections of this assessment. Table 1: Vulnerability Classification Proposed Element Use Flood-Risk Classification Proposed Poultry House Agricultural Building Less Vulnerable Proposed Manure Store Agricultural Building / Storage Less Vulnerable Meal Storage Bins and Ancillary Structures Agricultural Infrastructure Less Vulnerable Concrete Aprons / Hardstanding Agricultural Operational Area Less Vulnerable Site Entrance / Internal Access Local Access Infrastructure Less Vulnerable Underground Soiled-Water Storage Tanks Agricultural Storage Infrastructure Less Vulnerable Surface-Water Drainage and Attenuation Infrastructure Drainage Infrastructure Water-Compatible / Ancillary Infrastructure REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 12 3.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION REVIEW As part of the preparation of this Flood Risk Assessment, a review of available flood-risk information, published mapping, historical flood records, site topographical information and relevant hydrological and drainage information has been undertaken. The assessment has been prepared having regard to the recommendations contained within The Planning System and Flood Risk Management – Guidelines for Planning Authorities (DoEHLG/OPW, 2009). Information considered as part of the assessment includes: • Office of Public Works (OPW) Floodinfo.ie mapping; • Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA) mapping; • National Indicative Fluvial Mapping (NIFM), where available; • historical flood-event records; • Geological Survey Ireland (GSI) datasets; • OPW Arterial Drainage Scheme mapping; • available site layout and topographical information; • Flood Studies Update (FSU) catchment information; • site-specific surface-water drainage and attenuation calculations; • infiltration and ground-condition information; and • site observations and available site investigation information. The assessment considers the relationship between the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, the existing drainage features in the vicinity of the site and the wider receiving surface-water network. Particular consideration is given to the minor open drain passing adjacent to the site. This drain forms part of the local land-drainage network and ultimately discharges to a larger receiving stream. No FSU catchment node is available directly on the minor drain adjacent to the proposed development. An FSU node is, however, available on the larger receiving stream upstream of the location at which the site's drainage channel joins that stream. The available FSU node is therefore not directly hydraulically linked to the site in terms of its contributing catchment and does not represent the catchment draining through the minor channel adjacent to the development. The FSU information associated with this upstream stream node has nevertheless been considered as part of a conservative assessment of potential flood risk, as discussed further within this report. 3.1 Office of Public Works 3.1.1 Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA) The Office of Public Works (OPW) undertook a Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA) as the first stage of the Catchment Flood Risk Assessment and Management (CFRAM) Programme. The PFRA utilised national datasets and available historical information to identify areas potentially at risk from flooding throughout Ireland. A review of the available OPW PFRA mapping, National Indicative Fluvial Mapping and other available flood -risk information has been undertaken for the proposed development site at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. The proposed development is situated within a rural agricultural catchment in which local surface-water drainage is provided by field drains and minor open drainage channels. A minor open drain passes adjacent to the site and ultimately discharges to a larger receiving stream. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 13 The available strategic flood mapping should be interpreted having regard to the scale and nature of the local drainage network. Minor agricultural drains may not necessarily be represented as individually modelled watercourses within national flood-mapping datasets. Accordingly, the absence of a mapped flood extent along such a drain should not, in isolation, be interpreted as demonstrating an absence of flood risk. Conversely, indicative flood extents associated with the larger receiving stream should not automatically be assumed to extend to the proposed development site without consideration of the local topography, drainage connectivity and relative ground levels. The assessment of flood risk at the subject site therefore considers the OPW mapping together with available site levels, local drainage characteristics, surface-water pathways and a conservative assessment of the local drainage characteristics and potential flood pathways adjacent to the development. Figure 4: PFRA Indicative Flood Mapping REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 14 3.1.2 Past Flood Events Mapping The OPW Past Flood Events mapping available through Floodinfo.ie has been reviewed as part of the assessment of historical flood risk associated with the proposed development site at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. The purpose of this review is to identify whether recorded historical flood events are present within or in the vicinity of t he proposed development and whether any such events indicate a flood mechanism relevant to the subject site. Particular consideration is given to recorded flooding associated with the wider receiving stream network and to whether any identified historical flood events have a hydraulic or topographical relationship with the proposed development site. The minor drainage channel adjacent to the development and the larger receiving stream are treated as distinct drainage features for the purposes of the assessment. The presence of a flood record associated with the larger receiving stream would not automatically demonstrate flood risk at the proposed development site, particularly where that record is remote from the confluence with the site's drainage channel. Similarly, the absence of a recorded historical flood event does not, in isolation, confirm the absence of flood risk. Historical flood information is therefore considered alongside OPW flood mapping, site topography, drainage characteristics and the conservative assessment of the local drainage characteristics and potential flood pathways. Figure 5: OPW Past Flood Event Local Area Summary – Enagh, Rockcorry REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 15 3.2 Monaghan County Council 3.2.1 Monaghan County Development Plan The Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031 has been considered as part of this Flood Risk Assessment. The Development Plan includes policies and objectives relating to flood-risk management, sustainable drainage and the avoidance of inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding. The relevant flood-risk management principles include: • avoiding inappropriate development within areas at significant risk of flooding; • ensuring that new development does not increase flood risk elsewhere; • protecting existing floodplains and flood-conveyance routes; • applying the Sequential Approach to development and flood risk; • incorporating appropriate Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS); • considering the potential effects of climate change; and • appropriately managing residual and exceedance flood risk. The proposed development has been considered having regard to these principles. The development will introduce additional impermeable roof and hardstanding surfaces. Surface-water runoff will therefore be managed through a dedicated drainage system incorporating collection, appropriate treatment, attenuation and controlled discharge. The proposed drainage strategy does not rely upon infiltration to ground. Surface water will instead be temporarily stored within the proposed attenuation system before being discharged through a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow- control device, at a maximum design rate of 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated pre-development greenfield QBar. The drainage layout provides for a StormTech polypropylene tunnel attenuation tank, or similar approved, with a minimum capacity of 184 m³. The supporting drainage and attenuation calculations incorporate a 20% climate-change allowance and assess the proposed drainage arrangement for rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100-year return-period event. The drainage strategy therefore provides for the controlled management of post-development surface-water runoff and is intended to prevent an increase in flood risk to the receiving drainage network as a consequence of the proposed development. 3.3 Internet / Media Search A review of publicly available flood information, historical flood records, online mapping resources and available flood studies has been undertaken as part of this Flood Risk Assessment. The review includes available information from the Office of Public Works Floodinfo.ie website, Monaghan County Council documentation and other publicly available information relevant to flood risk within the vicinity of Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. The review considers both the immediate vicinity of the proposed development and the wider receiving surface-water network. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 16 Where historical flood information relates to the larger receiving stream, consideration is given to its location relative to the site and the hydraulic relationship between the recorded event, the receiving stream and the minor drainage channel adjacent to the proposed development. The minor site drain joins the receiving stream downstream of the available FSU node. Consequently, flood information or hydrological data associated with the upstream FSU node should not be interpreted as directly representing conditions within the drainage channel at the development site. The findings of the internet and media review are considered together with the OPW mapping, site topographical information, local drainage characteristics and the conservative assessment of the local drainage characteristics and potential flood pathways when determining the potential flood risk associated with the proposed development. 3.4 Site Walkover Survey A site walkover survey was undertaken to assess existing site conditions, surrounding land uses, drainage characteristics and potential flood-risk mechanisms. The site comprises agricultural land within a predominantly rural setting at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. Surrounding land use is predominantly agricultural and comprises farmland, agricultural buildings, local road infrastructure, field boundaries and associated rural development. The walkover assessment included consideration of the proposed development footprint, surrounding ground conditions, existing drainage features and potential overland surface-water pathways. Particular attention was given to the minor open drainage channel adjacent to the proposed development, including its relationship with surrounding ground levels and the wider receiving drainage network. The drainage channel ultimately discharges to a larger receiving stream. The available FSU node is situated on this larger stream upstream of the confluence with the minor site drain and therefore does not directly represent the hydrological catchment associated with the drain passing the development. The site walkover also informed the assessment of ground and drainage conditions relevant to the proposed surface-water management strategy. Site-specific infiltration testing indicates relatively slow infiltration characteristics, and the proposed surface-water drainage strategy consequently does not rely upon infiltration to ground. Instead, runoff generated by the proposed development will be collected, appropriately treated where required, temporarily attenuated and subsequently released to the existing receiving drainage network at the controlled design rate. The relationship between the development footprint, surrounding ground levels, the minor drainage channel and potential overland flow pathways has been considered as part of the assessment of flood risk. The observations from the site walkover are considered together with the available OPW flood -risk information, site topographical data and the conservative assessment of the local drainage characteristics and potential flood pathways in determining the overall susceptibility of the proposed development to flooding. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 17 4.0 LEVEL 1 – FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT 4.1 Potential Sources of Flooding The assessment of flood risk requires consideration of the Source–Pathway–Receptor Model, as set out within The Planning System and Flood Risk Management – Guidelines for Planning Authorities. The Source represents the origin of potential floodwater. Relevant sources may include fluvial flooding from rivers and drainage channels, intense rainfall generating surface-water runoff, groundwater, drainage infrastructure and, where applicable, coastal or tidal sources. The Pathway describes the route by which floodwater may reach a receptor. Potential pathways include rivers, streams, open drains, drainage systems, overland flow routes, low-lying ground and floodplains. The Receptor comprises the people, buildings, infrastructure, property and environmental features that may be adversely affected by flooding. For flood risk to arise, an appropriate source and pathway must exist through which floodwater can affect a vulnerable receptor. The assessment therefore considers each potential source of flooding together with the associated pathway and the susceptibility of the proposed development to that source. For the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, the principal potential sources considered are: • fluvial flooding associated with the minor open drain adjacent to the site and the wider receiving stream network; • pluvial flooding arising from intense rainfall and overland surface-water runoff; • groundwater flooding; • flooding associated with existing or proposed drainage infrastructure; • residual flooding associated with events exceeding the design capacity of the proposed drainage system; and • coastal flooding. Figure 6: Example of Source Pathway Receptor Model. Source: Flood Risk Management Guidelines 4.2 Classification of Flood Zones The Planning System and Flood Risk Management - Guidelines for Planning Authorities (November 2009) - DOEHLG and OPW identifies Flood Zones as follows: REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 18 “Flood Zone A - where the probability of flooding from rivers and the sea is highest (greater than 1% or 1 in 100 for river flooding or 0.5% or 1 in 200 for coastal flooding). Flood Zone B - where the probability of flooding from rivers and the sea is moderate (between 0.1% or 1 in 1000 and 1% or 1 in 100 for river flooding and between 0.1% or 1 in 1000 year and 0.5% or 1 in 200 for coastal flooding). Flood Zone C - where the probability of flooding from rivers and the sea is low (less than 0.1% or 1 in 1000 for both river and coastal flooding). Flood Zone C covers all areas of the plan which are not in zones A or B.” 4.3 Fluvial Sources The principal potential fluvial flood source relevant to the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan is the existing minor open drainage channel adjacent to the site. The drain forms part of the local rural drainage network and ultimately discharges to a larger receiving stream associated with the wider Stranoodan 36 surface-water network (IE_NW_36D020700). No dedicated FSU catchment node is available on the minor drainage channel adjacent to the proposed development. An available FSU hydrological node has, however, been identified on the larger receiving stream. Importantly, this node is located upstream of the point at which the minor site drain joins the receiving stream and therefore represents a separate and substantially larger contributing catchment. It is not directly representative of the catchment draining through the minor channel adjacent to the proposed development. The available FSU node represents a catchment area of 10.469 km². The FSU 4.2a Small Catchments calculation gives a QMED of 3.563 m³/s, QBar of 3.816 m³/s and Q100 of 9.960 m³/s. A separate FSU 7-Variable calculation was also undertaken as a comparative assessment and gives a QMED Rural of 2.574 m³/s and Q100 of 7.182 m³/s for the same receiving-stream catchment. These calculated flows relate to the larger receiving stream at the location of the FSU node and do not represent design flows within the minor drainage channel adjacent to the proposed development. The FSU information has therefore been considered as supporting hydrological information only and has not been transferred to the minor drain for the purpose of deriving a site-specific design flow or flood level. No site-specific OPW design flood level is available for the minor drainage channel and suitable surveyed channel cross - sections are not available from which a reliable site-specific flood level could be calculated. Accordingly, it would not be appropriate to undertake a Manning's equation channel-capacity calculation using flows derived from the separate upstream FSU catchment. The assessment of fluvial flood risk at the proposed development is therefore based principally on the available OPW flood - risk mapping, historical flood-event information, site topography, local drainage characteristics and the identification of potential flood pathways between the minor drainage channel and the proposed development. The available OPW National Indicative Fluvial Mapping does not identify the proposed development site as being affected by either the mapped medium-probability or low-probability fluvial flood extents. The available OPW Past Flood Events information also does not identify a recorded flood event at the proposed development site. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 19 Notwithstanding the absence of mapped flooding, the minor drainage channel has been retained as a potential local fluvial flood source within this assessment. For flooding from this feature to affect the proposed development, water would need to exceed the capacity of the channel, overtop its banks and establish an overland flow pathway towards the proposed buildings. Having regard to the available flood-risk mapping, historical flood information, site topography and the relationship between the proposed development and the local drainage network, no significant fluvial flood pathway affecting the proposed development has been identified. The potential fluvial flood risk is therefore considered low, with residual risks associated with exceptional events, blockage and restricted conveyance considered further within this assessment. 4.4 Pluvial Flooding Pluvial flooding occurs when the intensity or duration of rainfall exceeds the ability of the ground, natural drainage system or engineered drainage infrastructure to absorb or convey the resulting surface-water runoff. Floodwater may consequently pond within local depressions or travel across the ground along overland flow pathways. The proposed development comprises agricultural lands at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. The assessment of pluvial flood risk has considered the available flood-risk information, site topography, existing drainage features and the proposed surface- water management arrangements. The construction of the proposed poultry house, manure store and associated hardstanding will introduce additional impermeable surfaces. In the absence of appropriate mitigation, this could increase both the rate and volume of surface - water runoff generated during rainfall events. A dedicated surface-water drainage system is therefore proposed to collect and manage runoff generated by the development. Clean roof water and uncontaminated surface-water runoff will be maintained separately from soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water. Surface-water runoff will be collected through the proposed drainage network and appropriately treated where required before entering the proposed attenuation system. The drainage strategy does not rely upon infiltration to ground for disposal of the design runoff. This is particularly relev ant to the assessment of pluvial flood risk, as the performance of the proposed drainage arrangement is not dependent upon the infiltration capacity of the underlying soils or weathered rock. Instead, runoff will be temporarily stored within the proposed attenuation system before being discharged through a Hydro- Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device. The proposed drainage layout provides for a StormTech polypropylene tunnel attenuation tank, or similar approved, with a minimum capacity of 184 m³. Discharge from the system will be restricted to a maximum design rate of 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated pre-development greenfield QBar. The supporting surface-water drainage and attenuation calculations incorporate a 20% climate-change allowance and assess rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100-year return-period event. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 20 The proposed drainage arrangement will therefore prevent unrestricted runoff from the new impermeable surfaces entering the existing receiving drainage network and will reduce the potential for the development to increase pluvial or surface-water flood risk elsewhere. Potential exceedance of the formal drainage system during events exceeding the adopted design standard must also be considered. Site grading and finished levels should therefore ensure, insofar as practicable, that exceedance runoff is directed away from the proposed poultry house, manure store and other vulnerable infrastructure and towards lower-risk external areas and established drainage pathways. Subject to the implementation and continued maintenance of the proposed surface-water drainage, attenuation and exceedance arrangements, the proposed development is not expected to result in a significant increase in pluvial flood risk either within the site or on surrounding lands. 4.5 Coastal Flooding The proposed development site at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan is located within an inland rural area of County Monaghan and is a considerable distance from the coast. The site has no direct hydraulic connection to a tidal waterbody and is not considered susceptible to tidal inundation, coastal storm surge or other coastal flooding mechanisms. Accordingly, coastal flooding can be screened out as a significant potential source of flood risk to the proposed development. With respect to coastal flooding only, the site is considered to be subject to a low probability of flooding. 5.0 LEVEL 2 – INITIAL FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT 5.1 Vulnerability Classification This Site-Specific Flood Risk Assessment (SSFRA) has been prepared in support of the proposed agricultural development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, the subject of Planning Application Ref. 26/60154. The proposed development comprises the construction of 1 No. poultry house and 1 No. manure store, together with associated ancillary structures including meal storage bin(s), underground soiled-water storage tank(s), concrete apron and hardstanding areas, a new/upgraded site entrance, surface-water drainage infrastructure, landscaping and all associated site-development works. In accordance with The Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines for Planning Authorities (DoEHLG/OPW, 2009), agricultural buildings and associated infrastructure are considered to represent Less Vulnerable Development for the purposes of flood-risk assessment. The Flood Risk Management Guidelines generally permit Less Vulnerable Development within Flood Zones B and C, subject to the appropriate consideration of flood risk and application of the Sequential Approach. This Site-Specific Flood Risk Assessment has therefore been undertaken to identify the potential sources and pathways of flooding relevant to the proposed development, determine the susceptibility of the development to flooding and assess whether the proposal has the potential to increase flood risk elsewhere. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 21 The assessment considers fluvial, pluvial, groundwater, drainage-related, coastal and residual sources of flood risk together with the proposed surface-water management arrangements. 5.2 Local Drainage Network and Surface-Water Management The proposed development is located on agricultural lands at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. An existing minor open drainage channel is located adjacent to the site and forms part of the established local agricultural drainage network. This drainage channel ultimately discharges to a larger receiving stream associated with the wider surface- water network. The existing channel is a local drainage feature and is not identified as an OPW arterial drainage channel. Furthermore, the site and surrounding area are not identified as benefiting lands associated with an OPW Arterial Drainage Scheme. The potential for the existing open drain to represent a fluvial flood source has therefore been considered separately as par t of this assessment. The proposed development will introduce additional roof and hardstanding areas and will consequently alter the surface - water runoff characteristics within the developed portion of the site. A dedicated surface-water drainage system is proposed to ensure that runoff generated by the development is collected and appropriately managed. The proposed surface-water strategy is based on attenuation and controlled discharge and does not rely upon infiltration to ground for disposal of the design runoff. Clean surface water generated from roof areas and uncontaminated surfaces will be collected through the dedicated surface-water drainage network. Runoff from relevant concrete apron and trafficked areas will receive appropriate treatment, including silt/sediment removal and hydrocarbon interception where required, prior to entering the attenuation system. Wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural water will be maintained separately from the clean surface-water system and directed to dedicated underground storage facilities. Surface water entering the attenuation system will be temporarily stored before being released through a Hydro -Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device, at a maximum design discharge of 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated pre-development greenfield QBar. The proposed drainage layout provides for a StormTech polypropylene tunnel attenuation tank, or similar approved, with a minimum capacity of 184 m³. The supporting surface-water drainage and attenuation calculations incorporate a 20% climate-change allowance and assess rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100-year return-period event. The proposed drainage system will therefore prevent unrestricted runoff from the newly developed impermeable surfaces entering the existing receiving drainage network and will minimise the potential for the development to increase surface- water flood risk elsewhere. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 22 5.3 Source – Pathway – Receptor – Risk Potential sources of flooding have been assessed using the Source–Pathway–Receptor approach, considering the potential flood source, the pathway by which flooding could affect the site, the receptors at risk, and the likely consequence and overall magnitude of risk. The principal potential fluvial flood source requiring site-specific consideration is the minor open drainage channel adjacent to the proposed development. This drain forms part of the local rural drainage network and ultimately discharges to the larger receiving stream. No FSU catchment node is available directly on the minor drain. An available FSU node has been identified on the larger receiving stream; however, this node is located upstream of the point at which the minor site drain joins the receiving stream. It therefore represents a separate and substantially larger contributing catchment and is not directly representative of the catchment draining through the minor channel adjacent to the proposed development. The available FSU node represents a catchment area of 10.469 km². The FSU 4.2a Small Catchments calculation gives a QMED of 3.563 m³/s, QBar of 3.816 m³/s and Q100 of 9.960 m³/s. A separate FSU 7-Variable calculation gives a Q100 of 7.182 m³/s for the same receiving-stream catchment. These calculations have been considered as supporting hydrological information only. The calculated flows have not been transferred to the minor site drain for the purpose of deriving a design flow, channel capacity or site-specific flood level, as doing so would not appropriately represent the hydrological characteristics of the minor drainage catchment. In the absence of a site-specific FSU node, mapped design flood level or suitable surveyed channel cross -sections for the minor drain, the potential fluvial flood risk has instead been assessed having regard to the available OPW flood-risk mapping, historical flood-event information, site topography, local drainage characteristics and the potential flood pathways between the drainage network and the proposed development. The available OPW National Indicative Fluvial Mapping does not identify the proposed development site as being affected by the mapped medium- or low-probability fluvial flood extents. The available OPW Past Flood Events information also does not identify a recorded flood event at the proposed development site. Other potential sources considered include intense rainfall resulting in overland surface-water runoff, exceedance or blockage of drainage infrastructure, restricted conveyance within the local agricultural drainage network, groundwater flooding and residual events exceeding the adopted drainage design standard. Table 2: Source, Pathway, Receptor & Risk Factors Possible Source Possible Pathway Possible Receptor Likelihood Consequence Magnitude of Risk to Subject Site Minor open drain – fluvial flooding Overtopping of channel banks during extreme flow conditions and overland Poultry house, manure store and ancillary infrastructure Low Medium Low REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 23 flow towards the site Receiving stream – fluvial flooding Elevated water levels/backwater influence propagating towards the confluence with the minor site drain Minor drain and adjoining agricultural lands Low / Unlikely Medium Low Surface-water drainage system Surcharge, blockage or exceedance during extreme rainfall Proposed development and hardstanding areas Unlikely Low to Medium Low Pluvial flooding Overland runoff and localised ponding during intense rainfall Poultry house, manure store, aprons and access areas Unlikely Low to Medium Low Local agricultural drainage network Restricted conveyance or local blockage resulting in localised ponding or overland flow Site margins and surrounding agricultural lands Unlikely Low to Medium Low Groundwater flooding Elevated groundwater levels or local groundwater emergence Proposed buildings and site infrastructure Low / Very Unlikely Low Low Coastal / tidal flooding Tidal inundation or storm surge Proposed development Not Credible High Very Low Residual / exceedance event Rainfall or flow exceeding the adopted drainage design standard Proposed development and surrounding lands Rare Medium Low The minor open drain adjacent to the site remains the principal potential local fluvial flood source. For flooding from this feature to affect the proposed development, water would need to exceed the conveyance capacity of the drain, overtop its banks and establish an overland flow pathway towards the proposed buildings. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 24 Having regard to the available OPW flood-risk mapping, historical flood information, site topography and the relationship between the proposed development and the local drainage network, no significant fluvial flood pathway affecting the proposed development has been identified. Pluvial and drainage-related flood risks are mitigated through the proposed surface-water management strategy. Runoff generated by the development will be collected, attenuated and discharged at a controlled rate rather than relying upon infiltration to ground. The surface-water drainage calculations assess rainfall events up to and including the 1-in-100-year event incorporating a 20% climate-change allowance. Residual risks associated with exceptional rainfall, drainage exceedance, blockage or restricted conveyance cannot be eliminated entirely. These risks are considered manageable through appropriate site grading and exceedance routing, maintenance of the proposed and existing drainage infrastructure, attenuation and controlled discharge, and the proposed finished floor level. On the basis of the available information, the overall flood risk to the proposed development is considered low, with the management of residual flood risk considered further in Section 6.7. 5.4 Arterial Drainage Scheme and Benefiting Lands A review of the available Office of Public Works Arterial Drainage Scheme and Benefiting Lands mapping indicates that the proposed development site at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan is not located within mapped benefiting lands associated with an OPW Arterial Drainage Scheme. No OPW arterial drainage channel is identified within the site or surrounding area relevant to the proposed development. The existing open drainage channel adjacent to the site forms part of the local agricultural drainage network and is not identified as an OPW arterial drainage channel. Potential flood risk associated with this feature has therefore been considered separately within the fluvial flood-risk assessment. On this basis, OPW Arterial Drainage Schemes and associated Benefiting Lands do not represent a material source of flood risk to the proposed development. No further assessment of Arterial Drainage Scheme or Benefiting Lands flood risk is considered necessary. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 25 Figure 7: OPW Arterial Drainage Scheme and Benefiting Lands Mapping 5.5 Climate Change Allowance Climate change has been considered as part of the assessment having regard to relevant OPW guidance and the uncertainties associated with future rainfall and flood conditions. For supporting hydrological screening purposes, a 20% allowance has been applied to the Q100 flow calculated for the available FSU node on the larger receiving stream. As this node is located upstream of the confluence with the minor site drain and represents a separate catchment, the resulting flow has not been used to derive a site-specific flood level for the proposed development. Climate change has also been incorporated directly within the proposed surface-water drainage assessment, which considers rainfall events up to and including the 1-in-100-year event with a 20% climate-change allowance. Residual uncertainty associated with climate change is further addressed through the proposed finished floor level, site grading, attenuation, controlled discharge and appropriate exceedance routing. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 26 6.0 LEVEL 3 – DETAILED FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT 6.1 Detailed Fluvial Flood Risk Assessment The Level 1 and Level 2 assessments identified the existing open drainage channel adjacent to the proposed development as the principal local feature requiring further consideration in respect of potential fluvial flood risk. The available OPW flood mapping is strategic in nature and does not provide a dedicated FSU node or site -specific design flood levels for the minor drainage channel adjacent to the proposed development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan. A review of the OPW Flood Studies Update (FSU) information identified an available hydrological node on the larger receiving stream into which the minor site drain ultimately discharges. Importantly, this node is situated upstream of the confluence between the receiving stream and the minor drainage channel associated with the development site. The FSU node is therefore not located on the drainage channel adjacent to the proposed development and does not represent the catchment draining through that channel. The catchment represented by the FSU node is separate from, and substantially larger than, the local catchment associated with the minor site drain. Accordingly, the FSU information has not been used to directly calculate a flood level within the minor drain. Instead, it ha s been considered as a conservative hydrological screening assessment to provide context regarding the magnitude of flood flows within the wider receiving surface-water network. The available FSU node represents a catchment area of 10.469 km², with a SAAR of 938.530 mm, BFI of 0.438, FARL of 0.985 and S1085 of 6.582 m/km. The FSU 4.2a Small Catchments Method gives a QMED of 3.563 m³/s and QBar of 3.816 m³/s for the receiving-stream catchment. Application of the relevant growth factors gives a Q100 design flow of 9.960 m³/s and a Q1000 design flow of 13.944 m³/s. A separate FSU 7-Variable calculation was undertaken as a comparative check and gives a QMED Rural of 2.574 m³/s, QBar Rural of 2.752 m³/s and Q100 of 7.182 m³/s. For supporting hydrological context, the higher FSU 4.2a Q100 estimate has been considered together with a 20% climate - change sensitivity allowance. This calculation is presented solely to characterise flood-flow magnitudes within the larger receiving-stream catchment and is not applied as a design flow to the minor drain adjacent to the development. Q100 + 20% = 9.960 × 1.20 = 11.952 m³/s It is emphasised that these flows should not be interpreted as design flows within the minor drain adjacent to the development site. They relate to the substantially larger receiving-stream catchment at an upstream location and are used only to inform the wider assessment of potential fluvial flood risk. Table 3: FSU Design Flow Assessment Design Event FSU 4.2a Flow QMED 3.563 m³/s QBar 3.816 m³/s Q100 9.960 m³/s Q100 +20% Climate Change 11.952 m³/s Q1000 13.944 m³/s The location of the adopted FSU node relative to the proposed development site is shown in Figure 8. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 27 Figure 8: OPW FSU Node 36_1419_4 Location 6.2 Assessment of Flood Mapping and Site Topography The available OPW flood-risk mapping has been reviewed in conjunction with the topographical information available for the proposed development site. The OPW National Indicative Fluvial Mapping (NIFM) identifies medium-probability and low-probability fluvial flood extents associated with the larger watercourse network in the surrounding area. The mapped flood extents are remote from the proposed development and do not extend to or encroach upon the application site. Accordingly, no mapped design flood level is available at the proposed development site against which the proposed finished floor level can be directly compared. The minor open drainage channel associated with the development is not represented by a site-specific OPW flood extent or design flood level. Furthermore, as discussed in Section 6.1, the available FSU node is located on the larger receiving strea m upstream of the confluence with the minor site drain and cannot appropriately be used to derive a flood level for the development site. A review of the OPW Past Flood Events information has also been undertaken. While a recorded flood event is identified within the wider 2.5 km search area, no recorded past flood event has been identified at the proposed development site. The proposed poultry house has a finished floor level of 100.10 mOD. In the absence of a mapped flood extent or corresponding design flood level at the site, it would not be appropriate to calculate a numerical freeboard against an arbitrary or unrelated flood level. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 28 Based on the available OPW mapping, historical flood information and site topography, there is no identified fluvial flood extent affecting the proposed development site. The site is therefore considered to be located outside the mapped medium- and low-probability fluvial flood extents. Table 4: Comparison of Available Flood and Site Levels Flood Risk Information Assessment OPW NIFM Medium Probability (1% AEP) No mapped flood extent at the development site OPW NIFM Low Probability (0.1% AEP) No mapped flood extent at the development site OPW Past Flood Events No recorded flood event identified at the development site Site-specific OPW/FSU flood level Not available for the minor drainage channel Proposed Poultry House FFL 100.10 mOD Overall Fluvial Flood Risk Low 6.3 Discussion of Findings The detailed assessment has considered the potential relationship between the proposed development, the minor open drainage channel adjacent to the site and the larger receiving watercourse. No site-specific FSU node or calculated design flood level is available for the minor drainage channel adjacent to the development. The available FSU node is situated on the larger receiving stream upstream of its confluence with the site drain and represents a separate and substantially larger contributing catchment. Accordingly, the flows derived for this node have been used only as supporting hydrological information and have not been transferred to the minor site drain for the purpose of deriving a flood level. The assessment of fluvial flood risk at the development site has therefore been based on the available OPW flood-risk mapping, historical flood information, site topography and the relationship between the proposed development and the local drainage network. The available OPW National Indicative Fluvial Mapping does not identify either the medium-probability or low-probability mapped fluvial flood extents as extending to the proposed development site. Furthermore, the review of OPW Past Flood Events information has not identified a recorded flood event at the development site. The minor drainage channel adjacent to the site remains a potential local source of flood risk and has therefore been considered within this assessment. For flooding from this feature to affect the proposed development, water would have to exceed the capacity of the channel, overtop its banks and establish an overland flow pathway towards the proposed buildings. Having regard to the available flood mapping, historical flood information, site topography and local drainage characteristics, there is no identified evidence of a significant fluvial flood pathway affecting the proposed development. The proposed development is therefore considered to be at low risk of fluvial flooding. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 29 6.4 Proposed Finished Floor Level The proposed poultry house will have a finished floor level of 100.10 mOD, as indicated on the proposed site layout. The finished floor level has been considered in the context of the available flood-risk information, existing site topography, local drainage features and potential residual flood risk. No mapped OPW fluvial flood extent encroaches upon the proposed development site and no site-specific design flood level is available for the minor drainage channel adjacent to the development. It would therefore not be appropriate to state a numerical freeboard above a design flood level where no such site-specific level has been established. The proposed finished floor level should be implemented in conjunction with appropriate site grading so that local surface - water and exceedance flows are directed away from the proposed poultry house and towards appropriate drainage pathways. Having regard to the available flood-risk information and the proposed finished floor level of 100.10 mOD, the proposed floor level is considered appropriate from a flood-risk perspective. 6.5 Access and Egress Access to the proposed development will be provided from the existing public road network via the proposed site entrance. The available OPW flood-risk mapping does not identify the proposed development site or its immediate access as being affected by the mapped medium- or low-probability fluvial flood extents. No evidence has therefore been identified from the available flood-risk information to indicate that fluvial flooding would prevent access to or egress from the proposed development during the assessed flood events. The proposed access arrangements are consequently considered acceptable from a flood-risk perspective. Appropriate site grading and maintenance of the existing and proposed drainage infrastructure should be undertaken to minimise the potential for localised surface-water ponding or exceedance flows to affect the access route. 6.6 Other Flooding 6.6.1 Surface Water Flooding The proposed development will introduce additional impermeable roof and hardstanding areas and will therefore generate additional surface-water runoff during rainfall events. Surface water will be managed through a dedicated drainage system based on collection, treatment where required, attenuation and controlled discharge. The drainage strategy does not rely upon infiltration to ground. Clean roof water and uncontaminated runoff will be collected separately from wash water and soiled water. Runoff from relevant concrete apron and trafficked areas will pass through appropriate silt/sediment and hydrocarbon treatment measures where required before entering the attenuation system. The proposed attenuation system comprises a StormTech polypropylene tunnel attenuation tank, or similar approved, with a minimum capacity of 184 m³. Discharge will be controlled by a Hydro-Brake, or equivalent approved vortex flow-control device, to a maximum design rate of 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated pre-development greenfield QBar. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 30 The surface-water drainage calculations assess rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100-year return-period event incorporating a 20% climate-change allowance. Under the critical 1 in 100-year +20% climate-change event, the calculated peak storage requirement within the attenuation system is approximately 177.13 m³, which is less than the minimum 184 m³ attenuation capacity provided. The calculations indicate surcharge within parts of the drainage network during the extreme design event but no flooding from the system. Accordingly, the proposed surface-water management system provides appropriate attenuation and flow control and is not expected to materially increase surface-water flood risk elsewhere. 6.6.2 Washwater and Soiled-Water Management Washwater, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural runoff generated by the proposed development will be maintained separately from the clean surface-water drainage system. During washing operations, soiled water will be directed to dedicated underground storage facilities for subsequent management in accordance with the applicable agricultural and environmental requirements. No washwater, soiled water or potentially contaminated runoff will be permitted to discharge to the clean surface-water drainage system or the adjacent open drain. The separation of clean and soiled drainage systems reduces the potential for contamination of the receiving drainage network and ensures that the surface-water attenuation system operates solely in relation to clean or appropriately treated runoff. 6.7 Exacerbation of Flooding The proposed development has been designed to avoid materially increasing flood risk either within the site or on surrounding lands. The proposed buildings and associated infrastructure will not be positioned within the existing open drainage channel and will not obstruct its normal function as a local surface-water conveyance pathway. The development will introduce additional impermeable surfaces; however, the resulting runoff will not be discharged unrestricted to the receiving drainage network. Instead, surface water will be temporarily attenuated within the proposed storage system and discharged at a maximum rate of 12.7 L/s, corresponding with the calculated pre-development greenfield QBar. The attenuation system therefore limits the rate at which post-development runoff enters the existing open drain and reduces the potential for the development to increase peak flows within the downstream drainage network. Subject to implementation and maintenance of the proposed drainage measures, the development is not expected to materially exacerbate flood risk upstream, downstream or on adjoining lands. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 31 6.8 Residual Risk Residual flood risk refers to the risk that remains following implementation of the proposed flood-risk and surface-water management measures. Potential residual risks relevant to the development include: • rainfall events exceeding the adopted drainage design standard; • blockage or partial blockage of the existing open drainage channel; • blockage or failure of proposed drainage infrastructure; • climate-change effects exceeding the allowances adopted within the assessment; • uncertainty associated with available strategic flood mapping and hydrological information; • the absence of site-specific FSU information for the minor drainage channel; and • localised exceedance or overland surface-water flow during exceptional rainfall events. The proposed development incorporates attenuation, controlled discharge and separation of clean and soiled drainage systems. Appropriate site grading and exceedance routing should also ensure that, in the event that the capacity of the formal drainage system is exceeded, surface water is directed away from vulnerable buildings and infrastructure. The proposed finished floor levels should maintain appropriate vertical separation from the relevant available flood levels a nd surrounding drainage features. On this basis, having regard to the available OPW flood-risk information, site topography, local drainage characteristics, proposed finished floor level and the proposed surface-water management measures, the residual flood risk to the proposed development is considered manageable and acceptable. 6.9 Justification Test The available OPW flood-risk mapping indicates that the proposed development site lies outside the mapped medium - probability and low-probability fluvial flood extents. On the basis of the available flood-risk information, the proposed development is considered to be located within Flood Zone C, where the probability of fluvial flooding is low. In accordance with The Planning System and Flood Risk Management – Guidelines for Planning Authorities (DoEHLG/OPW, 2009), the Justification Test is not required for development located within Flood Zone C. 6.10 Emergency Access and Egress The potential for flooding to affect access and egress has been considered as part of the overall flood-risk assessment. Access to the proposed development will be provided via the proposed site entrance and existing public road network. The available OPW flood-risk mapping does not identify the proposed development site or its immediate access as being affected by the mapped medium- or low-probability fluvial flood extents. On the basis of the available flood-risk information, no significant fluvial flood mechanism has been identified that would be expected to prevent access to or egress from the proposed development. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 32 Residual risk associated with exceptional rainfall and localised surface-water runoff will be managed through appropriate site grading, maintenance of drainage infrastructure and the proposed surface-water attenuation and controlled-discharge system. In the event of exceptional rainfall or severe weather, the site operator should have regard to relevant warnings issued by Met Éireann, the OPW and the emergency services. 7.0 REPORT CONCLUSION This Site-Specific Flood Risk Assessment (SSFRA) has been undertaken for the proposed poultry development at Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan, having regard to The Planning System and Flood Risk Management – Guidelines for Planning Authorities (DoEHLG/OPW, 2009) and the flood-risk matters identified by Monaghan County Council. The assessment has considered the potential for flooding from fluvial, pluvial/surface-water, groundwater and drainage- related sources, together with residual and exceedance risk. The assessment has been informed by available OPW flood-risk mapping, historical flood-event information, site topography, local drainage characteristics and relevant hydrological information. Particular consideration has been given to the minor open drainage channel adjacent to the development site and its relationship with the larger receiving stream. No site-specific FSU node or calculated design flood level is available for the minor drainage channel. The available FSU node is located on the larger receiving stream upstream of the point at which the minor site drain joins the receiving stream and therefore represents a separate and substantially larger contributing catchment. The associated FSU calculations have consequently been used as supporting hydrological information only and have not been transferred to the minor drain for the purpose of deriving a site-specific flood level. The available OPW National Indicative Fluvial Mapping does not identify the proposed development site as being affected by the mapped medium- or low-probability fluvial flood extents. A review of the available OPW Past Flood Events information has also not identified a recorded flood event at the proposed development site. The minor drainage channel remains a potential local flood source and has therefore been considered within the assessment. For flooding from this feature to affect the proposed development, water would need to exceed the capacity of the channel, overtop its banks and establish an overland flow pathway towards the proposed buildings. Having regard to the available flood mapping, historical flood information, site topography and relationship between the proposed development and the local drainage network, no significant fluvial flood pathway affecting the proposed development has been identified. The proposed poultry house will have a finished floor level of 100.10 mOD. As no site-specific design flood level is available for the adjacent minor drainage channel, it would not be appropriate to state a numerical freeboard against an assumed or unrelated flood level. The proposed finished floor level has instead been considered in conjunction with the available flood- risk information, site topography and local drainage pathways. Surface-water runoff generated by the proposed development will be managed through a dedicated drainage system incorporating appropriate collection, treatment, attenuation and controlled discharge. The surface -water drainage calculations consider rainfall events up to and including the 1-in-100-year event incorporating a 20% climate-change allowance. The drainage strategy does not rely upon infiltration to ground. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 33 The proposed drainage strategy will prevent unrestricted post-development runoff to the receiving drainage network. Clean surface water will also be maintained separately from wash water, soiled water and other potentially contaminated agricultural runoff. Residual flood risks associated with exceptional rainfall, drainage exceedance, blockage or restricted conveyance, climate change and uncertainty inherent in the available strategic flood information have been considered. These risks can be appropriately managed through the proposed attenuation and flow-control system, appropriate site grading and exceedance routing, maintenance of the drainage infrastructure and implementation of the proposed finished floor level. On the basis of the assessment undertaken, the following conclusions are reached: • The proposed development is considered to be at low risk of flooding and is located within Flood Zone C on the basis of the available flood-risk information. • The development will not materially exacerbate flooding within the immediate vicinity or wider receiving catchment, having regard to the proposed attenuation and controlled-discharge strategy. • The proposed development will not obstruct or impede an identified important flood-flow pathway or materially reduce available flood storage. • The identified residual flood risks can be managed to an acceptable level through the measures incorporated into the proposed development and the ongoing inspection and maintenance of the drainage infrastructure. Accordingly, the proposed poultry development can be accommodated on the subject lands without giving rise to an unacceptable flood risk to the development or increasing flood risk elsewhere. The proposed development is therefore considered consistent with the principles and requirements of The Planning System and Flood Risk Management – Guidelines for Planning Authorities (DoEHLG/OPW, 2009). Signed: Nevin Traynor BSc. Env, H. Dip I.T, Cert SHWW. For Traynor Environmental REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Flood Risk Assessment Enagh, Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan 34 8.0 REFERENCES - Office of Public Works. - Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA) Study Maps - Catchment and Flood Risk Management Program (OPW Website http://www.cfram.ie). - OPW online viewer - https://maps.opw.ie/fhrm/viewer/ - OPW viewer – www.floodinfo.ie - The Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines for Planning Authorities, 2009 - Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 - EPA Envision Mapping (gis.epa.ie/envision) - Google Maps - Ordnance Survey of Ireland - www.floodmaps.ie - HR Wallingford: Defra & Environment Agency – R&D Outputs: Flood Risks to People Phase 2, FD2321/TR2 Guidance Document, 2006. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 PLANNING DRAWING ONLY 101 103 99 100 102 103 100 102 101 98 99 107.47 100.00 103.26 99.48 97.16 102.19 100.84 97.04 G 98.19 TP TP TP TP TP 111.81 111.76112.24 110.51 110.17 110.08 108.36 108.57 108.92 107.27107.47 107.59 106.46 106.34 106.12 105.25105.08 105.32 104.02104.00 104.11 102.93102.58103.15 101.77 101.31 101.55 99.96 100.24 100.33 99.27 99.3599.11 98.3398.37 98.28 98.10 98.12 98.15 98.0098.26 98.16 98.32 98.25 98.31 98.4298.31 98.46 98.4298.3998.38 103.40 103.36 103.65 103.83 103.95 103.89 103.74 103.47 102.98 103.00 103.39 103.52 103.85 102.84 101.39 100.45 99.63 98.61 98.02 97.68 97.30 97.44 97.43 97.47 97.45 97.4997.5797.4397.5597.7098.0798.3897.7597.4397.7197.81 97.89 98.25 98.85 99.68 100.35 101.45 102.36 102.26 102.50 102.56 102.52 102.23 102.04 101.74 101.87 102.18 101.05 100.76100.59 100.66 100.90101.17101.40101.38 101.10 100.02 99.97 100.23 100.16 100.00 99.78 99.71 99.82 100.15 100.07 99.30 99.1499.08 99.12 99.17 99.2999.36 99.32 99.1899.03 98.20 98.50 98.75 98.82 98.74 98.47 98.19 97.89 97.78 97.82 97.90 97.84 98.41 98.5698.4598.47 EP EP Cab l e H t = 1 0 6 . 1 9 1 Cab l e H t = 1 1 3 . 0 0 5 N PROPOSED POULTRY HOUSE MANURE STORE EGG STORE COLLECTION ROOM WATER / PLANT 1 2 3 4 47111931232734 SITE LAYOUT / DRAINAGE / LANDSCAPING PLAN SCALE 1:500 Fagus sylvatica (Beech) 10No. Total PLANTING KEY (Trees) Height at planting - 4m /4.5m Height at maturity - 6.5m /7m Age to maturity - 5 / 6 years Quercus petraea (Oak) 10No. Total Height at planting - 4.5m / 5m Height at maturity - 5.0m / 5.5m Age to maturity - 9 / 10 years Corylus avellana (Hazel) 10No. Total Height at planting - 3m / 3.5m Height at maturity - 3.0m / 5m Age to maturity 7 / 8 years SITE AREA = 13,319 sq.m. or 3.29 Acres or 1.3319 Ha FFL= 100.1 FFL= 100.1 D D F.F.L. = 100.1m PROPOSED Poultry House Ex. Level Proposed 95.00 100.00 SITE SECTION D-D SCALE 1:500 105.00 110.00 115.00 10 3 . 0 10 2 . 0 10 1 . 0 10 0 . 0 99 . 0 98 . 0 97 . 7 10 0 . 1 10 0 . 1 10 0 . 1 10 0 . 1 10 0 . 1 99 . 5 97 . 7 INLET OUTLET → → → ← REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Built with Concrete...Strengthened with Steel! Direct Line: +353 (0)59 9159100 Mobile: William Rooney + 353 (0)87 2583003 Noel Nolan + 353 (0)87 6665751 Email: sales@carlowtanks.com 1.Select lid suitable to your application. 2.Select inlet and outlets location if desired,mark location and size of these on the drawing. 3.Fill out the farm order confirmation with drawings and post it to out office. Tanks require a level,well compacted base of CI 804,thickness of which will depend on site conditions typically 150mm thick (1/2ft). Lorry must be able to reverse to the edge of the excavation. Tank is then installed by a crane at the rear of the lorry. After installation we recommend filling the tank with water to prevent flotation until backfilling is complete (only in high water table areas). Site with a high water table may require a hoop of concrete with rebar at the base of the tank to prevent flotation. Tank should be backfilled with material free of boulders and large stones. Weight of base 7.5 Te Weight of Lid 2.85 Te Solid lids can carry 5.8 Te wheel load Slatted lids can carry 4 Te wheel load Direct Line: 059 9159550 Mobile: 087 2583003 UK Mobile: +44 75405 64276 Email: sales@carlowprecasttanks.com Tel: + 353 (0)59 9159100 Fax: + 353 (0)59 9159831 UK Mobile: + 44 (0) 7540 564 276 Email: sales@carlowtanks.com REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Phone: 049-4371447/9Fax: 049-4371451E-mail: info@clw.ie The Mews,23 Farnham Street,Monaghan,Co. MeathCLW Environmental Planners Ltd. Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204J Outline Construction and EnvironmentalManagement Plan (C.E.M.P.) For Mr. Alan Niblock At Enagh,Rockcorry,Co. Monaghan. 14th September 2026 REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 2 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Applicant: Mr. Alan Niblock,Enagh,Rockcorry,Co. Monaghan. Proposed Development: Proposed Poultry House and associated workstogether with all ancillary structures and site works associated with the abovedevelopment at Location: Enagh,Rockcorry,Co. Monaghan. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 3 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Background: The following Outine Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) has been completedto comply with Further Information Request (issued 10/06/2026) Point No. 1 of Planning PermissionApplication Ref: 26/60154 submitted by Mr. Alan Niblock, to Monaghan Co. Co.. 1. Introduction CLW Environmental Planners Ltd. been commissioned to prepare this Outline ConstructionEnvironmental Management Plan (OUTLINE CEMP) on behalf of Alan Niblock, as Developer and Applicantfor the proposed development of 1 No. Poultry house and associated works. Planning permission (Ref:26/60156) was applied for by Mr. Alan Niblock for the completion of 1 No. Poulty house and associatedworks on a greenfield site, on agricultural lands at Enagh, Rockcorry, , Co. Monaghan. This OUTLINE CEMP has been prepared to communicate key planning and environmental obligationsrelating to the management of the construction phase of the Proposed Development. It comprisesgeneral measures and a series of discipline-specific measures that align with the Proposed Development. This OUTLINE CEMP is a ‘live’ document, which shall be updated by the Developer and the appointedconstruction contractor and/or overseeing engineer as the project is progressed. In particular, theOUTLINE CEMP will be updated to the Final CEMP upon receipt of planning permission and the appointmentof the site contractor to ensure the requirements of all relevant planning conditions are incorporated. 1.1 ObjectivesThis OUTLINE CEMP outlines the approach to the management and minimisation of environmentalimpacts during the construction phase, with the primary aim of avoiding, reducing or offsetting anyadverse impacts identified in the EIAR. The OUTLINE CEMP serves as a consistent point of referencefor environmental considerations throughout the construction period for the Main Contractor,developer and site engineer, and is to be updated upon receipt of planning permission to incorporateall applicable planning conditions / considerations. The Developer and the appointed Main Contractor are committed to undertaking the managementand mitigation measures detailed in this OUTLINE CEMP. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 4 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV 1.2 Roles and ResponsibilitiesThe anticipated roles and responsibilities of the key parties involved in the management ofenvironmental issues during the construction works are set out in Table 1 below. However, it shouldbe noted that all members of staff are responsible for ensuring the requirements of the OUTLINE CEMPand associated construction plans are followed.Table 1: Roles and Responsibilities Position Name Contact Details Project Manager TBC TBC Environmental Officer / Coordinator TBC TBC Project Ecologist TBC TBC Other Relevant Persons appointed by Main Contractor TBC TBC Any changes in roles and responsibilities will be identified and clearly communicated to those affected. The responsibilities of the Project Manager / Site engineer will include:Implement the OUTLINE CEMP and all associated management procedures and mitigation;To be the overall accountable person for the environmental compliance of the operations duringthe construction phase, including to ensure works are conducted in accordance with therelevant environmental requirements of the application and consent documentation and anyother regulatory and contractual requirements;To ensure that relevant staff have received appropriate environmental training; andManage the requirements of the OUTLINE CEMP during the course of the construction phase;Maintaining, inspecting and updating the OUTLINE CEMP and other relevant documents;Liaise with and provide advice to staff, sub-contractors and other relevant parties with regardsto the environmental risks and controls for tasks;Monitor the performance of activities to ensure that identified risks and controls areimplemented effectively;Undertake routine site inspections, initiate appropriate actions, and complete a weeklyenvironmental inspection report;Management of the environmental monitoring programme including noise, dust, and providestatus reports, as appropriate;Conduct environmental audits as required by the OUTLINE CEMP, to include audits ofsubcontractors and suppliers, as appropriate;Assist in the investigation and resolution of complaints and incidents;Documenting and maintain records of above audits, inspections and reports securely; andNotify the Project Manager or their appointed compliance representative of any deficiencies inthe performance of the OUTLINE CEMP, so that necessary improvements can be implemented. 2.0 Site Location and Surrounding Environment REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 5 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV The site in question is located in a rural area within the townland of Enagh. The site is 1.33 hectares inarea and it will be accessed via the creation of a new entrance that is just west off a local, third-class road.The site is 2km north of Rockcorry and 6.3km west of Ballybay. The land use around the application site is predominantly agricultural and the main habitat surroundingthe site is improved agricultural grassland. Other habitats represented locally include semi-improvedand wet grasslands, treelines, hedgerows and water courses. There is a moderate level of one-off housesand farmyards in the lands surrounding the site and the dominant habitats associated with these areasinclude buildings and artificial surfaces and amenity grasslands and gardens. Site location maps can beseen in Figures 2 and 3, whilst an aerial photograph of the site and its surrounding habitats can be seenin Figure 4. Figure 2 – Map showing the Location of the Proposed Development Site APPLICATION SITE REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 6 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Figure 3 – Map showing the Location of the Proposed Development Site. Habitats within the Application Site The application site does not lie within or immediately adjacent to any site that has been designated fornature conservation purposes. The application site is being removed from a field that was previouslyused for agricultural purposes and the dominant habitat within it is improved agricultural grassland thatis well drained. The northern and westerly perimeters consist of hedgerows, whilst there is also awatercourse flowing along the northern boundary of the site. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 7 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Water Features and Quality The application site lies within the Erne Hydrometric Area (36) and Catchment (36), and the DromoreSub-Catchment (020) and Sub-Basin (070). There is an unnamed watercourse flowing along the northernperimeter of the site. This watercourse flows west until its joins the Stranoodan Stream, which is 433mnorth-west of the site. The Stranoodan Stream is a tributary of the Rockcorry River. The Rockcorry Rivermeets the Dromore River just north of Cootehill. The EPA have classified the ecological status of the Stranoodan Stream, the Rockcorry River and theDromore River at points close to the application site as being of poor ecological status. Under therequirements of the Water Framework Directive, this is unsatisfactory and all water bodies are obligedto meet good status within the time frame of the current cycle of the Water Framework Directive (2027). Figure 4 – Aerial Photograph of the Site (Outlined in Red) and its Surrounding Habitats REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 8 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Natura 2000 Sites Identified In accordance with the guidelines issued by the Department of the Environment and Local Government,a list of Natura 2000 sites within 15km of the proposed development have been identified and describedaccording to their site synopsis, qualifying interests and conservation objectives. In addition, any othersites further than this, but potentially within its zone of interest were also considered. The zone of impactmay be determined by an assessment of the connectivity between the application site and thedesignated areas by virtue of hydrological connectivity, atmospheric emissions, flight paths, ecologicalcorridors etc. For significant effects to arise, there must be a potential impact facilitated by having a source, i.e., theproposed development and activities arising out of its construction or operation, a receptor, i.e., theEuropean site and its qualifying interests and a subsequent pathway or connectivity between the sourceand receptor, e.g., a water course. The likelihood for significant effects on the European site will largelydepend on the characteristics of the source (e.g., nature and scale of the construction works), thecharacteristics of the existing pathway and the characteristics of the receptor, e.g., the sensitivities ofthe Qualifying Interests (habitats or species) to changes in water quality. There are no Natura 2000 designated sites within 15km of the application site. There are three Natura2000 sites within 20km of the application site. These designated areas and their closest points to theproposed development site are summarised in Table 2 and a map showing their locations relative to theapplication site is shown in Figure 5. A full description of the sites can be read on the websites of theNational Parks and Wildlife Service (www.npws.ie) and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee(jncc.defra.gov.uk). Site Name &Code Distance Qualifying Interests SignificantEffects? MagheraveelyMark Loughs SACUK0016621 15.7km north-west Hard oligo-mesotrophicwaters withbenthic vegetationofCharaspp.Calcareous fenswithCladiummariscusandspecies of theCariciondavallianaeAlkaline fensAustropotamobiuspallipes(White-clawed Crayfish) No hydrologicalconnectivity.Potentialsignificant effectsarising fromatmosphericemissions will beconsideredfurther. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 9 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Kilroosky LoughCluster SAC001786 16.2km north-west Hard oligo-mesotrophicwaters withbenthic vegetationofCharaspp.Calcareous fenswithCladiummariscusandspecies of theCariciondavallianaeAlkaline fensAustropotamobiuspallipes(White-clawed Crayfish) No hydrologicalconnectivity.Potentialsignificant effectsarising fromatmosphericemissions will beconsideredfurther. Slieve BeaghSPA 004167 19.9km north-west Hen Harrier Circuscyaneus Screened Out - Nohydrologicalconnectivity sosignificant effectsupon this SPAarising fromemissions to waterwill not arise.Significant effectsupon this sitearising fromatmosphericemissions havealso beenconsidered (SCAIL,Appendix I) andimpacts have beenruled out. Table 2 – Natura 2000 Sites Within 15km of the Proposed Site REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 10 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Figure 5 – The Application Site (Red Dot) in relation to the Natura 2000 Sites beyond 15km REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 11 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV 4.0 Site Preliminaries / Site Safety The proposed development is to be undertaken on existing greenfield / agricultural lands. The Project Supervisor Construction Stage (PSCS) will be responsible for Health and Safety on the siteand the site health and safety statement should be referred to. NO specific high risk / hazardous issues were identified at the planning stage however specific care andattention should be given to; Overhead power linesUnderground gas line/water traversing the site (if applicable). 5.0 Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) Objectives The primary objective of this outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (outlineC.E.M.P.) is to ensure that the proposed works are carried out with minimal adverse impact on anysensitive receptor(s), including, The local environment.The local road networkLocal sensitive receptors (dwelling houses etc.) The prevention of adverse impact can be minimized by; The proper and sequential scheduling of site activities.Proper management of on-site activities. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 12 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV 6.0 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.): 6.1 Site Authorisation / Pre- Approvals The required authorisation (Planning permission) has been applied for from Monaghan Co. Co. All worksare to be completed in accordance with the conditions of any planning permission and this outlinedCEMP is to be updated to take into account any planning requirements prior to commencement. Thisoutline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) may be reviewed depending onany relevant conditions and/or requirements expressed therein. It is anticipated that no soil / soil & stone (Excl. purchased quarry stone) is to be imported onto the siteand / or exported form the farm, therefore there are no additional Cert of Registration / Waste Permitrequirements. The elimination of the need for import/export of soil material will also prevent the introduction /exporting of any invasive species. The proposed development is sub-threshold for an E.P.A. Licence and this is not required. Proposed Site Plan Layout (incl. provision of Storm water Attenuation.) 6.2 Overall Site Management REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 13 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV The Main Contractor / Developer / Engineer will emphasise the importance of good housekeepingduring the development phase. Housekeeping is an important part of good environmental practiceand it helps everyone to maintain a more efficient and safer site. The site should be tidy, secure, andhave clear access routes that are well signposted. The appearance of a tidy, well managed site canreduce the likelihood of theft, vandalism or complaints. The Main Contractor / Developer / Engineer will ensure that they: Adequately plan the site with designated area of materials and waste storage; Segregate different types of waste as it is produced and arrange frequent removal; Keep the Site and external areas clean and tidy; Ensure no wind blown litter or debris leaves the Site; Use covered skips and bins; Ensure that materials and plant storage areas are properly managed. Lightweight materials to be covered with sheeting and secured as required; Maintain haul routes in a clean and tidy condition; Ensure adequate space is given for the safe refuelling of site vehicles with appropriate protections in place for refuelling operations; Keep roads free from mud using a road sweeper; and Ensure the Site is secure. Working Hours:The proposed typical working hours would be: 07:00hrs to 19:00 hours Monday – Friday; and08:00hrs to 14:00 hours Saturday. No work will be carried out on Sundays or bank holidays and the Site will remain secure whenconstruction is not taking place. No work, or other activity that could reasonably be expected to causeannoyance toresidents in the vicinity (including deliveries), will take place on site between 19:00 hoursand 08:00 hours. 6.3 Site Clearance and Preparation / Enabling works. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 14 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Site Entrance :The proposed site is to be accessed from an existing entrance onto the local road, albeitthat same is to be upgraded in line with the requirements of Monaghan Co. Co., and as per the encloseddrawings, as may be specified in any permission as granted. Site Preparation:As detailed in the planning drawings a certain amount of soil will have to be moved tolevel the development area. Excess soil will not be an issue on the site and can be used for landscaping/ leveling works. Given the nature of the development the proposed FFl has been arrived at so as toutilise all of the excavated material on the site. Any excess topsoil to be used as part of the landscaping proposed for the development. Some additional works are necessary to form the site entrance and enhance the internal road way to thesite. Tree and vegetation removal will be limited to only essential areas. The trees are programmed tobe felled outside the bird nesting season (in accordance with the Wildlife Act 1976, as amended). All excavations to be left open for the minimum time required and stockpiles to be used for landscapingto be seed with grass at the earliest opportunity. 6.4 Construction REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 15 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV The proposed development is a typical agricultural development, and similar to that previously carriedout by the specialist contractor and engineer on different sites. A significant proportion of theconstruction requirements are prefabricated off-site and only require assembly on site, this significantlyreducing potential waste streams. No significant hazardous waste streams will arise from the development to be completed. HydrocarbonsThe following controls for the handling and storage of hydrocarbons would be implemented throughoutthe construction phase: • All construction plant machinery and equipment would be maintained in good working order andregularly inspected; • Any fuels, oils or chemicals would be stored in accordance with the EPA guidance on the storage ofmaterials, in a designated bunded area, with adequate bund provision to contain 110% of the largestdrum volume or 25% of the total volume of containers; • A designated area for the storage of hydrocarbons would be established by the construction workscontractor and inspected on a regular basis; • Deliveries of fuels and oils to the site would be supervised; • Fuels / oils would be handled and stored with care to avoid spillage or leakage; • Where appropriate, small construction plant equipment would be placed on drip trays; • Any waste fuel / oils would be collected in bunded containers at the designated waste area and properlydisposed of to an authorised waste contractor; • Spill kits, adequately stocked with spill clean-up materials such as booms and absorbent pads, wouldbe readily available onsite; • In the unlikely event of a hydrocarbon spillage, contaminated spill clean-up material would be properlydisposed of to an authorised waste contractor; • The construction works contractor would ensure the relevant site personnel are trained in spillagecontrol; • Where construction plant shows signs of hydrocarbon leakage, site personnel would cease theoperation of the item in plant in question and notify the Project Manager. Any defective plant would bekept out of service until the necessary repairs are undertaken.Excavated Materials REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 16 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV The following controls for the handling and storage of excavated materials would be implementedthroughout the construction phase: • Spoil would only be stored at the proposed development site temporarily. A designated spoil areawould be established by the construction works contractor away from any surface water drains. • Spoil would be covered or alternatively, graded, to avoid ponding and water saturation, in additionto minimising exposure to wind; • Where required, silt fencing would be placed around spoil areas until such time as the excavatedsoil has been used in re-instatement works or removed offsite by a licenced waste contractor; • Spoil would be used in the reinstatement process where possible; • Reinstatement would be undertaken as soon as possible after excavation and earthmoving works. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN An Emergency Response Plan would be prepared for the proposed development by the constructionworks contractor, which would cover all potential risks, including environmental risks, such as fire,explosion, accidents, spillage and leaks. Designated site personnel would be trained as first aiders andfire marshals, with additional site personnel trained in environmental emergencies such as spill responseprocedures. A designated/secured area for;Refueling of vehicles (Typically with a mobile bowser, thus no fuel storage on-site),Storing of any liquids with the potential for environmental contamination,Loading and unloading of materialsSegregation and storage of waste streamsis to be identified on-site, and same is to be located at least 30m from any drainage channel (dry orotherwise). Low noise rated equipment to be used in the construction and operation of the proposed developmentwhere appropriate. All complaints (if any) received during construction to be recorded, documented and addressed in linewith the complaints record sheet enclosed. 7.0 Controls, Records and Monitoring REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 17 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV REPORTING AND RECORD KEEPINGThe Project Manager, in conjunction with the Contractor, would ensure that appropriate, detailedrecords are maintained during the construction phase of the development. Records of all worksassociated with the proposed development would be completed by the construction works contractorthroughout the construction phase. Environmental records would include waste and site inspectionrecords and where relevant, environmental incident and complaints records. Other records may includeSafety Data Sheet records and a copy of the Safety File. Where relevant to the associated works, statutoryinspection records would be maintained for such activities as excavations and lifting gear. Wherenecessary and as requested by the local authority, copies of relevant construction activity records canbe made available. In the event of an environmental incident occurring at the site with the potential tocause environmental pollution, the Project Manager/Contractor would notify the clients and the relevantthird parties, as soon as practicable. Such environmental incidents may include:• Fire;• Water pollution event;• Hydrocarbon or chemical spill;• Excessive noise;• Excessive dust. Any complaints and/or incidents would be reported to the Project Manager. The Project Manager wouldbe responsible for developing and maintaining a register of complaints and a register of incidents, withdetails on follow-up actions. The Project Manager would notify the clients as soon as practicable of anyenvironmental complaint or incident. ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE MONITORINGThe appointed contractor would be present at the development site during working hours, to ensureactivities are undertaken in an environmentally sensitive manner. The contractor/applicant wouldundertake regular site inspections and audits, at least weekly, to monitor the environmentalperformance of the site and address any potential environmental issues such as dust, litter and noise. Site inspections and audits would include the following:• Assessment of public access roads;• Assessment of Landholding Boundary;• Chemical and hydrocarbon storage area;• Waste storage area;• Spoil area.Storm water discharge. The contractor would be responsible for maintaining a register of all environmental monitoring andwould communicate the site’s environmental performance during site meetings.MONITORING COMPLIANCE REPORTS REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 18 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV As noted in the Environmental Monitoring Programme, site inspections and audits would be undertakenby the contractor/applicant/appointed and responsible person on a regular basis, at least weekly. Thesesite inspections and audits would monitor the environmental performance of the site. Where works aredetermined to be in breach of any specifications outlined within the CEMP, the appointed officer shallnotify the Project Manager, who would raise a non-compliance report and notify the applicant as soonas practicable. Non-compliance reports may also be raised as a result of an incident or potential incident,the receipt of a complaint or as a result of a regulatory inspection or audit. The non-compliance reportwould include details on the nature of the non-compliance, the proposed corrective action required,action taken to prevent recurrence and verification that the corrective actions have been undertakenand the non-compliance has been closed out. Any non-compliances would be discussed at the regular meetings between the construction workscontractor and clients. PROCEDURES TO REVIEW INSPECTIONS AND STEPS TO ADDRESS NON-COMPLIANCEThe contractor would be responsible for reviewing inspections, audits and any arising non-compliances.A review schedule would be decided upon between the construction contractors and the clients uponthe approval of the outline CEMP and in the preparation for commencement of development. The ProjectManager would notify the clients as soon as practicable of any non-compliances arising during theconstruction of the proposed development. The Project Manager would be responsible for notifying therelevant third parties where required of non-compliances at the site and would liaise with third partiesas necessary as to the outcome of the non-compliance. All non-compliances would be investigatedimmediately, and the construction works contractor would aim to close out non-compliances as soon aspossible. Where it has been determined that revisions to the CEMP are required to ensure recurrence ofa non-compliance does not take place, the Project Manager / Contractor would make the necessarychanges to the CEMP and would ensure that the revisions are implemented on site. 8.0Good Practice Measures REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 19 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Notwithstanding that there are no significant surface water features within, or bounding the proposeddevelopment, and in order to avoid any reductions in water quality in the area surrounding the proposeddevelopment, a number of good practice measures should be implemented and followed. Measureshave also been suggested that will help to protect the local biodiversity of the surrounding area and toensure the protection of local wildlife. The primary parties responsible for the implementation of these measures include the applicant himself,the project manager and the site engineer. The construction and operation of the proposed farm must comply with the European Communities(Good Agricultural Practice for Protection of Waters) Regulations 2022 (S.I. 113 of 2022).The proposed farm structures and storage tanks should adhere to the Department of Agriculture’sFarm Building and Structures Specifications.Site preparation and construction must be confined to the development site only and must be doneas per the plan presented in Section 6. Work areas must be kept to the minimum area required tocarry out the proposed works and the area must be clearly marked out in advance of the proposedworks.There must be no discharges of contaminated waters to ground or surface waters from thisdevelopment, either during the construction or operation of the development. The control andmanagement of hydrocarbons on site will be vital to prevent deteriorations in surface andgroundwater quality locally. The following measures must be employed on site during construction:o A dedicated re-fuelling location should be established on the site in a suitable compound areaaway from the proposed locations of excavations and groundworks.o The risk of fuel spillages on a construction site is at its greatest when refuelling plant. Therefore,only designated trained and competent operatives should be authorised to refuel plant on site.Plant and equipment should be brought to a designated refuelling area rather than refuelling atnumerous locations about the site.o Spill kits stations should be provided at the fuelling location for the duration of the works.o Workers should be provided with training on spill control and the use of spill kits.o All fuel storage containers must be appropriately bunded, roofed and protected from vehiclemovements. These bunds will provide added protection in the event of a flood event on site.o All chemicals must be stored as per manufacturer’s instructions. A dedicated chemical bundshould be provided on site if chemicals are to be stored on site. Any chemicals used on site shouldbe returned to the site compound and secured in a lockable and sealed container overnight inproximity to the fuel storage area.o Procedures and contingency plans should be established on site to address cleaning up smallspillages as well as dealing with an emergency incident. A stock of absorbent materials such assand, spill granules, absorbent pads and booms should be kept on site, on plant working near thewater and at the refuelling area.o Daily plant inspections will be completed by all plant operators on site to ensure that all plant ismaintained in good working order. Where leaks are noted on these inspection sheets, theapplicant should remove the plant from operations for repairs. REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 20 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV o All personnel shall observe standard precautions for handling of materials as outlined in theSafety Data Sheets (SDS) for each material, including the use of PPE. Where conditions warrant,emergency spill containment supplies should be available for immediate use. The following best practice concrete / aggregate management measures must also be employedon site.o A designated concrete wash out area must be set up on site; typically this will involve washingthe chutes, pumps into a designated IBC before removing the waste water off site for disposal.o Best practice in bulk-liquid concrete management must be employed on site addressing pouringand handling, secure shuttering, adequate curing times etc.o Stockpile areas for sands and gravel must be kept to a minimum size, well away from the coastalsite boundary.o Where concrete shuttering is used, measures must be put in place to prevent against shutterfailure and control storage, handling and disposal of shutter oils.o Activities which result in the creation of cement dust must be controlled by dampening down theareas.o Raw and uncured waste concrete must be disposed of by removal from the site;o Stockpile areas for sands and gravel must be kept to a minimum size. All farm yard drainage should be in accordance with the specifications within the Department ofAgriculture’s “Minimum specification for Farmyard Drainage, Concrete Yards and Roads”. Any excavated material arising from the construction process must not be disposed of within anydesignated site. It must be used responsibly within the boundary of the application site or disposedof in a licensed facility using a registered contractor. The storage and handling of organic fertilisers on site must be in accordance with SI 588 of 2025. It is illegal to remove hedgerows / treelines during the bird nesting season (September – March).Riparian verges along local streams and watercourses must not be damaged during the constructionor operation. Any landscaping should involve the planting of native Irish species that are indigenousto the site. Suitable species would include birch, oak, willow and alder. 9 Conclusion: Due to the nature of the proposed development, completion of an agricultural development, withno significant excavation, and where a significant proportion of the development can be pre- REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6 Outline Construction and Environmental Management Plan (C.E.M.P.) for Proposed Proposed Poultry House and associated worksat Enagh, Rockcorry, Co Monaghan. Sept. 2026 Page no. 21 Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV Directors: S. Clarke, O. Leddy B.Agr.Sc., P. Fay B.Agr.Sc.V.A.T. Reg. No. 8277204JV fabricated off-site, there are no areas of significant concern with regard to the proposeddevelopment. The measures as outlined in this proposed Construction and Environmental Management Plan(C.E.M.P.) will ensure that the activity is carried out in accordance with appropriate practices andensuring no significant impact on the local environment. Signed:Paraic FayB.Agr.Sc. Date: __14/09/2026_________ Appendix No. 1 – Waste Record Sheet REC E I V E D : 1 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 6