Submission to Oral Hearing August 2010-08-23
My name is Betty Schult. Together with my husband and children I live in Pullathomas, 3 kms from
Glengad, 3 kms from Aughoose and 7 km from the Gas Refinery in Ballinaboy. Our home and business is
located adjacent to the L1202.
I want to submit to this Oral Hearing my personal experience as a resident and road user in
Pullathomas since 2008 because it will show you, Mr Chairman, what will happen and on a much larger
scale, if the Board grant Shell permission to construct the pipeline as well as an enormous tunnel to
house it.
We are privileged to have lived here for more than 30 years and as a family we have provided guest
accommodation dedicated to sustainable, environmentally sensitive tourism for the past 30 years. We
accommodate walkers, cyclists, and all kinds of outdoor enthusiasts. All of our guests come to take a
break from hectic lifestyles in overcrowded and industrialised places. When our guests arrive, we
frequently hear the word “paradise” being used to describe this area.
We are very fortunate to see an interest from the next generation of our family in running our business
and making a living for themselves here. We hand over what we built with great concern, having
experienced the arrival of Shell in our community and the constant and ongoing disturbance and
destruction of all that was precious and intact previously.
When I view the Traffic Management Plan and Mr. Noonan’s report to this hearing I see that it deals
with road conditions, traffic figures, road surfaces details, even driver training and mitigation measures!
Evidently a lot of work went into this and still I find it a very incomplete and meaningless document. It
should not be called a Traffic Management Plan at all but perhaps a Transport Management Plan,
because its only real concern is the movement of materials, personnel and machinery .Only very
marginally are the needs of other road users mentioned.
In the Transport Management Plan it is claimed that earlier haulage in connection with the construction
of the pipeline has been successful and that the experience gained from it has been built on. I want to
contest that.
While the personnel, materials and machinery might have been successfully hauled along the roads, life
during those months of construction traffic has been nothing but chaos, danger and disruption for us. It
is stated that any impact would only be temporary but does this mean that it can be ignored? What will
happen when the need for the next pipeline into Ballinaboy arises?
The L1202 is the only connection between several villages and individual houses. It borders the Special
Area of Conservation in its full length. The part of it that was carved out of the mountain side has been
affected by several landslides in recent years. The same engineering firm that sign for the Transport
Management Plan has recommended that this part of the road should be closed completely when heavy
rain falls and another landslide might occur.
There was never a proper and consistent plan for the so-called upgrading works and they were never
finished. It is geographically impossible to widen this road sufficiently.
There is an amazing variety of flora and fauna along the roadside all year round, including some
protected species, the habitats of which would be seriously endangered.
It is good to see that funerals and community events might be accommodated, but what about
everyday life? The road is not just used to get from A to B. Often the media mentions that people are
not getting enough exercise, however on the L1202 you can still frequently see people out and about.
They walk, cycle, visit each other, stop for a chat, pick their children up from school and travel the short
distance to the church, pub or graveyard. The roads around Erris have also recently been made
recommended bicycle routes, so people from all over the world are indeed invited to use them for
recreational purposes.
In the letter of the 2nd Nov 09 the board gives the opinion that the community of Rossport and their
local amenities must not be exposed to the disturbance created by construction traffic.
Other residents and I living beside the L1202 have already experienced many months of that type of
impact.
I do not believe that the mitigation measures listed in the Transport Management Plan will provide any
change because there is still nobody but the developer itself to turn to. There is no trust, no good will
and we have no common values.
Mr. Noonan states in his report that here will be far less traffic than anticipated for the previous version
of the pipeline route. But how can he know? After what we have experienced, how can I believe these
indications? At this stage no one can claim to know the amount and time of the work or its exact
procedure.
The following is not a projection of events that might happen but well documented facts. I ask the
Board to use its responsibility and authority to make sure that no community will ever experience
anything like that again.
In January 2008 Mayo County Council erected small signs along the roads leading from Shell’s Refinery
in Ballinaboy to the proposed landfall site of the pipeline in Glengad; these are the roads L1202 and
R314.
The notice on the signs was about a planned road upgrade.
Local residents and landowners were concerned about:
1: the extent and timing of the planned works
2: the type and amount of traffic it would generate
3: The environmental effects in relation to the Special Area of Conservation it borders
4: their legal situation
5: the fact that Shell finances these works and because of that the interests of other road users might be
overruled
A public meeting was called in Aughoose church and was attended by a large number of residents.
Two of my neighbours and I were asked at that meeting to gather more information, get legal and
practical advice and form a smaller group consisting of one resident from each affected village so that
information could easily be passed on.
To be able to write our initial submission to Mayo County Council we needed information and I tried to
find that.
I phoned the Mayo County Council engineer to ask him about the timing, extent and practicalities of the
project and was informed that details were available in the Transport Management Plan, that Shell was
going to pay for the works and that there was “nothing you can do about it”. When I asked a question
regarding geographical limitations within the landslide area, I was told that all problems would be solved
“as we go along”.
This engineer was never again available to speak to me on the phone or meet with me.
The Transport Management Plan available for inspection turned out to be out of date, not dedicated to
the road works at all and only marginally to the haulage along our road.
There was no information available about the level of noise, vibration, dust and dirt.
Still, a petition letter, signed by 112 residents was sent to Mayo County Council objecting to the
proposed works, outlining our reasons for objection and our concerns.
Residents consequently met with all local counsellors and with the Local Agenda 21 officer again
outlining our concerns.
However at the monthly Mayo County Council meeting the road works were approved. It was stated
that the necessary landowner consent would be sought and works would not take place if landowners
did not give it. Compulsory Purchase Orders were not needed; an Environmental Impact Study was not
required.
About one week later the residents finally had access to a Transport Management Plan, the high
numbers of anticipated haulage movements were confirmed by a Mayo County Council engineer
neighbour and me at a short meeting with a Mayo County Council engineer.
A petition, signed by 114 residents, opposing the decision of Mayo County Council was sent. While the
residents of course approved of road improvement works, we declared again that we opposed the
transformation into a haulage road and gave our reasons for that. This would certainly not be a
sustainable development!
The director of Services replied in writing to me and promised to deal with the petition. This never
happened to my knowledge, but I was reminded in that same letter that it was unreasonable and
wasteful of time for me to “ignore the decision made by MCC”. I was free to lobby my elected
representatives!
In April we were made aware of another, new, valid Transport Management Plan. On inspection we
found that it covered a much smaller timeframe than the previous one and ended at the month when
the real Shell haulage was expected to start. The spaces where high numbers of traffic had been
indicated before were now blank.
A second meeting with Local Agenda 21 officer was promised by e-mail but never materialised.
On the 14th of April the road works started. On the 20th a section of the road was officially closed.
I felt completely frustrated in my efforts to achieve some sort of reasonable communication with Mayo
County Council. As residents we felt ignored and powerless so we found a solicitor to represent us. We
were by now a consistently growing group of over 30 very concerned residents and road users.
Many months of severe disruption and stress followed as we witnessed the L1202 being turned into a
haulage road:
Trees and hedges were ripped away during the nesting season. Large amounts of materials were stored
beside a little stream. Serious runoff occurred into said stream. The road was in some parts extended by
more than twice its original width. The work was done in obvious haste, not even ceasing during a bank
holiday weekend. Coming home from the shop on that weekend a huge gap in the road suddenly lay
before me and some machinery was halted. Some workers walked around puzzled and helpless. The
road had slipped away from underneath them, taking with it peat, gravel, vegetation and ESB poles. As a
result people were left without electricity at a busy bank holiday weekend.
Landowners’ wishes were ignored. Sometimes I and others had to literally stand our ground to prevent
intrusion on our properties by machinery or workers. The explicitly written wishes of land owners who
were not present were sometimes ignored. Damage to land was not repaired at all or only after
correspondence from the solicitor.
Complaints were made to Mayo County Council, the North West Fisheries Board, the Environmental
Protection Agency, Minister Gormley, Minister Ryan, The Road Safety Authority and The Garda
Superintendent. Urgent phone calls were also made by several residents to the National Park Wildlife
Service. I will not list every correspondence nor the responses, only conclude that it seemed that no
statutory body could find anything nor were they responsible for the situation my family and neighbors
found ourselves in. Because the works were declared necessary for health and safety reasons, it seemed
bird protection, frog conservation, preservation of the Special Area of Conservation and the immediate
health and safety of residents and road users could be ignored altogether. I also learned that Mayo
County Council is ultimately responsible.
But Mayo County Council has always clearly stated that it supports the Corrib Gas Project and all that
comes with it. So what help could we expect?
Then, long before road works were complete, the haulage started in earnest and with it began a
nightmare. I certainly can not use the words transient, temporary or imperceptible as Mr.Noonan does
in the latest Transport Management Plan!
My husband was admitted to hospital and I travelled to Castlebar every morning for several weeks. I had
to navigate my way through all types of road work machinery, moving or parked, convoys of truckloads
containing large boulders or steel fences bound for Glengad. Neighbours were on their way to work or
to drop their children to school. There were patrol cars, road workers, sheep, and an assortment of
movable traffic signs, shovels and spades, traffic cones and sandbags carelessly left behind.
Every evening when I came home I saw another stretch of road destroyed. Meetings with neighbours
were arranged, more letters were sent, and local media were contacted.
Visitors and guests to our house and Holiday Hostel were shocked and upset and could not understand
what sort of hell had broken loose here. Some had been halted by police en route and questioned
regarding their reasons for coming here. A walk to the beach in Glengad after their long journey could
no longer be recommended as it was hazardous to walk on the road and when someone did go to
Glengad they were met by high steel fences and masked, uniformed men with binoculars and video
cameras. I attach a letter from an American journalist published in the Irish Times. (Mary Doyle letter to
the Irish Times)
My husband arrived home after weeks of struggling for his life in the intensive care unit in Castlebar
Hospital. He was extremely weakened and exhausted. He was wheelchair bound and needed to be seen
by his family doctor in Belmullet twice a week.
On many mornings it was nearly impossible to safely leave our car park.
We loaded the wheelchair into the car and drove to a safer place once or twice a week just to escape
the constant noise, vibration, dust and the thoughts of what was going on.
Something needed to be done about the ongoing situation. This time we turned to Mayo County
Council, our local councilors and the police, as advised. At the Garda Station it was difficult to even
obtain a receipt for the letters of complaints and the signatures that were handed in. There were
certainly no efforts made to relieve the situation. One Councillor accepted an invitation to meet with
residents, listen and pass on our grievances.
In May 2009 we and some residents received a letter from the Roadbridge Ltd, offering a structural
survey of our premises prior to the beginning of what was called the substantial part of haulage work.
When we suggested through our solicitor that we might choose our own, independent engineer, we did
not hear again from that company or from anyone else.
In august 2008 the solicitor, representing the residents along the L1202 wrote a lengthy complaint to
the Ombudsman Emily O’ Reilly regarding the actions of Mayo County Council who we were always told
are ultimately responsible for the road works, environmental aspects, communication as well as
implementation of the Transport Management Plan.
Mayo County Council insisted in their detailed response to her that all was in best order and that no
laws or rules had ever been broken and that they acted entirely within their authority.
The Ombudsman then suggested closing the file.
I still know that what has happened was very wrong and harmful and not necessary.
As a family and a group of residents we had lost trust and confidence in our statutory bodies. We were
not able to spend more time, money or energy. Good neighbourly relations, strength for daily work and
our families are more important to us.
There is no need for this pipeline; this becomes more obvious every day. I respectfully ask the Board to
refuse permission to build it.