Mutton Island Sewage Plant

Robbo

Reading a recent article about water standards in coastal areas, I was reminded of the Mutton Island controversy of the 1990s which was more circulatory than the roving slicks of excrement that roamed the Bay. For our younger readers, 8 million gallons of raw sewage was being pumped daily into the Bay in the absence of any kind of adequate treatment plant and given the nature of the Bay, it tended to hang around.

Looking back, it's hard to see how there was any legitimate opposition to the scheme; the visual intrusion is minimal, there's no smell from the plant, the water quality in the Bay has improved beyond belief and the causeway itself has become part of the walking infrastructure of the City. Architectural tours take in the old Lighthouse on the Island so even up close the presence of the plant doesn't offend.

It's also unthinkable that we would have been able to proceed without the scheme given the level of growth in the City and the likelihood that subsequent legislation would have entailed massive fines being accrued. Indeed, given that the Mutton Island plant was upgraded during the "boom years" to take into account the City's growth, it's hard to see how one of the alternatives would have been expanded as easily.

So I fired up the Irish Times archive to see what was the thinking at the time.

A group called Save Galway Bay (chairman Michael O'Flaherty) were proposing a land based plant in Lough Atalia (on the site of the derelict isolation hospital), threatening (through secretary Derek Hambleton) to take the relevant Minister (then Brendan Howlin) to the CJEU, arguing amongst other things that the famous Habitats Directive (not transposed into Irish Law at the time, but possibly overdue) was violated. It is doubtful that such group would have locus standi to do so but the Commission was prepared at one stage to instigate proceedings.

A funding row also occurred with the EU wishing to withhold Structural and Cohesion Fund money due to the location, with the Commission being of the view that a mainland location should be chosen. Labour Councillors (and indeed Michael D) at times floated the compromise idea of a Mutton Island plant, but built underground with no causeway, like some kind of lair for the worst James Bond villain ever.

Parallel to this, An Taisce were objecting to other developments on the basis that without Mutton Island being operational, the sewage problem would be compounded.

High Court proceedings were brought by SGB through Claddagh based actor Ray McBride seeking to halt the request for tenders to construct the plant and causeway. This action failed and he was landed with reported costs of £160,000. At this point, SGB appeared to cut McBride loose:

On the appeal issue, Mr Hambleton said: "It is not our decision. The case was in the name of Ray McBride. Ultimately, it's his decision. Naturally, we support our members".

Pending the Supreme Court appeal, the sewage problem continued and £885,000 was sought to move the outflow pipe further out into the bay. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the scheme in 1998 and there was talk of "eco warriors" occupying the island to prevent construction.

Tenders were signed in spring 1998 and construction was underway on the causeway until a land dispute arose between the estate of Henry Grattan and the Council. This was resolved (I believe through spending more money) and construction recommenced.

Dire predictions followed in a letter to the Times by "Galway Native" Tom Conroy, writing from Dublin 6 that:

The responsibility for this mess lies with Galway Corporation's flawed and stubborn patterns of thinking - as it will in five years' time when the plant may need to be expanded, at escalating cost, and the citizenry realise the full impact of the visual and olfactory pollution; as it will in 20 years' time when future citizens and visitors to Galway will be amazed at such costly environmental blunders that have destroyed the very reasons that made the city worth seeing and living in.

Construction was completed in May 2004 and the upgrade work approved by ABP in 2007.

So, nearly 20 years and over €60 million on, is anyone in agreement with the above predictions of Tom Conroy or perhaps Margaret Cox (whose late father, Tom Cox, helped establish SGB) that "it is the greatest mistake ever made in the development of Galway"?

I acknowledge the possibility that this will "inspire" a piece in one of the local rags so knock yourselves out you plagiarising, press release recycling hacks.

ronnie3585

Great article!

I too remember the loss of the Blue Flags in Galway and the roaring debate around the proposed use of Mutton Island. However, I was a young'un so I didn't realise it had become so litigious - thanks for that info, very interesting.

I think the treatment plant is one of the best infrastructure/services projects ever undertaken by the city. The treament plant is completely unobtrusive and provides a benifit to the city and county that is so great, it is difficult to quantify.

Perhaps in 100 years when (if?) there is finally another bridge across the Corrib, people will look at it in the same light as we view Mutton Island, wondering what all that fuss was about and how would they live without it.

Red Pepper

Maybe I got it wrong but I heard that Mutton Island was at 100% capacity the day it was commissioned and that we continue to pour the excess poo into the bay?

Aerohead

Out at Salthill last weekend and I have to say the colour of the water was brilliant, it was crystal clear and blue in colour compared to before the plant went into operation when you could see and smell the sewerage which was clinging to rocks and coming onto the beaches, sure how many of ye got a bit of s...e in your mouth while swimming at Salthill.

Now if we could only get the dog walkers to remove their pets poo from the prom it would be clean both in and out of the water.

Iwannahurl

The treatment plant has been at full capacity for quite a few years now. I have been told (off the record, so no source, independent corroboration or other evidence to back it up) that after heavy rain the volume of run-off means that the plant has to be 'flushed' into the sea.

I've been out to Mutton Island, and up close it stinks. Around five years ago I ventured to suggest to some residents of this terrace that odour was not a problem and their response was something along the lines of "why don't you try living here".

In my opinion the treatment plant, and the causeway out to it, is a visual intrusion. The old lighthouse in its original state was a beautiful and iconic landmark on the bay. The sewage treatment plant is, literally and figuratively, a sh1tty replacement. I wonder what Joe Boske would make of it now.

IIRC I was out of the country during the controversy, so I'm not au fait with all the details. However, my general recollection is that SGB and others were not against a sewage treatment plant, as some Straw Man ninjas like to claim, but against the selection of Mutton Island as the location, for a variety of reasons.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it was also claimed at the time that a major (undeclared) reason for choosing Mutton Island was that the required causeway would be of benefit as a breakwater (or whatever it's called) to people with a vested interest in the harbour area. Given what those private interests are now pursuing that original notion may not have been wildly speculative.

Is it "the greatest mistake ever made in the development of Galway"? Given the many fine messes created by the dysfunctional cryptocracy in City Hall, it's quite hard to say for sure where Mutton Island ranks on the list. But it's on that list somewhere, in my opinion.

Red Pepper

wow that is a hell of a poo factory!

Iwannahurl

Just found this by chance while Googling info about Mutton Island.

The idea of Galway County Council criticising Galway City Council's planning record is rather amusing, like hearing Sinead O'Connor question John Water's sanity.

Let county run city!

A CALL was made for the abolition of Galway City Council and for the entire county to be administrated from one central authority based at County Hall, at a meeting of Galway Co Council this week.

The City Council was accused of consistently failing to live up to its responsibility in important areas such as waste disposal and now waste water treatment and leaving the Co Council to clean up its mess.

The call was made after the Co Council members were informed that the city's sewage treatment plan at Mutton Island was close to capacity and there was an urgent need for a new plant to be built in the county area if planned economic developments were not to be stopped in their tracks.

...

Fianna Fail Cllr Tomas Mannion stated bluntly that the Mutton Island treatment plant had been a "cop out" by the City Council and it was inevitable that the Co Council would have to step in and bail them out.

He added that the City Council had never lived up to its responsibilities as far as waste disposal, sludge and now waste water was concerned and it was time to recognise what was obvious to all “that one local authority was all Co Galway needed and that authority should be Galway Co Council."

When asked by Mayor Jimmy McClearn to clarify his position and whether he wanted to see the abolition of a local authority for the city, Cllr Mannion said no, but he "hoped they could find something useful to do with themselves." However he favoured the Co Council having overall authority of the city, arguing that they were taking the lion's share of responsibility as things stood.

...

Engineer Padraic Fogarty said the new plant was critical to achieving the development objectives for the region, adding that the economic slowdown provided the opportunity to get matters quickly to construction stage.

He warned that Mutton Island could only cope in the short-term but would not be up to meeting medium or long-term needs as the plant did not have the necessary capacity.

Without a new plant, economic growth in Galway would come to a standstill and have a serious impact on the jobs situation.

Many Co Councillors are still aggrieved that the City Council never lived up to its commitment to build a waste incinerator when it was agreed to locate the county's only landfill dump near Ballinasloe.

It was acknowledged that any future development of Galway city will be in Co Council controlled areas and co-operation between the two authorities is vital in this regard.

http://www.tuamherald.ie/news/roundup/articles/2014/03/28/4022261-let-county-run-city/print#sthash.bczUL6CF.dpuf

buzz11

Indeed the water quality in Galway Bay is much improved and you can see water activities getting more popular in recent years.

I never understood how a small number of people could justify holding up the facility on the basis of 'visual' issues when the toxins coming from their own a*s was polluting the environment around them.

Naux

I'm glad it was built. You will always have some people that will try to block improvements/development.

That said, smell is always an issue no matter where you build one of those plants and I feel sorry for the affected residents.

Hope they develop the Harbour........ Harbour + Outer ring Road would enhance the city greatly.

Iwannahurl

‘Poor’ rating for Galway beaches

http://galwayindependent.com/20140501/news/poor-rating-for-galway-beaches-S37160.html

Two Galway beaches are among just three coastal bathing areas nationally that have failed to meet EU standards in relation to water quality.

Ballyloughane Beach, Renmore and Clifden Beach join Dugort, Achill, Co. Mayo and the inland Lilliput Beach at Lough Ennell, Co. Westmeath as the four bathing areas rated ‘poor’ in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ‘The Quality of Bathing Water in Ireland – An Overview for the Year 2013’ report, launched today.

Assessors monitored bathing water at 135 popular sites throughout the 2013 bathing season for two microbiological parameters, E.Coli and Intestinal Enterococci. Just three per cent achieved a ‘poor’ rating, with the remaining 97 per cent achieving ‘sufficient’ or ‘good’ status.

According to the report, Clifden beach “continues to be subject to episodic pollution by the local Wastewater Treatment Plant effluent but work is now underway on improvements to the sewage infrastructure and treatment plant which it is hoped will bring about an improvement in water quality over the coming years and allow the beach to be reopened”.

Ballyloughane, meanwhile, “experienced two pollution incidents, one of which resulted in E.Coli exceeding the mandatory value” during 2013.

In addition to Clifden and Ballyloughane, water quality at Grattan Road Beach, Spiddal’s Trá na mBan, and Trá na bhForbacha was identified as being of ‘sufficient’ status, but having “the potential to be of less than sufficient status” in the report.

Traught Beach in Kinvara was also found to be "exhibiting periodic pollution events" which could influence its overall status.

However, Traught, in addition to An Trá Mór, Indreabhán; Loughrea Lake; Portumna bathing place; Cill Mhuirbhigh, Inis Mór; Goirtín, Cloch Na Rón; Trá an Dóilín, Carraroe and Trá Chaladh Fínis, Carna, received a ‘good’ rating in the report.

The report is available to download at www.epa.ie/pubs.

At present, the inlet pumping arrangements and probe settings at Mutton Island are such that the Inlet 1800mm diameter pipe is always partly full. The modelling work has identified however that this results in significant surcharging of trunk sewers in the approaches to the causeway sewers, and it also results in losses at upstream backwatered Combined Sewer Overflows.

http://www.epa.ie/licences/lic_eDMS/090151b2801f5c71.pdf

A question for the OP and others: if you build a city's sewage treatment plant on a small island, and if your single causeway-contained 1.8m diameter inlet pipe is "always partly full", and if storm-water runoff causes euphemistic "losses" upstream in the sewerage, and if "storm water" has to be discharged into Galway Bay on occasion, how do you go about upgrading your treatment plant to cope with the expansion of the city?

dilallio

Slightly off-topic, but does anyone remember the boat in the docks which stunk up Galway for a few weeks. I'm guessing the mid to late nineties. I think it was rotting fish in the hold of a boat which had been seized or something.

Bogsnorkler

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I have been told (off the record, so no source, independent corroboration or other evidence to back it up) that after heavy rain the volume of run-off means that the plant has to be 'flushed' into the sea.

I've also heard this off record. However if this washout happened the treatment plant would be out of action for weeks if not months so as to get the secondary treatment back up and running.

Having said that based on your quote from the EPA, it does appear that the overflow storage capacity has been undersized, which I suppose is leading to these storm flow events (which are not that uncommon, every WWTP has this as a safety valve, or damaging as the storm flow itself typically dilutes the waste water to a level where there is unlikey to be much of a health impact).

Spring Onion

Bogsnorkler wrote: »

I've also heard this off record. However if this washout happened the treatment plant would be out of action for weeks if not months so as to get the secondary treatment back up and running.

Having said that based on your quote from the EPA, it does appear that the overflow storage capacity has been undersized, which I suppose is leading to these storm flow events (which are not that uncommon, every WWTP has this as a safety valve, or damaging as the storm flow itself typically dilutes the waste water to a level where there is unlikey to be much of a health impact).

What is bog snorkling like?

Iwannahurl

Bogsnorkler wrote: »

I've also heard this off record. However if this washout happened the treatment plant would be out of action for weeks if not months so as to get the secondary treatment back up and running.

Having said that based on your quote from the EPA, it does appear that the overflow storage capacity has been undersized, which I suppose is leading to these storm flow events (which are not that uncommon, every WWTP has this as a safety valve, or damaging as the storm flow itself typically dilutes the waste water to a level where there is unlikey to be much of a health impact).

"Unofficially" might have been a more appropriate term. I've done a bit of enquiring since the OP resurrected the Mutton Island story. It seems that what is happening is that Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs in the documentation linked earlier) fill up the sole 1.8m diameter inflow pipe to the Mutton Island treatment plant. At some point valves open in the pipe to relieve pressure, discharging effluent. I gather that CSOs are a well-recognised cause of water pollution, and CSO discharges are not required to be monitored.

Interestingly enough, the EPA report (The quality of bathing water in Ireland 2013) mentions the source of pollution in Clifden, Lough Ennell and Achill, but apart from some general references to weather it does not suggest what the cause of contamination might have been in the case of Ballyloughane and Grattan Beach. It's just there, somehow.

The treatment capacity of the Mutton Island WWTP is for a population equivalent (PE) of 91,000. The proposed upgrade will increase capacity to 170,000 PE. Meanwhile, the population of the city is 75,000. There are 25,000 students, and thousands of people commute to work in the city every working day. And it rains an awful lot, apparently. Do the math, as they say in the States.

The level of treatment depends on a number of factors, and one major limiting factor is the space available:

The treatment plant site at Mutton Island is surrounded by a wave wall, which set tight horizontal and vertical constraints in relation to any possible upgrade.

http://www.nodwyer.com/galway%20main%20drainage.pdf

So, to reframe my earlier question, in the context set by the OP, where is there space on Mutton Island for expansion?

whatstherush

Iwannahurl wrote: »

So, to reframe my earlier question, in the context set by the OP, where is there space on Mutton Island for expansion?

Why are you asking that question when they are already planning to almost double capacity?
Also alot of your points presume that the plant at the second location would have been built to a different spec, what are you basing this on. Do you know for instance that a bigger pipe would have been used, or it would have been built for a bigger population size. And finally I'm pretty sure the alternative location would have smelled also.

Iwannahurl

whatstherush wrote: »

Why are you asking that question when they are already planning to almost double capacity?

Also alot of your points presume that the plant at the second location would have been built to a different spec, what are you basing this on. Do you know for instance that a bigger pipe would have been used, or it would have been built for a bigger population size. And finally I'm pretty sure the alternative location would have smelled also.

I suspect the smell is universal!

How much of the increased capacity is being gained through expansion of the Mutton Island WWTP?

What was the capacity limitation inherent in the choice of Mutton Island as the site for the WWTP?

whatstherush

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I suspect the smell is universal!

How much of the increased capacity is being gained through expansion of the Mutton Island WWTP?

What was the capacity limitation inherent in the choice of Mutton Island as the site for the WWTP?

I would presume that it all was, do you know different?

I don't know to second question, do you?

What about the alternative site, do you know that a different pipe would have been used, or that it would have been built for a bigger pop then 95k? Also do you know the answer to your second question wrt the other site?

Iwannahurl

whatstherush wrote: »

I would presume that it all was, do you know different?

I don't know to second question, do you?

From the tender notice for the upgrade:

The upgrade works are expected to be by means of alterations to the existing process as the current site is highly constrained.

...

The site is constrained, being on a island [sic], and so the upgrade of the WWTW is expected to be by means of alterations to existing processes with some upgrade to the hydraulic capacity.

Unlike the OP I am not in a position to search the Irish Times archive. Therefore I can only speculate regarding the likelihood that the original proposers of Mutton Island ever described their preferred island site as "highly constrained".

Would that term have been a good selling point at the time, do you think?

whatstherush

Iwannahurl wrote: »

From the tender notice for the upgrade:



Unlike the OP I am not in a position to search the Irish Times archive. Therefore I can only speculate regarding the likelihood that the original proposers of Mutton Island ever described their preferred site as "highly constrained".

Would that term have been a good selling point at the time, do you think?

So in answer to your question the capacity is being nearly doubled using the existing site, by using a more efficient process. This is a problem why?

And you don't know anything about the second site which may have had all the issues you listed re pipe size and initial capacity.

So twenty years later what do you think Galway bay hasn't being saved from?

Iwannahurl

whatstherush wrote: »

So in answer to your question the capacity is being nearly doubled using the existing site, by using a more efficient process. This is a problem why?

Using more efficient processes is commendable. It's also their only option, along with modifications to the sewerage upstream in order to take the pressure off. There are also strategic proposals for "longer-term redirection [of other inflows, such as those from Oranmore] to a different focal point and a different WWTP."

Robbo wrote: »

it's hard to see how one of the alternatives would have been expanded as easily.

Would you say the original proposers of Mutton Island made much of the fact that their chosen site, being an island, was "highly constrained"?

Would you say that a highly constrained island site was the best choice?

That was one of the arguments put forward by opponents of the Mutton Island site in the first place. Were they wrong?

And were they wrong also when they said that a major motivation for the selection of Mutton Island was that the causeway would act as a breakwater, thereby serving the commercial interests of those desiring an expansion of Galway Harbour?

whatstherush

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Using more efficient processes is commendable. It's also their only option, along with modifications to the sewerage upstream in order to take the pressure off. There are also strategic proposals for "longer-term redirection [of other inflows, such as those from Oranmore] to a different focal point and a different WWTP."

Again whose to say the same modifications wouldn't have been made to the alternative site. Can you imagine the uproar by Derick and an taisce et al, if the council had said that they were doubling the capacity of the other site by doubling it's footprint instead of using a more efficient process.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Would you say the original proposers of Mutton Island made much of the fact that their chosen site, being an island, was "highly constrained"?

Would you say that a highly constrained island site was the best choice?

That was one of the arguments put forward by opponents of the Mutton Island site in the first place. Were they wrong?

And were they wrong also when they said that a major motivation for the selection of Mutton Island was that the causeway would act as a breakwater, thereby serving the commercial interests of those desiring an expansion of Galway Harbour?

But the site isn't highly constrained in terms of the only thing that matters, which is capacity. Why would they highlight something that's not an issue? If they are doubling the capacity at the site, what exactly is wrong with it? Do you foresee the pop going above 175k anytime soon.

As for the break water this is just innuendo. I'm not an engineer, but it would be the first break water I've seen with holes in it. Have the latest plans for the new harbour stated that the causeway has some benefit to their plans, are they not building a breakwater as part of their plans.

whatstherush

Double post

Iwannahurl

whatstherush wrote: »

Again whose to say the same modifications wouldn't have been made to the alternative site. Can you imagine the uproar by Derick and an taisce et al, if the council had said that they were doubling the capacity of the other site by doubling it's footprint instead of using a more efficient process.

I don't believe anyone -- not even the much-maligned SGB -- argued against sewage treatment. Furthermore, I doubt anyone would argue that expansion and improved efficiency would not be necessary or desirable over time.

Therefore the main issue is the choice of site, and the consequences of that decision.

I refer you again to the OP, which is why this thread exists:

Robbo wrote: »

Indeed, given that the Mutton Island plant was upgraded during the "boom years" to take into account the City's growth, it's hard to see how one of the alternatives would have been expanded as easily.

I can't recall the particular "boom years" upgrade mentioned by the OP. Perhaps someone else can provide a link/source.

However, the OP makes a specific claim suggesting that Mutton Island was, or is, "easily expandable". The official record directly contradicts this notion: the site is highly constrained, "being on a island".

I repeat my earlier question: why choose "a island" in the first place?

whatstherush wrote: »

But the site isn't highly constrained in terms of the only thing that matters, which is capacity. Why would they highlight something that's not an issue? If they are doubling the capacity at the site, what exactly is wrong with it? Do you foresee the pop going above 175k anytime soon.

Are you claiming that the site itself -- ie the WWTP on Mutton Island -- can be modified in such a way as to increase capacity from 92000PE to 170,000PE? If so, have you a source for that assertion?

Can you also address the issue of how the highly constrained Mutton Island WWTP is creating major problems for the county? See this earlier post: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90190439&postcount=7

Also, on that note, can you comment on the possibility that another WWTP will have to be constructed sooner or later because Mutton Island, even after upgrade, will not be sufficient?

whatstherush wrote: »

As for the break water this is just innuendo. I'm not an engineer, but it would be the first break water I've seen with holes in it. Have the latest plans for the new harbour stated that the causeway has some benefit to their plans, are they not building a breakwater as part of their plans.

Excerpt from the Galway Harbour Extension Environmental Impact Statement Non-Technical Summary:

A simulation was also carried out assuming the Mutton Island causeway to be completely submerged by 200-year Tide with Sea level Rise (4.635 m O.D. Malin). It would then be covered by over 1m of water depth. A westerly deepwater design wave of 4 m significant wave height was applied to the model. The simulation shows that the Mutton Island Causeway would under these submerged conditions break the storm waves and dissipate much of its energy and thus provide protection to the westerly face of the proposed development even under submerged conditions.

bonzodog2

I would have thought the site could be expanded fairly easily with a couple of hundred trucks full of rocks.

whatstherush

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I don't believe anyone -- not even the much-maligned SGB -- argued against sewage treatment.

Who said they did, so far in this thread your the only one who has brought this up. Every reply from me has mentioned an alternative site, which I thought you would have known was the one proposed by SGB.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Furthermore, I doubt anyone would argue that expansion and improved efficiency would not be necessary or desirable over time.

Again nothing to do with what you quoted from me, I was merely making the point that in a choice between increasing the capacity of the "alternative Site", by increased efficiency of existing site or increase the size of the plant, I think we know which side An Taisce would come down on. So any ancillary issues you quote with this change would exist with the other site too.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

However, the OP makes a specific claim suggesting that Mutton Island was, or is, "easily expandable". The official record directly contradicts this notion: the site is highly constrained, "being on a island".

I repeat my earlier question: why choose "a island" in the first place?




Are you claiming that the site itself -- ie the WWTP on Mutton Island -- can be modified in such a way as to increase capacity from 92000PE to 170,000PE? If so, have you a source for that assertion?

This is the second time you asked this, and I said I presumed all the increase was in the plant and asked if you knew different, which you didn't really reply to. Also the first line in the tender you linked states "This Scheme involves the upgrade of the existing Mutton Island WWTP from its current design capacity of 91,600 PE to 170,000 PE". Am I missing something in this statement, Is it not stating that the design capacity of mutton Island WWTP will be increased from 91k to 170k And if I'm not reading this wrong, what is wrong with the current site, if they can nearly double the capacity on the existing footprint.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Can you also address the issue of how the highly constrained Mutton Island WWTP is creating major problems for the county? See this earlier post: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90190439&postcount=7

Can you clarify what the major problems are from your previous post, and state how an alternatively located WWTP would have alleviated them.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Also, on that note, can you comment on the possibility that another WWTP will have to be constructed sooner or later because Mutton Island, even after upgrade, will not be sufficient?

I can't because I don't what your basing this on, How high is the possibility, over what time frame, who is making this suggestion?

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Excerpt from the Galway Harbour Extension Environmental Impact Statement Non-Technical Summary:

Ok this is fair enough, but when you say it is too the benefit of commercial interests can you expand on this and was this one of points originally raised by SGB as I don't recall it.

Also as an aside, do you know is the location of the new harbour at the proposed location for alternative site by SGB, I know its in that general area but I mean specifically.

dubhthach

bonzodog2 wrote: »

I would have thought the site could be expanded fairly easily with a couple of hundred trucks full of rocks.

Indeed well this is what they did when it was actually built, anyone living in Galway at the time remembers the huge amount of trucks going in and out with rock fill.

If you look at the aerial photo and compare it to Ordance Survey map (particulary the 25" from 1912) it's obviously that half the footprint of the plant is on land reclaimed from the sea.

1995 OS photo:
http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,529784,723235,7,5

2000 OS photo: (work in progress)
http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,529784,723235,7,4

2005 OS photo:
http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,529784,723235,7,0

25" map (published in 1912 -- surveyed in 1893 in case of Mutton Island!!)
http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,529677,723213,7,9

The 6" map which was surveyed in 1840 is even more telling, the site of plant was Shingle (probably covered at high water)
http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,529630,723233,7,7

dubhthach

Of course I should mention that the first time a causeway to Mutton Island was proposed was back in the 1820's to prevent silting of the harbour. Of course back in 1900's there was a proposal to turn Rusheen Bay into a harbour (ala Dún Laoghaire) with it's own specific railway branch (using the pre-existing Shantalla "branch" off the Clifden line as a start)

Iwannahurl

bonzodog2 wrote: »

I would have thought the site could be expanded fairly easily with a couple of hundred trucks full of rocks.

Would you care to make a prediction in this thread that they are going to do exactly that, ie enlarge Mutton Island by adding some reclaimed land?

Of course the notion that the site could be/would have to be expanded with "a couple of hundred trucks full of rocks" again raises the basic question: why choose an island site to begin with?

dubhthach

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Would you care to make a prediction in this thread that they are going to do exactly that, ie enlarge Mutton Island by adding some reclaimed land?

Of course the notion that the site could be/would have to be expanded with "a couple of hundred trucks full of rocks" again raises the basic question: why choose an island site to begin with?

Same reason why Poolbeg treatment plant was put on a manmade peninsula, the land is cheap (already in state ownership) plus it's not right in middle of a residential area. Only other viable site in center of Galway would have been the old isolation hospital. Of course the Harbour Company were against that as they ended up building a connecting bridge, demolishing the Isolation hospital and built the "Harbour Enterprise Park" (Part of which also involved landfill/reclaimation)

1995 (isolation hospital still standing)
http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,530507,724782,7,5

vs. 2005 (use Google for more recent)
http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,530507,724782,7,0

Iwannahurl

Unfortunately I can't see those OSI images so I'll take your word for it.

The OP seems to be under the impression that Mutton Island WWTW was upgraded "during the boom years". I can't recall that upgrade, though I do know that An Bord Pleanala gave clearance for such a development in 2007. That's still in the pipeline, as it were, and the "expansion" of the system is part of the current City Development Plan:

One element of the long term [waste water] strategy for Galway City and adjacent Galway County Council area is the provision of a new Galway East WWTW located in the general Oranmore/Athenry area. This facility will service undeveloped lands to the east including Ardaun and alleviate future capacity constraints on the existing network by allowing flows, which are currently treated at Mutton Island WWTW, to be diverted to the Galway East WWTW. This project is being carried out in collaboration with Galway County Council.

Emphasis added by me. That brings us back to the issue of original site selection and its consequent limitations, as recently highlighted, for example, in the Tuam Herald report I quoted earlier:

The City Council was accused of consistently failing to live up to its responsibility in important areas such as waste disposal and now waste water treatment and leaving the Co Council to clean up its mess.

County Council members were informed that the city's sewage treatment plan at Mutton Island was close to capacity and there was an urgent need for a new plant to be built in the county area if planned economic developments were not to be stopped in their tracks.

Fianna Fail Cllr Tomas Mannion stated bluntly that the Mutton Island treatment plant had been a "cop out" by the City Council and it was inevitable that the Co Council would have to step in and bail them out.

He added that the City Council had never lived up to its responsibilities as far as waste disposal, sludge and now waste water was concerned and it was time to recognise what was obvious to all “that one local authority was all Co Galway needed and that authority should be Galway Co Council."

Engineer Padraic Fogarty said the new plant was critical to achieving the development objectives for the region, adding that the economic slowdown provided the opportunity to get matters quickly to construction stage.

He warned that Mutton Island could only cope in the short-term but would not be up to meeting medium or long-term needs as the plant did not have the necessary capacity.

My understanding is that there are at least a few unhappy bunnies in Galway Co Co because their plans are somewhat stymied by uncertainty and lack of progress regarding the overall waste water issue. The "cop out" referred to by Cllr Mannion is the original decision to site the WWTP on Mutton Island, which some would regard as having been the easy way out at the time, eg no NIMBY backlash threatening Councillors' votes.

Here's a reference to such ongoing uncertainty, from the minutes of a committee meeting held in County Buildings in 2012:

The Department [of Environment] raised concerns in regard to the lack of capacity in the public sewerage scheme to serve future development in Bearna and the uncertainty in regard to the precise capacity (if any) which is to be allocated to Bearna from the upgrade of Mutton Island to 170,000PE. The proposal to provide temporary treatment systems in the interim can proceed only where discharge to a public system is a realistic option in the near future and a clear time schedule for delivery exists.

It seems that some County Councillors are also a bit vexed that sludge from Mutton Island is transported from the city for storage/dispersal in county areas, such as Tuam.

http://www.connachttribune.ie/breaking-news/38-archive-news/6629-residents-fury-at-plan-to-recycle-galway-city-sewage-in-tuam

bonzodog2

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Would you care to make a prediction in this thread that they are going to do exactly that, ie enlarge Mutton Island by adding some reclaimed land?

Of course the notion that the site could be/would have to be expanded with "a couple of hundred trucks full of rocks" again raises the basic question: why choose an island site to begin with?

I wouldn't dream of predicting what a local authority might decide to do in the future! Also, when I mentioned trucks full of rocks, I was just referring to the area of the site; possibly future capacity increase requirements might need bigger pipes, or maybe some other stuff, that as a non-municipal-sewage-engineer type person, I might have no knowledge of.

dubhthach

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Unfortunately I can't see those OSI images so I'll take your word for it.

Having walked out to Mutton Island at low tide in the mid 1990's (as many hundreds of people did) I can tell you that they did a good chunk of reclamation for the existing site. Likewise the Harbour company did a good chunk of reclamation after they demolished the Isolation hospital.

The only alternative site within the proximity would have been to build the plant on "The Swamp" which would never have flown with the residents of the Cladagh.

As for Galway County Council, why should the City Council care about their opinion. The two are seperate and legally equivalent organisations (both have "county status" in terms of Local Government). The city councils cares as much about the opinion of the county council as they care about Mayo County Council's opinion.

Of course Galway CoCo have over the years "piggy-backed" on the city. One only has to look at their speculative development just outside the city boundary in Parkmore. Why bother developing industry in country towns such as Tuam, Ballinasloe and Loughrea when they can use the City as a proxy and collect some nice commercial rates. Or in this case instead of building treatment plants for all their zoning activities in Oranmore and Bearna they piggied back on the City Council's waste treatment plant.

Thankfully Galway isn't Limerick where outdated boundaries and a predatory CoCo basically destroyed the city. (donut effect with flight to non-city suburbs, how american)

Iwannahurl

Robbo wrote: »

Looking back, it's hard to see how there was any legitimate opposition to the scheme.

It's also unthinkable that we would have been able to proceed without the scheme given the level of growth in the City and the likelihood that subsequent legislation would have entailed massive fines being accrued. Indeed, given that the Mutton Island plant was upgraded during the "boom years" to take into account the City's growth, it's hard to see how one of the alternatives would have been expanded as easily.

Construction was completed in May 2004 and the upgrade work approved by ABP in 2007.

The OP's one and only post in this thread, so far, claims that the Mutton Island WWTW was (relatively?) "easily" expanded during the "boom years".

I have found no evidence that such an upgrade actually took place. Perhaps the OP could break his self-imposed silence and provide a source for that assertion.

In the meantime, what I have found is that in 2006 Galway City Council sought permission for an upgrade to 170,000 PE. In 2007 An Bord Pleanala approved an upgrade in principle but placed a restriction on the scale of the project subject to a future EIA and regular environmental monitoring:

The biological loading on the proposed works shall not exceed a population equivalent of 115,000 as an average value or of 135,000 as a maximum or peak value, pending the approval of a higher loading which would be based on an environmental assessment set out in an Environmental Impact Statement.

A detailed ongoing monitoring programme shall be implemented to measure the respective quality of the effluent and of the receiving water in the vicinity of the outfall.

Ammonia monitoring shall be carried out on at least a three monthly basis along the migratory path of salmonid fish between Galway Bay and the mouth of the river Corrib. This monitoring shall be carried out at varying depths with a minimum of three samples at each sampling location.

An estimate of the population equivalent discharging to the WWTP at each year end shall be carried out by the Galway City Council and details of this estimate shall be made available for inspection at the offices of Galway City Council.

http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/EF2018.htm

In the oral hearing for the above application, Galway City Council specifically acknowledged that Mutton Island itself could not be extended, either with "a couple of hundred trucks full of rocks" or anything else:

Mr. Fogarty [Project Manager on the scheme] described the proposed development and stated that extending the boundaries of the site was considered, but deemed not be feasible, given the protected structure on the island and other environmental considerations. He said the upgrade of the plant was therefore limited to using the existing process tanks in a different configuration or with a different process.

After broadening the search, I eventually found a news report I vaguely recalled from a couple of years ago. The gist of the July 2012 Examiner article was that the IDA had bought a former Teagasc site in Athenry for €36 million with a view to developing it as a "Silicon Valley-style industrial campus". Unfortunately the limitations of the Mutton Island WWTW and the planning restrictions attached thereto meant that the IDA's plan was stalled. (Taxpayers did not lose out however: Teagasc used the proceeds to develop training and research facilities elsewhere in the country.)

The IDA's €36 million "Silicon Valley" was instead rented out for grazing sheep, generating an annual income of €17,000:

It appears the sale price was more than the IDA had bargained for. It told Teagasc it was in a competition to attract a major investor. And it believed the Athenry site was ideal, except for limits on the amount of waste water the local network could cope with. This proved a major hurdle. In 2008, after the sale was completed, the IDA found itself lobbying to rescue the potential for the site. It had drawn up a planning application and put an estimate on the amount of water firms would need to bring on to the site and discharge back into the system.

But separately, An Bord Pleanála put a restriction on the amount of water the Galway City plant at Mutton Island could take. Coupled with other developments around Galway, it meant there would be no public facility available to accept treated water from the campus.

The IDA wrote to the EPA in 2008 urging them to licence an increase to 170,000 PE, but all to no avail apparently.

I don't know where things stand with regard to current capacity, upgrade works and the results of environmental monitoring. However, it does look as if this issue is far from resolved.

Sheep may safely graze, but is Galway City Council's "highly constricted" WWTP mutton dressed as lamb?

dubhthach

Athenry is not connected to Mutton Island scheme, sounds like a red-herring to me. Here's an EPA report on Athenry treatment scheme from 2008

http://www.epa.ie/licences/lic_eDMS/090151b2802f932a.pdf

Back in 2011 Phil Hogan gave the go ahead for the new scheme in Athenry:
http://galwayindependent.com/20120511/news/116m-sewerage-system-for-athenry-S3909.html


Having work professionally in the IT business for 11 years it's highly doubtful that any such "Silicon Valley" scheme would have worked anyways. Amazon for example didn't even want to go to Athlone when IDA presented it to them (as a fait complete). It went so far that the IDA had to be called to heal as Amazon threatened to not setup in Ireland if they weren't allowed be based in Dublin.

Iwannahurl

dubhthach wrote: »

Athenry is not connected to Mutton Island scheme, sounds like a red-herring to me. Here's an EPA report on Athenry treatment scheme from 2008

http://www.epa.ie/licences/lic_eDMS/090151b2802f932a.pdf

Back in 2011 Phil Hogan gave the go ahead for the new scheme in Athenry:
http://galwayindependent.com/20120511/news/116m-sewerage-system-for-athenry-S3909.html


Having work professionally in the IT business for 11 years it's highly doubtful that any such "Silicon Valley" scheme would have worked anyways. Amazon for example didn't even want to go to Athlone when IDA presented it to them (as a fait complete). It went so far that the IDA had to be called to heal as Amazon threatened to not setup in Ireland if they weren't allowed be based in Dublin.

The bigger picture is the Galway East WWTP and Galway Main Drainage.

Iwannahurl

dubhthach wrote: »

Athenry is not connected to Mutton Island scheme, sounds like a red-herring to me.

Galway County Council Needs Assessment

The Galway East WWTW is a proposed works which will provide treatment for sewage from the east of Galway City and environs, Clarinbridge, Athenry and Oranmore.

It is proposed to provide a treatment plant of 90,000 P.E. capacity with holding and pumping facilities for each agglomeration. The treated effluent would be pumped to a dedicated outfall adjacent to the existing Mutton Island outfall in Galway Bay. Apart from the densely populated areas close to Galway City, the towns of Athenry, Clarinbridge and Oranmore urgently require this plant.

The next phase of the works upgrade at Athenry will only provide approximately 3,150 P.E. additional capacity.

Further studies will be required to determine whether or not the receiving water at Athenry, the River Clarin, has the assimilative capacity to deal with loadings beyond this threshold.

The proposed development of an IDA technology campus at Athenry will be dependent on having adequate sewerage infrastructure in place.

dubhthach

Read your quote again. It says nothing about "interconnection" with Mutton Island, or the city sewage scheme.

pumped to a dedicated outfall adjacent to the existing Mutton Island outfall in Galway Bay.

You only pump to an outfall after the waste has been treated.

In the scenario that the Plant was in Oranmore this means they would lay a outflow pipe in the bay out as far as Mutton island. There's a very simple reason for this one only has to look at a Bathymetric map of Galway bay. Here's a simplistic representation:



Here's a screenshot I just made:



Again why should Galway City Council give a rats-ass about the sewage treatment requirements of part of the County Council area?

Iwannahurl

dubhthach wrote: »

Read your quote again. It says nothing about "interconnection" with Mutton Island, or the city sewage scheme.

...

There's a very simple reason for this one only has to look at a Bathymetric map of Galway bay.

...

Again why should Galway City Council give a rats-ass about the sewage treatment requirements of part of the County Council area?

Oh dear.

I'm afraid looking at this issue in bathymetric terms gives a rather shallow perspective.

Do you think drainage and the natural environment respect current administrative boundaries? And in any case, what about regional, national and EU policy?

As I've already stated, the bigger picture in terms of strategic planning and infrastructure is the Galway Main Drainage Scheme, and within that the Galway East (proposed) and Mutton Island WWTPs.

Since you appear reluctant to take my word for it, or to look more closely at the relevant documentation, here's what the development plans of the two local authorities have to say on the subject of waste water and drainage, in the broader policy context:

Galway City Development Plan 2011-2017:

The Galway Main Drainage – Stage 3 project consists of three major elements:
• Maximising the treatment potential of the existing Mutton Island Wastewater Treatment Works (WWTW)
• Study of the existing drainage network within the city area.
• Long term strategy for Galway City and adjacent Galway County Council area including Oranmore, Clarinbridge and Barna.

Part of this study will include an examination and assessment of existing foul and surface water and storm drainage infrastructure of the area. It will identify future drainage and treatment needs with particular reference to areas being considered for zoning as development lands and long term strategic planning for the region.

One element of the long term strategy for Galway City and adjacent Galway County Council area is the provision of a new Galway East WWTW located in the general Oranmore/Athenry area. This facility will service undeveloped lands to the east including Ardaun and alleviate future capacity constraints on the existing network by allowing flows, which are currently treated at Mutton Island WWTW, to be diverted to the Galway East WWTW.

This project is being carried out in collaboration with Galway County Council.

Galway County Development Plan 2009-2015:

The pursuit of the East Galway Main Drainage Scheme, Phase 3 is one of the strategic priorities of this Plan. It is considered a key piece of infrastructure to unlock the development potential of the strategic development corridors identified in the county spatial strategy and County Settlement Strategy.

Furthermore, when operational, they would allow for the expansion of the western and eastern satellite settlements such as Bearna, Ardaun, Oranmore, Athenry, Clarinbridge and Kilcolgan to meet their development potential and contribute to the achievement of critical mass in the greater Galway Gateway. The introduction of new licensing regulations in 2007 will require the up-grading of existing waste water treatment schemes.

Objective IS2: Seek to accelerate progress on the delivery of the East Galway Main Drainage Scheme, in particular Phase 3 as a key piece of strategic infrastructure, in conjunction with the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Galway City Council.

dubhthach

One element of the long term strategy for Galway City and adjacent Galway County Council area is the provision of a new Galway East WWTW located in the general Oranmore/Athenry area. This facility will service undeveloped lands to the east including Ardaun and alleviate future capacity constraints on the existing network by allowing flows, which are currently treated at Mutton Island WWTW, to be diverted to the Galway East WWTW.

This project is being carried out in collaboration with Galway County Council.

In other words Oranmore (population circa 5,000 in 2011) , somewhere which should never have been serviced from Mutton Island anyways, and which has seen unsustainable development without provision of services as the County Council who wish to be parasitic off the city and collect as much Commercial rates as possible.

The population within the city boundary is 75,529 (2011) up about 50% from 1991. There is enough land within the city boundary for the city to easy grow another 50%-75% in the next 20 years. I very much doubt that they are planning on shipping sewage from Renmore etc. to any proposed WWTP, instead it's a case of the County Council taking responsibility for what actually is produced in it's own local authority area.

If you believe the Connacht Turbine the funding for upgrading Mutton Island was approved late last year:
http://www.connachttribune.ie/galway-news/item/1573-mutton-island-upgrade-to-double-capacity

Iwannahurl

dubhthach wrote: »

In other words Oranmore (population circa 5,000 in 2011) , somewhere which should never have been serviced from Mutton Island anyways, and which has seen unsustainable development without provision of services as the County Council who wish to be parasitic off the city and collect as much Commercial rates as possible.

Galway City Council knew all that before selecting the "highly constrained" Mutton Island site.

dubhthach wrote: »

The population within the city boundary is 75,529 (2011) up about 50% from 1991. There is enough land within the city boundary for the city to easy grow another 50%-75% in the next 20 years. I very much doubt that they are planning on shipping sewage from Renmore etc. to any proposed WWTP, instead it's a case of the County Council taking responsibility for what actually is produced in it's own local authority area.

And the truckloads of sludge leaving Mutton Island for county areas every day represents Galway City Council taking responsibility for what exactly?

Naux

dubhthach wrote: »

Again why should Galway City Council give a rats-ass about the sewage treatment requirements of part of the County Council area?

Yikes that thinking is just nonsense(for the tax payer)

You may well be right in that this may well be the attitude of the City Council but it sure illustrates why we should amalgamate(with redundancies) as many councils as we can. We have a ridiculous amount of councils(and politicians) for a country of our size and population.

dubhthach

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Galway City Council knew all that before selecting the "highly constrained" Mutton Island site.








And the truckloads of sludge leaving Mutton Island for county areas every day represents Galway City Council taking responsibility for what exactly?

So constrained that it can be upgraded to have a capacity equal to City + county population combined for under €10million?

As for the sludge the disposal of which was put up for tender which was won by the specific private company. If they are in breach of EPA guidelines and the law then the County Council should prosecute them. They have a legal department after all, but then things such as actual enforcement has gone down over last 2-3 years. They've never seem to have had a problem with farmers spreading pig crap on their lands which hasn't undergone any treatment. Last I heard the sludge was now going to Waterford for "processing".

Of course if you did anaerobic digestion you'd end up producing methane which could be burnt to produce electricity (ala Natural Gas).

Has Mutton Island been a benefit to the city, I'd say yes. You no longer see turds floating around on Grattan Beach that's for sure! Let alone the site of raw-sewage flowing into the Corrib from the old outflow pipes.

Iwannahurl

dubhthach wrote: »

Has Mutton Island been a benefit to the city, I'd say yes. You no longer see turds floating around on Grattan Beach that's for sure! Let alone the site of raw-sewage flowing into the Corrib from the old outflow pipes.

Waste water treatment is of benefit. I don't recall hearing reports that SGB ever said otherwise.

The question (still) at issue is whether "highly constrained" Mutton Island was the best site, as per the OP's thread title.

Another question for the OP's consideration, and yours: has Galway City Council been carrying out the relevant environmental monitoring and reporting, as ordered by An Bord Pleanala in 2007?

dubhthach

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Waste water treatment is of benefit. I don't recall hearing reports that SGB ever said otherwise.

The question (still) at issue is whether "highly constrained" Mutton Island was the best site, as per the OP's thread title.

Another question for the OP's consideration, and yours: has Galway City Council been carrying out the relevant environmental monitoring and reporting, as ordered by An Bord Pleanala in 2007?

What alternative sites were there? I can only think of two:

1. Isolation hospital -- owned by Harbour Company, since demolished/rebuilt
2. The Swamp -- would never have flown with residents, let alone the loss of playing fields.

As for your question on the EPA I would imagine you would need to ask someone who actually works in the City Council, that or put in a Freedom of Information request that's what the facility is there for.

Or you could put a question into your local councillor, I'd ask mine but I doubt the councillors in Sandymount have any idea what's going on in Rathmines let alone Salthill.

Iwannahurl

Thanks to the OP for putting Mutton Island WWTP firmly back on the agenda again.

The available documentation paints a very interesting picture.

From EPA licensing inspector's report February 2010:

According to the 2006 census, Galway City has a population of approximately 72,000 persons. An assessment carried out in 2007 determined that the current loading on the WWTP is now approximately 130,000 PE. It is predicted that, by 2013, the loading on the plant will rise to 165,500 PE, a figure that includes both domestic and industrial wastewaters, with industrial wastewaters predicted to contribute 24,000 PE to this figure. Consequently, Galway City Council proposes to carry out upgrade works at the Mutton Island plant to increase the treatment capacity to 170,000 PE. It has been determined that there is spare capacity in the existing plant units which, when combined with certain plant modifications, will enable the plants capacity to be increased in a short time frame without the use of any additional land on the Island.

From Galway City Council's 2012 Annual Environmental Report re Mutton Island WWTP:

The average organic loading ... expressed as Population Equivalent (PE) was 145,968. Given the WWTP has been designed for a PE loading of 91,600, this represents an average overload of 59%.

Iwannahurl

An example of why Galway City Council and Galway County Council ought to give more than "a rat's ass" about each other's policies and projects.

From Galway Independent 26th March 2014:

The pumping station recently installed by Galway County Council in the Bearna area at a cost of €6,500,000 is only operating at ten per cent of its capacity because, [local Fianna Fail election candidate MacDara Hosty] said, Galway City Council have not completed proposed works on the Mutton Island facility that would allow the Bearna pumping station to operate to full capacity.

http://www.galwayindependent.com/20140326/politics/bearnana-forbacha-and-buailebeag-forgotten-by-council-hosty-S34380.html

dubhthach

Iwannahurl wrote: »

An example of why Galway City Council and Galway County Council ought to give more than "a rat's ass" about each other's policies and projects.

From Galway Independent 26th March 2014:

So a Fianna Fáil candidate is complaining that more rampant suburbanisation can't occur in Cois Fharraige as planning won't be given until the pumping plant operate at a higher percentage. This is a bad thing why?

The actions of Galway County Council have led to widespread angliscation/language shift due to the influx of commuters into that very area. If anything there shouldn't be any more development allowed there except for local needs. Is there an actual demand in the housing market for more suburbanisation in Bearna when there's plenty of development land within the city boundary? Or is it a case of a FF looking out for his developer friends who want to get land rezoned?

The more interesting thing in that article is the continued neglect of the council of the general area, no community center etc. Why didn't the council get off their arse and build a proper sewage treatment system for eastern Cois Fharraige instead of piggybacking off the city's system.

gordongekko

Never knew everyone was so passionate about ****e

stampydmonkey

gordongekko wrote: »

Never knew everyone was so passionate about ****e

One man's ****e is another man's gold!

Iwannahurl

gordongekko wrote: »

Never knew everyone was so passionate about ****e

The OP's interest seems to have waned after just one post.

dubhthach wrote: »

So a Fianna Fáil candidate is complaining that more rampant suburbanisation can't occur in Cois Fharraige as planning won't be given until the pumping plant operate at a higher percentage. This is a bad thing why?

...

Why didn't the council get off their arse and build a proper sewage treatment system for eastern Cois Fharraige instead of piggybacking off the city's system.

Your awareness of, and attitude towards, regional planning in the context of EU law is illustrated by this little nugget:

dubhthach wrote: »

why should Galway City Council give a rats-ass about the sewage treatment requirements of part of the County Council area?

On the one hand you appear to be arguing for coordinated planning, yet on the other you believe that one local authority needn't give a "rat's ass" for what a neighbouring (and closely connected) Council is doing.

The reality, regardless of whether you (or wannabe FF Councillors) know or care about it, is that EU, national, regional and local policies and strategies all have a bearing. In fact, EU legislation is key.

The EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) is built on the principle of river basin management. River Basin Management Plans, required under the WFD, are "the key tool for the strategic planning of the range of actions required by the different actors to meet the objectives of the Directive". Galway City and County are in the Western River Basin District (RBD).

According to the Western RBD management plan, waste-water discharge points have to be selected to minimise impact on the environment. Sewage treatment plants can't be located, constructed and operated willy-nilly without reference to regional objectives and the WFD.

The WFD legislation also refers to "agglomerations" as distinct from administrative boundaries. Defined agglomerations require a waste water discharge licence, and the EPA's Galway Agglomeration encompasses Galway City, Parkmore, Oranmore and Barna.

The "very compact" Mutton Island WWTP is just one (small, and possibly malfunctioning) cog in a regional waste water management system.

If Mutton Island WWTP is deficient in any way, then there may be consequences for the entire agglomeration or even parts of the RBD. What seems to be happening is that the capacity limitations of Galway City's Mutton Island WWTP are causing strategic and operational problems for Galway County Council, hence the concerns expressed by outgoing Councillors, local election candidates and others (such as the IDA): http://www.epa.ie/licences/lic_eDMS/090151b2802097a5.pdf

Iwannahurl

Robbo wrote: »

...there's no smell from the plant, the water quality in the Bay has improved beyond belief...

... the plant was upgraded during the "boom years" to take into account the City's growth ...

...

I acknowledge the possibility that this will "inspire" a piece in one of the local rags so knock yourselves out you plagiarising, press release recycling hacks.

It seems the local rags and others are indeed taking an interest.

Unfortunately it turns out that, contrary to the OP's assertion, the Mutton Island plant was never upgraded, during the "boom years" or otherwise. Not only that, but it seems that some people believe the water quality in the bay is not "beyond belief" in the way one might hope.

With regard to the necessary upgrade, which was sought not long after the plant opened in 2004, a report by the Local Government Audit Service confirmed in 2012 that the Mutton Island treatment plant had not been upgraded, and also queried the procurement contract arrangements:

Since the Mutton Island Waste Water facility was officially opened in April 2004, no tender has been awarded to date in relation to the ongoing operational and maintenance contract, which is currently costing the Council approximately €2.7 million per annum. Instead the original mechanical and electrical works contractor was given an interim contract to operate and maintain the plant, pending the appointment of a private service provider. This interim contract applies to date.

To achieve cost savings and to ensure the Council complies with procurement regulations, a contract needs to be put in place.

The City Manager's response was:

[Galway City Council] has been actively seeking to award a contract for the operation and maintenance of the Mutton Island Waste Water Treatment Plant for some time. While the formal procurement process commenced in May 2004 with the posting of an advertisement seeking expressions of interest from suitably qualified private service providers to operate and maintain the plant for a 20 year period, the process was delayed for reasons that were not envisaged and were outside the control of Galway City Council.

In the first instance, an operational assessment of the plant identified the need for an upgrade to meet the increasing demands of the city population. It was decided to include a design and build upgrade of the plant within the operation and maintenance contract, resulting in a necessary change to the procurement process and consequent delay. The second delay in 2008 was a consequence of the introduction of Discharge Licensing Regulations. The regulations required the submission of an application for a Waste Water Discharge License to the EPA, which was not granted until April 2010.

Fast forward to the present.

In today's City Tribune ("Mutton Island sewage leak claims are denied -- residents and fishermen insist treatment plant spewing out waste", page 4) Dara Bradley reports that "a local election candidate and residents have claimed that Mutton Island Wastewater Treatment facility is full to capacity and is at bursting point, with raw sewage spilling out into the bay made famous the world over through song."

Song rather than pong, one hopes.

Galway City Council -- just in the nick of time for them, perhaps -- has referred all queries to Irish Water, which the Council says now has responsibility for Mutton Island.

Irish Water has denied the claims about sewage spills, and says that the plant "consistently meets the wastewater quality standards laid down in the Discharge Licence issued by the EPA to Galway City Council, and for which Irish Water is now responsible."

As mentioned earlier in 2012 the average loading on the plant, expressed as Population Equivalent (PE) was 145,968. Given that Mutton Island was designed for a PE loading of 91,600, this represents an average overload of 59% in 2012. The peak loading was actually >330,000, far in excess of the maximum limit imposed by ABP.

Apparently that's OK by the EPA, even though an upgrade to 170,000 PE has not even been started yet.

Not only that, but in the confusing and crooked web (or webs?) of Irish environmental regulation, planning enforcement and pollution control, it is apparently normal for the EPA to issue waste water discharge licences without any (binding) reference to planning conditions imposed by Bord Pleanala.

Also as stated earlier, Bord Pleanala imposed a much lower average capacity limit in 2007, with a condition that an increase would have to be subject to further approval by the Board, based on another Environmental Impact Assessment.

Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me (one of the 28 thankers of the OP perhaps?) can point me in the right direction, but ttbomk no such planning approval has been issued and no such EIA exists. I'm very much open to correction on that, as non-compliance with regard to such matters would be a rather serious issue. It could cause quite a stink, in fact, and not just locally.