Latest news with #KeithRollo
Irish Times
19-06-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
Surveyor disputes ‘extraordinary' claim that wind farm could devalue nearby property by 44%
A chartered surveyor has disputed another expert's 'extraordinary' view that noise nuisance from a Co Wexford wind farm could devalue a nearby four-bedroom property by up to €120,000 or 44 per cent. Tom Corr said the appropriate devaluation figure for the €400,000 Hill House property was €25,000 or 7 per cent. The current lack of housing supply means purchasers must compromise and might mean no drop in value due to noise nuisance from a turbine at Ballyduff Windfarm at Kilcomb, near Enniscorthy, he added. A valuation expert hired on behalf of Keith Rollo and Margaret Webster, joint owners of Hill House, has assessed noise nuisance could mean a €120,000 or 44 per cent devaluation. READ MORE However, Mr Corr, on behalf of the wind farm operator, described that level of devaluation as 'extraordinary'. In reaching his findings, he took research and comparators into account and placed himself in the shoes of a potential purchaser who he believed would not go into 'forensic' detail about the court's judgment that wind turbine noise caused a nuisance in relation to Hill House and another nearby property. The fact wind turbines have become bigger in size may be relevant, he said. It would be difficult now to buy a home similar to Hill House for €400,000, he added. He also considered his 6 to 7 per cent devaluation figure for a nearby property owned by Ross Shorten and Joan Carty, of Grange Road, Rathfarnham, Dublin, until they sold it in August 2021 for €295,000, was accurate. He was influenced by evidence from the purchaser of their property, who had said she could tolerate the wind turbine noise. His view was the market value of that property in 2021 and 2022, taking the wind farm into account, was respectively €318,000 and €360,000. Mr Corr gave evidence on Thursdayin a continuing hearing to assess damages for Mr Rollo, Ms Webster, Mr Shorten and Ms Carty, over noise nuisance from one of the two wind turbines at the Ballyduff wind farm. All four plaintiffs sued wind farm operator Meenacloghspar (Wind) Limited, which has a registered address at Stillorgan Road, Donnybrook, Dublin 4, seeking orders restraining or restricting its operations and damages for nuisance. Represented by John Rogers, instructed by solicitors Noonan Linehan Carroll Coffey, they claimed their sleep was disrupted, their mental health suffered and their properties were devalued due to noise, vibration and shadow flicker. The claims were denied. In her landmark March 2024 judgment on the cases, the first private nuisance claim for wind turbine noise to run here, the judge held the noise levels amounted to 'unreasonable interference'. Last month, she said she would grant an injunction restricting the turbine's operation. She adjourned the case to this week to hear arguments on the level of damages that should be awarded to the plaintiffs for the nuisance impact. The claim includes a sum of about €1 million to enable Mr Rollo, who is living in rented accommodation since March 2021 after separating from Ms Webster, to buy or build a home similar to Hill House. Now aged 51, Mr Rollo claims the noise nuisance caused a breakdown of his mental health, relationship and chance to have a family. The evidence concluded on Thursday. The judge will hear legal submissions next month.
Irish Times
18-06-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
Man who suffered noise nuisance from Wexford wind farm seeks €1m damages for a new home
A man who claims he had to leave his four-bedroom home in Co Wexford after wind turbine noise led to his mental health and relationship breaking down has asked the High Court to award him about €1 million damages to buy or build a similar home. Keith Rollo has spent €42,900 on rental accommodation since leaving his former home at Ballyduff, jointly owned with his ex-partner Margaret Webster, about four years ago, Ms Justice Emily Egan heard. The judge on Wednesday began a hearing to assess damages for Mr Rollo and Ms Webster following her judgment that wind turbine noise (WTN) generated at certain times of the day from the two-turbine Ballyduff wind farm at Kilcomb, near Enniscorthy, constituted a nuisance to them. The nearest turbine is 369m from their Hill House property. The judge found WTN also constituted a nuisance to Ross Shorten and Joan Carty, of Grange Road, Rathfarnham, Dublin 14, who had owned a property at Ballyduff, about 359m from the wind farm but sold it in 2021, three years after commencing their proceedings. READ MORE All four plaintiffs sued the wind farm operator Meenacloghspar (Wind) Limited, of Stillorgan Road, Donnybrook, Dublin 4, seeking orders restraining or restricting its operations and damages for nuisance. Represented by John Rogers SC, instructed by solicitors Noonan Linehan Carroll Coffey, they claimed that, due to noise, vibration and shadow flicker, their sleep was disrupted, their overall mental health suffered and their properties were devalued. The claims were denied. The cases ran for 51 days with estimated costs at about €3 million and were the first private nuisance claims from wind turbine noise to run here. In her landmark decision last March, the judge held the noise levels amounted to 'unreasonable interference'. Last month, she said she would grant an injunction placing restrictions on the operation of the turbine and adjourned a hearing to assess damages for nuisance impact. In evidence on Wednesday, Mr Rollo said he was aged 41 when he and Ms Webster bought Hill House, he is now aged 51 living in rented accommodation. Ms Webster, aged 49, remains in Hill House with an outstanding mortgage of €140,000. Mr Rollo, whom the judge found suffered a depressive disorder due to the noise impact, said he had lost his home and relationship and chance to have a family. Hill House was 'a special place' and he wanted his new home to be like it. He disagreed with David Whelan SC, for the wind farm, that the damages sought would mean he and Ms Webster would get two properties, saying each would have 'a home'. He was open to Ms Webster buying out his share of Hill House. He agreed, despite the injunction to abate WTN, his separation meant he could not move back into Hill House. The noise caused that, he said. The judge was told valuation experts for the sides agreed Hill House had an open market valuation about €400,000 but disagreed about the valuation impact of the wind farm. A loss-adjustment expert for the plaintiffs said, based on current building and other costs, he believed in excess of €1 million would be required to reinstate Mr Rollo in a property similar to Hill House. Ross Shorten told the judge he and Ms Carthy had in 2021 sold their property near Ballyduff, for €295,000, plus €10,000 for the contents. They acquired it about 2003 with a view to relocating from Dublin, and it was never their full-time residence. They spent about €500,000 purchasing and carrying out works to it and their loss of value claim was for €195,000. He agreed with Mr Whelan they had not provided a valuation for the property in 2003 and previously put the property on the market in 2016 for €260,000. He considered a €318,000 valuation for the property in 2021, based on there being no wind farm nuisance, as 'very low'. The hearing continues on Thursday.
The Journal
27-05-2025
- General
- The Journal
High Court orders turbine to shut down at certain windspeeds overnight due to sleep disturbance
THE HIGH COURT has ordered that a wind turbine in Co Wexford be shut down at night for certain windspeeds due to its potential to disturb sleep. The turbine will also have to operate on a lower mode during quiet waking hours at certain windspeeds. Last year, the High Court ruled that one of two wind turbines at Ballyduff Windfarm at Kilcomb, near Enniscorthy, Co Wexford, amounted to an 'unreasonable interference' with the enjoyment of two couples' properties. This action was taken by Margret Webster and her partner Keith Rollo, whose home is close to the wind farm that has been operational since 2017. A second action was taken by Ross Shorten and Joan Carty, who owned another property close to the turbines but sold it after commencing their proceedings in 2018. The wind farm is operated by Meenacloghspar (Wind) Limited. The cases were the first private nuisance claims from wind turbine noise to run in Ireland or the UK, the judge said. At the conclusion of module 1 of the trial last year, the High Court deemed that 'one of the two turbines caused a nuisance to the plaintiffs during night hours and quiet waking hours'. The judge, Ms. Justice Emily Egan, then directed the parties involves to 'attempt to agree appropriate mitigation measures to abate the nuisance in advance of module 2'. The Court noted that the defendant trialled just one potential mitigation measure – the operation of the turbine in a lower power mode. This reduces the rotational speed of the turbine blades and marginally reduces the wind turbine noise. The plaintiffs said this lower power mode did not mitigate the noise nuisance and sought an order to shutdown the turbine during 'sensitive', quiet waking hours. The judge agreed that the lower power mode trialled by the defendant 'does not ameliorate the nuisance'. However, the defendant's claimed that the wind turbine noise did not create a noise nuisance even in its 'full' power mode and that no mitigation is required. Advertisement The defendant also sought to bring forth new evidence to persuade the Court to review the findings made last year after module 1 of the trial. It was contended by the defendant that the new evidence showed that the wind turbine noise was lower than the limit currently fixed in Irish planning guidance. The judge rejected the data provided by the defendant and said it did not provides a 'scientifically robust guidance on what level and nature of wind turbine noise causes unacceptable interference with residential amenity'. She added that the new evidence 'does not comprise a useful or complete baseline assessment for the purposes of crafting abatement measures'. 'Even if admitted, the defendant's new evidence would not substantially impact or alter my finding on liability', said the judge, who declined to admit the evidence or revisit last year's findings on liability. The judge remarked on the benefits of renewable energy but added that the plaintiffs are 'entitled to an injunctive remedy'. The Court ordered that the It seems that noise levels therefore had to be reduced by a 'clearly noticeable degree'. She remarked that five decibel reduction would be an 'easily noticeable noise differential'. The defendant was ordered to implement this noise reduction and to operate on a lower mode 'during quiet waking hours at certain wind speeds and wind directions'. The judge added however that this would not be an acceptable solution during night hours. The judge said this is partly because she is 'not satisfied' that the predicted noise level reductions by lowering the power mode 'can be reliably and consistently achieved at night'. She also noted that 'constant sudden changes to the wind turbine noise at night would have a jarring effect, disturb sleep and thus cause ongoing nuisance'. As a result, the judge ordered the shutdown of the turbine at night for 'windspeeds of 5m/s to 11 m/s inclusive in those wind directions associated with high AM values and thump AM'. AM (Amplitude Modulation) relates to the variance of wind turbine noise, which can cause more annoyance than constant, stable noise of a similar level. A 'high AM value' is a noticeable variation in the sound, often described as a 'swish' or a 'thump'. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
