By Gordon Kingston, Heritage Action
Incredible news from the World Heritage Site at Brú na Bóinne. The National Roads Authority has released plans for its new bypass around Slane, County Meath, to be constructed on the eastern side of the town, a mere 500m – 30 seconds drive – from the buffer-zone around the world-famous monuments.
While it is difficult to argue with the given scenario, regarding the deficiency of existing roads for traffic volume carried, as set out in the Environmental Impact Statement summary, or with the history of accidents at points along the route, one must certainly question this selection of by-pass corridor.
How could a route that roughly shaves the outskirts off Newgrange and Knowth, the national symbols, have been chosen above other alternatives – on the far side of the town, for example?
According to the EIS summary, section 4.0;
“The assessment of several alternative Routes considered the following factors:
� Engineering suitability
� Traffic Safety
� Traffic Impact
� Archaeology and Cultural Heritage
� Ecology
� Landscape and Visual impact
� Agricultural Land-Use
� Geology and Hydrology
� Economics
Following detailed investigations an eastern bypass was considered the favourable Option.”
The order may be misleading. How were these factors weighted? I wonder. A quick look at the following map;
shows that the route chosen is the shortest, straightest option possible. To go west of the town would have meant taking a much longer, more circuitous trail, over, around and then back to meet the N2 again. Is it Economics that weighs heaviest, then? Followed perhaps by Engineering Suitability? Less ground to cover and less compulsory purchase orders. Was there really so much money used to prop up our banks, that a few quid couldn’t have been kept back to protect our Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, not to mention our national dignity, by financing the trouble of a road on the western side? Even if it was and I use this word reluctantly, ‘just’ something less uncommon, but the landscape around Brú na Bóinne. Come on.
How could they possibly dress that up for public view?
According, again, to the EIS summary, Section 8.0; “The proposed route alignment seeks to hide the road within cuttings and topographic adjustments in the landscape, coupled with extensive roadside planting to screen and green the corridor. However the design also seeks to minimise the scale of these cuttings and regrading – this is both efficient design and also lessens the potential intervention and “footprint” of the road corridor. In general screen planting and woodland planting will mitigate much of the landscape and visual impact of the road corridor itself. Where there is potential for exposed rock to present a long term scar in the otherwise pastoral landscape natural colonisation of these areas will in due course cover these potentially obtrusive features.”
That’s just great so, lads. Let nature sort out the scars after you’ve finished. The footprint, the awkward “44 archaeological and cultural heritage constraints within 500m of the route” (Section 10.0) and the un-sortable, the three sites where “the potential impact is considered potentially significant”. Slap a road in there.
Who gives a damn anyway?
Submissions, as set out in Section 13.0, can be made to an Bórd Pleanála. The relevant bypass publications are here;
http://www.meath.ie/LocalAuthorities/Roads/MajorRoadsProjects/N2SlaneBypass/SlaneBypassPublications/
Watch this space.
The Heritage Journal 
11 comments
Comments feed for this article
22/01/2010 at 13:10
Pink Zoe Realm
Madness & as some one who worked in Construction, you are taught to keep things simple & un Complicated PLUS & it is a BIG PLUS cause MINIMAL DISTURBANCE to Wild Life & Local human Life, this as you already know does neither, I dont know what is Taught in Ireland on construction but what you have shown here & befor, I dont recognise any of it.
23/01/2010 at 16:20
SlaneMan
I think you need to look at this more carefully. The land to the West is much higher and any road on that side would be a) much longer and b) a huge blot on the elevated landscape.
The proposed route is a .5k from the *edge* of the BNB buffer zone. The bypass will be a couple of KM away from BNB. In fact, the existing M1 bridge (which is much bigger than the bypass bridge) is actually closer to BNB.
The existing 600 year old bridge really should be a protected structure and is in a beautiful location. Instead is a deathtrap as trucks and 1000s of cars cross it every day – 22 have died so far.
The protected buildings in the village are under threat from the contest rumbling of trucks through the crossroads. There was a multiple car pileup outside the four Georgian houses late last year and it was a miracle that nobody died.
The village of Slane is a Heritage village and the bypass will benefit village both from an environmental and safety point of view.
23/01/2010 at 20:20
heritageaction
“I think you need to look at this more carefully.”
I get where you’re coming from. I don’t doubt the need for a bypass, merely the positioning of the same. Is it your concern that it won’t get the go-ahead if its proposed location is anywhere else except beside Brú na Bóinne?
24/01/2010 at 21:31
SlaneMan
I am glad that you recognize the need for the bypass. Too many people have died on the existing bridge in Slane. Unlike the M3 situation there is no argument about the clear and urgent need for a bypass. This is agreed by all who have a stake in the Boyne valley.
Are you familiar with the local landscape?
Newgrange will be over 3 km from the bypass and the road will actually be quite difficult to see when driving along the roads of the beautiful Boyne valley. Any alternative route to the West would be over much higher ground and would be a very ugly scar on the landscape especially when seen by the thousands of tourists who approach Newgrange from the south.
Aside from the obvious safety benefits, Slane itself is a heritage village, and its environment will be improved dramatically by the removal of 1000s of HGVs and cars. See http://www.slanetourism.com/gpage.html for more information on this outstanding example of an 18th century estate village.
The route selection process has actually been going on for number years and all groups who want to protect the Boyne valley and BNB have been involved. Indeed, An Taisce have commented that the chosen route is the least offensive route. A lot of the recent media attention has focused on Newgrange but as mentioned above, Newgrange will be a considerable distance away from the bypass.
24/01/2010 at 23:00
SlaneMan
heritageaction asked
“Is it your concern that it won’t get the go-ahead if its proposed location is anywhere else except beside Brú na Bóinne?”
No – as mentioned above, any Western route would actually have a far worse effect on the local landscape. This is easy to see when you approach Slane/Newgrange from the south as the land to the West of the village is much higher.
My major concern is how best to stop people dying on the existing bridge.
The route selection process has taken years. Any further time spent revisiting the route will only go back over the exact same issues. The net effect will be to delay the time when people stop being killed.
A Google search yielded this article from those who will be most affected by this bypass.
http://www.bypassslane.com/BSCResponse.html
25/01/2010 at 13:51
Ken Duffy
thanks for your reasonable and meassured writting. Im already seeing hysterics being written about it, much like was written about Tara. Like that its actually going over the hill.
I do see the need for a better road, although i hate big roads, and we have to understand that you cant build anything in meath without disturbing some heritage site.
but exagerated claims which are already being spouted, that theyre going to knock down newgrange are going to do more damage to any campaign to reroute the thing.
25/01/2010 at 14:37
heritageaction
I’m very sorry. I can see that this is an issue that you have very strong feelings about and, unless I’m reading incorrectly between the lines, one that you’ve put a lot of hard work into. However, I’m not really sure that, after stating that I understand the need for a bypass, I should be answering an argument that can be excarnated to:
“Accept this route, or you’ll have blood on your hands.”
I apologise, again, for the simplification, but that’s the message that I’m getting. The following, notwithstanding that, are a number of points which may clarify our own position.
1. The existence of a buffer zone does not imply that anything goes, or should go on, immediately outside it.
2. Your problem with a putative western route doesn’t seem to be, based on your reply, in its workability, but in its aesthetic impact. You must appreciate how we might look at the EIS summary – with reference to ‘concealing’ the effects of the eastern option, and phrases such as “screen planting and woodland planting” and “natural colonisation” – and consequently wonder why the western option, despite its more elevated position, should necessarily be “a huge blot on the landscape”, or “have a far worse effect on the local landscape”.
3. It is my understanding that a HGV ban, sanctioned by the council and presumably fought for by yourselves, has not been implemented. Surely this would ease the danger – “the net effect will be to delay the time when people stop being killed” – that you are so worried about until this route issue is addressed? If I had to guess, I would assume that the County Manager was relying on the bypass to take the responsibility off his hands.
I’ve left the link to your website, but removed, for the sake of brevity, the subsequent text. Anyone that wishes to read it can do so.
25/01/2010 at 15:13
SlaneMan
1. How big is an acceptable buffer zone? 3.5 km seems pretty big to me especially if lives will be saved. The M1 and its associated retail development is probably 4km from Newgrange. Are you telling me that it is ok for that development but we can’t have a bypass to save lives?
2. Your words “Accept this route, or you’ll have blood on your hands.” are not the way I would put it. The reality, which you may not like, is that a lot of time and effort has *already* gone into selecting the least damaging route and the conclusions seem obvious and reasonable.
3. I chose to live here because of the outstanding natural beauty of the Boyne valley and Newgrange. I absolutely guarantee you that a Western route would do far worse damage to the landscape. Such a Western route would have to go over or skirt the historic hill of Slane which can be seen for miles. This is like someone proposing that the M3 be rerouted over the hill of Tara. If this is proposed then I will object to it myself.
4. The HGV ban was politics; Councillors voted for it knowing that it is impractical. For such a ban to work the 1000s of trucks would have to get diverted through other villages such as Duleek . Note that Duleek is actually closer to Newgrange than Slane.
I can understand the initial reaction from those who feel strongly about our culture given the way some in the media have chosen to present this issue. All I ask is that people carefully investigate the facts and the realities on the ground before taking actions that will further delay the time when our village is made safe.
25/01/2010 at 16:32
heritageaction
Thanks Slaneman. I can’t argue with what you’ve said in that last paragraph.
25/01/2010 at 23:19
Bendis
Although I do not like to see the destruction of the countryside and roads built close to sensitive areas I have come to the conclusion that it is pointless arguing.
The people living in the area are right to want a safe solution as quickly as possible.
No amount of arguing about the environment or ancient sites will override this.
I wish that other options were available.
I’ve pretty much given up as far as the environment goes. I don’t see much hope. Ancient sites have no value in our modern world.
Perhaps it’s time to let things be. Who knows maybe it’ll work itself out.
02/02/2010 at 02:52
Kevin Brady
Just to further some of the points made by Slaneman,a western by pass although preferable would bring other historical sites into the equation,knowing the area,as a local,to bring a western bypass,which could be routed between the Hill of Slane and the existing large quarry at castleparks would mean routing it thru the grounds of slane castle,meaning 50 mtr from the front door and another 50 mtrs from St Erc,s hermitage the opposite side of a road.
To move further west would now bring into the equation the walled demense of Beauparc hse and a deeper river valley which is heavily wooded as it is too steep for agricultural use and a route thru here would bein the line of the already mentioned quarry.
Moving a little further west brings the obstacles of the Dollardstown statue,Dollardstown hse,a railway line and bridge, a football field and an even steeper,heavily wooded river valley south of the boyne and now north of the boyne we have again the walled estate of Stackallen HSE and from there to again link up with the N2 you would again be beset with the old cemetery at gernonstown,difficult geography and topography and be left with a 12-15 mile by pass thru difficult terrain.
To conclude,the proposed route of the bypass is the most viable route and the people of slane,I have no doubt will fight to ensure the safety of newgrange and bru na boinne while attaining a safer living envoirement
Thanks for the chance to give my opinion
Kevin