New report claims crash barrier is ‘illegal’

FOR some, Clare County Council’s erection of a steel “motorway” barrier at the bridge in O’Briensbridge is not a big issue. For others, however, like the local community group, it is an issue that runs  deep, one they claim is undermining their efforts to attract more tourists to the picturesque village.

The group recently commissioned a local planning expert to produce a report, which alleges the provision of the barrier is “illegal” because it interferes with the bridge, which is a national monument, as defined by the National Monuments Acts 1930 to 2004. This status confers various levels of protection on monuments, including a provision for prior written consent of the Environment Minister for any works at or in proximity to monuments.
However, Hugh McGrath, local area engineer with Clare County Council noted, “Clare County Council was obliged to act on a matter of serious concern for the safety of the public. Our solution was determined following careful consideration of all the various and valid inputs, including that of the local community group.
“The barrier, which has been installed on the ramp leading toward the bridge and not on the bridge itself, is a normal (N2) containment type structure. From the council’s experience, it is likely that it will continue to be struck regularly until such time as HGVs can be prevented from using the bridge. In considering the most appropriate material to use, the council has to take account of the material type, flexibility, durability and retained integrity, with safety the paramount consideration, as well as heritage, aesthetics and cost. While timber-clad barriers have been used in particular locations, most often in woodland or mountain scenic routes, it was not deemed suitable in this instance. The cost of such a barrier would be typically over three times that of steel,” he added.
Group chairman Mick Murtagh queried if safety is the council’s main concern, why has the group’s campaigns for traffic lights and pedestrian access on the bridge and to have heavy goods vehicles re-routed failed over the past 10 years.
The commissioned report quotes sections of the 2009 to 2015 South Clare Local Area Plan, which seeks to ensure the “effective protection, conservation and enhancement of monuments”, while claiming the council can only consider developments where there would be no adverse impacts upon the archaeological or historical importance of the monument.
O’Briensbridge was one of four Architectural Conservation Areas identified  in the 2005 Clare County Development Plan. It is considered the overall quality of these areas are of sufficient importance to require special treatment in terms of development proposals that may affect protected and unprotected structures.
The community group claims the council has failed in its duty to protect this structure. It wants the council to take out the barrier and provide more appropriate materials in resolving this problem.
Mr Murtagh said he cannot understand how the council can stand over the “demolition of part of a national monument in order to erect a steel motorway crash barrier”.
“The council’s own conservation officer spells it out clearly on the council website but doesn’t appear to take his own medicine. In Architectural Conservation Areas he states even small, insignificant details, such as the design in a single windowsill, can affect the character of an ACA and requires planning permission.
“It appears the demolition of part of a national monument and replacement with a steel crash barrier is fine,” he claims.
Mr McGrath noted however that “Clare County Council’s heritage officer, Risteard Ua Cróinín, was not in favour of a timber-based solution on aesthetic grounds, a view that the council agreed with and there was also a real concern about the long-term durability of timber.”