The Taoiseach, Mr Ahern's belief that there is no better alternative than running the M3 motorway through the Tara-Skryne valley is contradicted by a report compiled by consultants for the National Roads Authority, The Irish Times has confirmed.
This 2000 report examined a range of alternative routes for the proposed motorway under several headings, including archaeology. It shows that a route to the east of Skryne would be "the least intrusive" with "the least impact" archaeologically.
Such a route would also be "the least visually intrusive in terms of the Hill of Tara" because much of the motorway would be screened by the Hill of Skryne. "The route does not come particularly close to, or cross through, any of the archaeological features in the area."
The report went on: "There appears to be no need for mitigation in the case of this route. A field study would be required to check for above ground monuments and features, but . . . most of the archaeology in this area is well defined and recognisable in the field."
By contrast, it said routing the motorway through the Tara-Skryne valley - as currently proposed - would have a "profound" effect on the Hill of Tara and on its outlying monuments and would have "severe implications from an archaeological perspective".
The report also cautioned that it was "unlikely that cost-effective proposals to meet the mitigation requirements could be supported for this route in this area". (Since then, 42 archaeological sites have been identified along the 15 km route through the valley).
"Route B1 passes through the most sensitive area of Tara from an archaeological view and B3/B4 comes closest to the largest number of archaeological monuments/sites," the report said. Yet one of the B routes (B2) became the "preferred route" for the motorway.
The report, compiled by consultants Halcrow Barry in advance of the decision to opt for the B2 route, noted that the north-eastern end of it "follows the same proposed line as that of B1, and its route and river crossings carry the same archaeological implications".
While there appeared to be no severe impact on built heritage, it showed that the P1 route east of Skryne is the least affected, while the B routes were the most affected because of their impact on the setting of Bellinter Bridge and possible archaeological finds.
Route P1 also emerged as the preferred option in terms of its impact on flora and fauna, after mitigation measures were taken. "This route does not impact on any ecological sites," the report said. By contrast, the B route affected the highest number of sites.
Mr Brendan Magee, of the Meath Roads Action Group, which has been monitoring the M3 since its inception, said he was "astonished" to discover that, in none of the criteria against which it was assessed, the route eventually chosen was not recommended.
In terms of archaeology, it recommended the P route. This route also scored on built heritage, flora and fauna, landscape and visual effects, air quality and noise. As a result, Mr Magee said the action group was at a loss to know why the NRA had not opted for it. The claim by the NRA - repeated in the Dáil last week by the Minister for Transport, Mr Cullen, - that the route chosen for the M3 had been "evaluated as the best choice or equal best under 14 out of 18 assessment headings" did not, in Mr Magee's view, "stand up".
Mr Magee also described as "blatantly untrue" a claim made by the NRA's chairman, Mr Peter Malone, that "the route of the motorway is twice as far from Tara as the existing N3 Dublin to Navan road". Even a cursory look at the map would show that this was not the case.
"I am prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt that it is a mistake on their part, but the same assertion . . . was repeated at the NRA presentation to Meath County Council and it has also been repeated by politicians.
"I have written to the chairman of the NRA, to whom the statement was attributed to in print, asking for it to be retracted, but to no avail," Mr Magee said.
The NRA has said the P route, running east of Skryne, which would have been less damaging to the archaeological landscape around Tara, had "serious drawbacks in terms of its ability to serve traffic demand" as well as impacts on communities and the environment.
