Sir, -In reference to the letter from Dr Catherine Swift (August 23rd) and the comment of Dr Pat Wallace (The Irish Times, August 14th) it would be helpful if local opinion in the Tullamore and Durrow area was consulted as to what the people of the area wanted in relation to the Durrow historic site. Both An Taisce and the Heritage Council have objected to the proposed country club development at Durrow but have not at any time met with community interests in the Tullamore/ Durrow area to discuss their proposals for the site or their objections.
The situation at Durrow is complicated and the following would appear to be the facts:
Only the High Cross and three early Christian slabs are in the guardianship of Duchas.
There is an existing legal dispute about the ownership of the cemetery where the High Cross is located. This has been the subject of legal proceedings by Duchas for some five years now without, as yet, reaching the Circuit Court.
The people of this area claim a right of access to the site, not just on "Pattern Day" (the anniversary of the death of St Colmcille) on June 9th but on every day of the year and this public access as of right has been denied since 1991.
About 1994, a sum of £750,000 was allocated from EDRF funds for improvements to the site. This figure was later reduced to £400,000. It was withdrawn by Duchas in 1999 due to the title difficulties.
The proposed developers of the 400-acre Durrow Demesne property (to which about another 400 acres is to be added) have promised the following:
(a) To transfer to Duchas the "ownership" of the disputed cemetery and holy well; to provide for necessary car parking and tourism facilities at the site; to agree to public access to the religious and archaeological site together with the Esker Riada and the entire 800-acre estate when completed.
(b) to develop a golf course, country club and a housing development meeting at all times the requirements of Duchas and Offaly County Council as part of the planning conditions.
The proposal meets with the overwhelming support of the people of the Tullamore and Durrow district as it will provide undisputed public ownership of the religious site with public access. It will create employment opportunities and local development in an area which until three years ago had no hotel and until this year had no permanent tourist office.
One would agree with Dr Wallace that it would be appropriate that the State should acquire the property for public benefit. However, in the light of the track record of Duchas this is an extremely remote possibility. The support of local people for the development proposal is based on a careful assessment of the threats and opportunities it presents and it must also be said it is a response to the frustration of dealing with Duchas in relation to preservation proposals for this site since the early 1970s.
It is good that the proposed development controversy has brought about an appreciation of how significant the Durrow archaeological site is in the Irish context and it is unfortunate that public monies were not made available to acquire this historic area in 1991. At that time the State could have bought the house and some 20 acres for £300,000.
In a democracy, and particularly in the context of planning, the public good must surely mean asking the public what is good for them. In the Tullamore and Durrow area we have yet to hear from An Taisce, the Heritage Council, Duchas or the National Museum as to what the people of this area would like. Curiously, the only person who has consulted local people about the site and has made a pitch for their support is the developer, John Maher of Radleigh Developments Ltd. - Yours, etc.,
Michael Byrne, Convent View, Tullamore, Co Offaly.