5         Cultural Heritage

5.1   Introduction and Methodology

This chapter is drawn from a report prepared by Irish Archaeology Consultancy Ltd (IACL 2001) and assesses the impacts on the cultural heritage for the alternative route options.

The assessment involved a detailed study of the archaeological, historical and cultural background of the study area.  Sources of information, organisations, and individuals consulted are presented in Tables 5.1 and 5.2 in Appendix 5.  From the documentary sources, an initial list of sites and areas of archaeological and Cultural Heritage potential were compiled.  Consultations with statutory and voluntary bodies highlighted further potential sites such as famine graves, hanging fields and mass rocks.  The public consultations also drew attention to concerns over known archaeological sites and areas, which illustrated the local importance of many of the recorded sites.

As part of this assessment a low altitude aerial survey was undertaken (26/07/2001) to identify potential new sites and confirm the position of existing recorded monuments.  This was carried out instead of a field inspection survey as this was not possible due to a number of factors including; site access restrictions (due to Foot & Mouth disease and the IFA dispute with the NRA), the size of the scheme and time constraints.

The aerial survey succeeded in identifying 50 potential archaeological sites and establishing the location of a number of the larger visible monuments.

All sites were given individual constraint numbers referring to the cultural classifications

·       Archaeological Heritage – Sites listed on the Sites and Monuments Record.  These sites are split into 2 categories:

NIS – Nationally Important Sites: includes sites owned by the Minister, sites under preservation orders, and sites on the Register of Historic Monuments (these sites are also all Recorded Monuments).  There are three within the study area, potentially affected by the routes:

NIS119 – Franciscan Abbey at Kilcrea (guardianship of the State)

NIS120 – Graveyard at Kilcrea (guardianship of the State)

NIS058 – Ecclesiastical Enclosure at Ballineadig (listed on Register of Historic Monuments)

AH – Sites listed on the Sites and Monuments Record

·       Built Heritage – Architectural or Post medieval structures not listed in the Record of Monuments & Places.  It also includes additional architectural sites from the Cork Development Plan, and non-statutory protected post-medieval sites surveyed by the Cork Archaeological Survey.  Sites are split into two categories.

CDP – Sites included within Cork Development Plan

BH – Other built heritage sites, (included on Sites and Monuments Record)

·       AS: Aerial Photographs – Sites identified through aerial photographs

·       AAP: Areas of Archaeological Potential –Areas of archaeological potential are areas identified through cartographical and topographical analysis – areas of wetland or marsh, river banks, high altitude plateaux etc. which are likely to contain upstanding or sub-surface sites.

·       LH: Sites identified through consultation with Local Historian.  Precise location of these sites has not been verified, and hence are not mapped

A number of sites were identified from submissions received as part of the Public Consultation.  These sites either referred to sites already identified and listed within various publications, or could not be verified.

The impact on each site, and hence on each route section, was determined using the significance criteria presented below.  Although all recorded archaeological monuments are legally protected by the State, a distinction has been drawn between sites of national importance (such as Kilcrea Abbey and Graveyard) and sites listed only on the Record of Monuments and Places (such as a ringfort or fulacht fiadh), as the predicted impact would be deemed more severe on a monument in guardianship of the state or under a preservation order.

For the purpose of setting the area within its wider archaeological landscape, a study area corridor of 600m was imposed around each route option, and the additional links.

 

In assessing impacts, the following significance criteria have been used:

Impact

Significance Criteria

Severe adverse impact

Damage or land-take to internationally (World Heritage Sites) or nationally protected sites or areas (monuments in the ownership or guardianship of the State, registered monuments, structures covered under preservation orders or temporary preservation orders).  Land-take from a burial site.

Major adverse impact

Land take or significant change to the setting or visual amenity of a recorded monument.  Loss of building listed on the Architectural Inventory (or CDP) or significant impact on its setting.  Land-take from a previously unidentified upstanding monument. 

Moderate adverse impact

Moderate change to the setting or visual amenity of a Recorded Monument or building listed on the Architectural Inventory (or CDP).  Significant impact on areas of high archaeological potential, including potential sub-surface sites identified through aerial surveys (Potential sub-surface sites are those identified through cropmarks or soil irregularities from aerial survey).  Loss of post-medieval buildings or sites not listed on the CDP, or significant impact on their setting or visual amenity. 

Minor adverse impact

Minor impact on setting or visual amenity of a recorded monument or building listed on the Architectural Inventory (or CDP) – no intrusive view created and no impact on integrity.  Minor impact on areas of high archaeological potential or moderate change to the setting or visual amenity of post-medieval buildings not listed on the CDP.  Land take within close proximity to potential sites identified through aerial survey.

No impact

No effect on designated sites, listed structures or areas of high archaeological potential.

Minor beneficial impact

Minor improvement in the setting or visual amenity of a recorded monument or building listed on the Architectural Inventory (or CDP).

Moderate beneficial impact

Moderate improvement in the setting of a recorded monument or building listed on the Architectural Inventory (or CDP).  Perceptible improvement in the setting of other nationally or internationally protected sites or areas.

 

5.2   Existing situation

The study area lies in rich tracts of park and fertile agricultural land, interspersed with valleys and uplands and fed by numerous rivers and smaller streams.  This region once known as the Barony of Muskerry, lies immediately west of Cork City.  Soil quality of this agricultural land, ideal for both tillage and pasture combined with the abundance of water, has attracted settlement throughout prehistoric and historic times.  As can be seen from Figure 5.1, the proposed routes run through a particularly rich and complex cultural landscape, containing sites which represent over 6000 years of human occupation from the Late Neolithic period to the Industrial period of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, including the medieval urban settlements of Macroom and Ballyvourney.  In all, there are 201 archaeological monuments and 84 built heritage sites within the study corridors, recorded by the Archaeological Survey of Cork.  Details of the sites and monuments that occur within the route corridors are presented in sections 5.2.1 – 5.2.5.  Background information on the Cultural Heritage of the region is presented in Appendix 5.

 

5.2.1 Prehistoric Period

The majority of prehistoric monuments and sites within the study corridors are from the Bronze Age, and comprise the following:

Fulacht Fiadh

58 recorded fulacht fiadh (Bronze Age cooking sites), lie within the study corridors.  These sites survive in the landscape as low mounds of charcoal-enriched soil mixed with an abundance of heat-shattered stones.  Often they have been levelled by ploughing activity and appear as burnt spreads in the landscape.  They are usually horseshoe shaped and located in low-lying areas near a water source, often in clusters.  Radiocarbon dates for this monument type have generally placed them in the Bronze Age (Brindley and Lanting, 1990).  An additional feature of these cooking sites was the presence of huts close by.  An oval hut associated with a fulacht fiadh (CO058-033) measuring 5.50m x 4m was uncovered at Gortnatubbrid, south of Ballyvourney, in 1951.

Stone Circles

In Late Neolithic / Early Bronze Age (3000-1500BC) times, multiple stone circles constructed for ritualistic or ceremonial functions formed a characteristic group in the megalithic tradition (Ó’Nualláin 1984).  A distinctive style of stone circle occurs in the southwest of Ireland, unlike any style elsewhere in either Ireland or Britain.  It consists of an uneven number of freestanding stones, spaced evenly apart to form a ring.  The number can range from five to nineteen.  The stones were symmetrically placed so that one, known as the axial stone, consistently occurred on the southwest section of the perimeter.  O’ Brien (1993) has suggested a Middle/Late Bronze Age date (1500-800BC) for their use.  There are 2 recorded examples within the study area in the townlands of Carrigaphooca (AH 176) and Kilboultragh (AH 030).

Stone Rows

Stone rows similarly date to the Bronze Age and were built for ritual, ceremonial or commemorative purposes.  Several examples also appear to have solar or lunar orientations.  They consist of three or more standing stones positioned closely together in a relatively straight line and are orientated on a northeast / southwest axis.  There is one recorded example within the study area in the townland of Bealick (AH 079).

Standing Stones

A familiar feature of the rural landscape is the standing stone.  These monuments are very difficult to date, each example having the potential to belong to a number of different periods, including recent times.  It is likely that those with a long northeast / southwest axis date to the Bronze Age having close affinity in orientation to similarly dated stone rows and pairs.  They appear to have been erected for a variety of reasons.  Certain stones mark prehistoric burials while others may have had a commemorative or ritual role, or served as boundary markers or position posts along ancient routeways (Buckley & Sweetman, 1991).  Within the study corridors there are 22 recorded single examples and a further two examples of paired standing stones.

 

5.2.2 Early Medieval Period

Ringforts

During the turbulent early medieval period, roughly circular defensive enclosures known as ringforts were constructed to protect farmsteads.  They were enclosed by an earthen bank and exterior ditch, and ranged from 25m to 50m in diameter.  The smaller sized and single banked type (univallate) was more than likely home to the lower ranks of society while larger examples with more than one bank (bivallate/trivallate) housed the more powerful kings and lords.  There are 24 recorded ringforts existing within the study corridors distributed mainly on higher grounds.

Cashels

Farmsteads were also enclosed by huge drystone walls as an alternative to the excavated defences of ringforts.  These have the same circular arrangement as ringforts but the walls can be quite substantial, with examples occurring where the height reaches up to 3m and the thickness up to 6m across.  There are three recorded cashels existing within the study corridors, in Ballymakeery (AH 008), Gortnalicky (AH 026) and Coolnacaheragh (AH 169).

Souterrains

Souterrains, or artificial underground passages are frequently found within ringforts or cashels and occasionally occur in ecclesiastical enclosures.  They consist of a concealed narrow entrance at ground level leading into a passage that opens into a single chamber or series of chambers.  They probably functioned as places of refuge or as storage facilities.  There are 16 recorded examples within the proposed route options.

Ecclesiastical Sites

Within the study area there is historical and archaeological evidence to indicate a flourishing ecclesiastical element.  The landscape from the 6th century onwards was dominated by scattered rural monasteries often surrounded by large circular or oval enclosures.  Monastic communities were not attached to all religious sites, some of the smaller sites may have consisted of little more than a church and graveyard.  Three ecclesiastical enclosures are recorded within the study corridors in the townlands of Aglish (AH 147), Ballineadig (AH 058) and Kilgobnet (AH 057).  The latter of these translates as ‘Cill Ghobnatan – St. Gobnait’s church’ (O’ Donoghue 1986, 224).  The Ballineadig enclosure is known locally as ‘An Teampall’ and is possibly associated with St. Finbarr.

Ballyvourney village and environs are associated with St. Gobnait.  Traditionally this saint is linked with Abbán whom we can assign with reasonable certainty to the 6th century (Ó hÉaluighthe, 1952).  Tradition also suggests that both saints had religious foundations in close proximity to each other.  Cill Abbán was located on lower ground in the townland of Sean-chluain, close to the river Sullane, while Gobnait’s residence stood approximately one quarter of a mile away on a hill with good command of the valley eastwards towards Macroom.

Bullaun Stones

Bullaun stones, whose exact purpose remains unclear, are generally found in association with religious sites.  The Gaelic word translates as a bowl or round hollow in a stone.  There are six recorded examples within the study corridors, three associated with ecclesiastical enclosures, two with a penitential station and one with a holy well.

Cross Slab

One example of a cross slab exists in the townland of Killeen (AH 004).  These are upright cross carved pillar stones and are a feature of religious sites.  They appear to date from the 9th and 10th centuries.

 

5.2.3 Anglo-Norman and Medieval Period

Tower Houses

Within the study corridors there are recorded examples existing of only Later Norman tower houses in the townlands of Mashanaglass (AH 095) and Carrigaphooca (AH 173), there are no examples of the typical earlier moated sites.  The Anglo-Normans also built military ringworks, however these are difficult to identify because they are so similar in surface morphology to Early Christian ringforts.  If the distribution pattern of moated sites is examined it soon becomes apparent that there are several surprising gaps in areas that were known to have been extensively settled by the Anglo Normans.  A major gap exists in south and east Cork.  It is possible that some of the ringforts in the study area might well be this type of monument.

Ecclesiastical Sites

Monasticism continued to flourish in the medieval period but taking a new form and organisation as several major Continental monastic orders were introduced during the 12th century.  Ballyvourney, which saw its first settlement in the early medieval period with the arrival of St. Gobnait, and the foundation of a nunnery, contains the ruins of a 12th century Romanesque church which according to tradition stands on the site of St. Gobnait’s convent.  During the medieval period Ballyvourney developed as a small rural village and is now recognised as a place of pilgrimage.

The 13th century saw the arrival of a mendicant order of Franciscan Friars.  This order was vowed to poverty and dedicated to preaching to the general public.  The friary at Kilcrea (AH 120) within the blue route option belongs to this tradition.  Located in the rich valley of the Bride River, it was founded in 1465 by Cormac Laidir MacCarthaigh, Lord of Muskerry, for the Franciscan Observants.  To the west stand the ruins of Kilcrea Castle which was also constructed by the friary’s founder.

 

5.2.4 Post-Medieval Period

Country Houses and Demesnes

The late 18th and early 19th centuries saw the development of large landed estates in the area.  The protestant settlers of the previous century changed the fiefdoms of the Anglo-Normans into working estates akin to those in England, and numerous country houses and demesnes were constructed.  These estates were more than often located in areas of better land and within the study area this is reflected along the Valley of the River Lee and its tributaries.  Forty country houses exist in various states of preservation within the study area.

Burial Grounds and Graveyards

The Macroom area was very badly affected during the famine years.  In response to this J.J. Herley advertised in the ‘Cork Examiner’ seeking “a space of ground not exceeding one acre…to be used as a graveyard” as all other burial grounds had no available space due to the high rate of death.  This resulted in the establishment of the paupers’ graveyard at Carrigastyra, Clondrohid, outside the study corridors.  Other famine graves have been noted by local historians, three of which may fall within the study area (AH 195,  LH 006 & LH 003).

There are 11 burial grounds or graveyards recorded, some of which are still in occasional use.

Lime Kilns

Lime was an important commodity of this area and attesting to this are numerous lime kilns within the study corridors in varying states of preservation.  Lime was extracted from the native limestone and used primarily as an agricultural fertiliser and also as a base in lime wash, a type of paint.

 

5.2.5 Other Sites and Monuments

Holy Wells

There are seven holy wells within the route corridors.

Milestones

Thirteen milestones are still in situ along the local roads.

 

5.3   Assessment of Effects: Construction and Operation

Full lists of sites affected are presented in Appendix 5.  Summary information is presented below.

Green Route

G01 (Nodes 1 to 2)

Moderate Adverse Impact

The route would exert a moderate impact on one Area of Archaeological Potential (AAP 7).

G/02 (Nodes 2 to 3)

Moderate Adverse Impact

The route would exert a moderate impact on one Area of Archaeological Potential (AAP 7).

G/03 (Nodes 3 to 4)

Major Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on one recorded monument, a Cashel at Ballymakeery (AH008).  Other sites that would be impacted (6) are listed in Appendix 5.

G/04 & G/04a (Nodes 4 to 6)

Major Adverse Impact

The route would exert a major impact on two recorded monuments (AH020 & AH022) and also on two sites identified from aerial photographs (AS018 & AS041).  Other sites that would be impacted (10) are listed in Appendix 5, three of which would be affected by the slip roads/overbridges/underbridges leading to the main carriageway.

G/05 (Nodes 6 to 9)

Moderate Adverse Impact

The route would exert a moderate impact on one Area of Archaeological Potential (AAP 10), and a minor impact on one built heritage site (BH077).  Two recorded monuments (AH037 & AH038) would be moderately affected by the slip roads/overbridges/underbridges leading to the main carriageway.

G/06 (Nodes 9 to 14)

Severe/Major Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on one recorded monument (NIS058), and one site identified from aerial photographs (AS011).  The slip roads/overbridges/underbridges would also have a major impact on one site, a battleground (LH012), identified through private consultation.  Other sites that would be impacted (12) are listed in Appendix 5.

G/07 (Nodes 14 to 16)

Major Adverse Impact

The route would exert a major impact on 2 recorded monuments (AH063 & AH064).  Other sites that would be impacted (8 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

Yellow Route

Y/01 (Nodes 1 to 2)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The route would have a moderate impact on one Area of Archaeological Potential (AAP 7).  The realignment of the existing N22, on the approach to the roundabout would have a major impact on a Holy Well (AH001) in Slieveragh.

Y/02 (Nodes 2 to 3)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The route would have a moderate impact on one Area of Archaeological Potential  (AAP 7) only.

Y/03 (Nodes 3 to 3a)

Major Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on 3 recorded monuments (AH162, AH163 & AH165).  Other sites that would be impacted (5 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

Y/04 (Nodes 3a to 5)

Severe Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on one recorded monument (AH195).  Other sites that would be impacted (7 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

Y/05 & Y/05a (Nodes 5 to 6)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a moderate impact on 2 recorded monuments (AH117 & AH031).  For further details, see Appendix 5.

Y/06 (Nodes 6 to 7)

Major Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on one built heritage site listed in the Cork Development Plan (CDP022).  Other sites that would be impacted (3 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

Y/06a (Nodes 7 to 7a)

Major Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on two recorded monuments (AH082 and AH080).  Other sites that would be impacted (6 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

Y/07 (Nodes 7a to 8)

Major Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on one recorded monument (AH179).  Other sites that would be impacted (6 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

Y/08 (Nodes 8 to 11)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a moderate impact on one area of potential (AAP19).  Other sites that would be impacted (4 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

Y/09 (Nodes 11 to 12)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a moderate  impact on one built heritage site (BH058) and one area of potential (AAP20).  Other sites that would be impacted (6 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

Y/10 (Nodes 12 to 15)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a moderate impact on one area of potential (AAP18), and a minor impact on one built heritage site (BH018).

Y/11 (Nodes 15 to 16)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a moderate impact on two recorded monuments (AH064 & AH065), one built heritage site (BH020) and one area of potential (AAP18). The route would have a minor impact on one other site (BH083).  Further detail is presented in Appendix 5.

Red Route

R/01 (Nodes 7 to 7b)

Major Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on one recorded monument (AH082) and one built heritage site listed on the Cork Development Plan (CDP024).  Other sites that would be impacted (5 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

R/02 (Nodes 7b to 13)

Major Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on four recorded monuments (AH084, AH124, AH142 & AH143).  The slip roads/overbridges/underbridges would also have a major impact on one site, a fulacht fiadh (AH196) in Killinadrish.  Other sites that would be impacted (15 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

R/03 (Nodes 13 to 14)

Major Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on one recorded monument (AH147), and one aerial survey site (AS041).  Other sites that would be impacted (15 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

Blue Route

B/01 (Nodes 7b to 10)

Major Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on one recorded monument (AH203), and four sites identified from aerial photographs (AS020, AS050, AS051 & AS049).  Other sites that would be impacted (14 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

B/02 (Nodes 10 to 11)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The slip roads/overbridges/underbridges would have a major impact on one recorded monument (AH111).  The main carriageway would also exert a moderate impact on one built heritage site (BH036).  Further details are presented in Appendix 5.

B/03 (Nodes 11 to 12a)

Major Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a major impact on two recorded monuments (NIS119 & NIS120), and one site identified from aerial photographs (AS013).  Other sites that would be impacted (10 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

B/04 (Nodes 12a to 15)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a moderate impact on one area of potential (AAP18).

Link Routes

L/02 (Nodes 4 to 5)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a moderate impact on four recorded monuments (AH020, AH022, AH024 & AH069) and a minor impact on one recorded monument (AH067).  Further details are listed in Appendix 5

L/03 (Nodes 9 to 13)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a moderate impact on one recorded monument (AH211) and on an area of archaeological potential (AAP12).  The slip roads/overbridges/underbridges would also have a minor impact on one recorded monument (AH205).  Further details are listed in Appendix 5.

L/04 (Nodes 8 to 10)

Moderate Adverse Impact.

The route would exert a moderate impact on one site identified from aerial photographs (AS016) and on an area of archaeological potential (AAP19).  Other sites that would be impacted (3 further sites) are listed in Appendix 5.

L/06 (Nodes 12 to 12a)

No Impact.

 

5.4   Mitigation Proposals

It is considered that the following summary mitigation would lessen the impact of the road on the Cultural Heritage resource of the study area.  Mitigation strategies for individual sites will be assessed in detail at detail design stage through consultation with Dúchas and the NRA Project Archaeologist.

General mitigation would include a full field inspection of the entire route, to determine the exact location, extent and condition of all recorded monuments, built heritage sites, potential archaeological monuments, local history sites and areas of archaeological potential.

River surveys of the river crossings are recommended to ascertain the likelihood of potential archaeological sites or ancient fording points along the river-banks.  This may include underwater surveys of the larger rivers, such as the River Lee and River Laney, and may also involve topographical, geophysical and metal detecting surveys.

All areas of archaeological potential that exist within the route corridor should be inspected and stripped of topsoil, in the presence of a qualified archaeologist, in advance of construction work.  A programme of strategic test excavation to establish nature and extent of known or suspected archaeological deposits is recommended.  The locations of the excavations would be determined in consultation with the NRA project archaeologist.

A programme of archaeological monitoring of all construction works should be undertaken along the entire length of the selected route under licence to Dúchas – The Heritage Service, with provision for full excavation of any further archaeological features and deposits which may be exposed.

It is also recommended that, once the exact extent of the built heritage sites are known, a programme of landscaping be undertaken, where appropriate, to lessen the visual and noise impact on those sites close to the route.

 

5.5   Conclusion

5.5.1 West of Macroom

West of Macroom, the Green/Link/Yellow route is preferred over the Green or Yellow routes as fewer sites would sustain a major or moderate impact.  The Green/Link/Yellow route exerts a major adverse impact on one recorded monuments, coming within 8m of the site.  It would have a moderate adverse impact on the setting or possible associated archaeology of eight recorded monuments, including Kilgobnet ecclesiastical enclosure (which contains three monuments) and Mount Massey Country House, one aerial survey site and three areas of archaeological potential.  Minor adverse impacts would be imposed on one recorded monument and on one aerial survey site.  The Green route would exert a major adverse impact on 3 Recorded monuments, and 2 potential archaeological sites, a moderate impact on 10 sites or areas of potential, and a minor impact on six sites.  The Yellow route would have a major impact on five Recorded Monuments, a moderate impact on four areas of archaeological potential and six other sites.  It would also have a minor impact on four sites, one a recorded monument, and three identified through the aerial survey.

To the west of Macroom, the routes in order of preference are as follows:

·       Green/Link/Yellow route– Preferred

·       Green route

·       Yellow route – Least Preferred

 

5.5.2 East of Macroom

Between Macroom and Ballincollig, the Green route and the Green/Link/Red route exert a similar impact on the cultural heritage of the area, although the Green /Link/Red route is marginally preferred.  The selection of the Green/Link/Red route as the preferred route would depend on suitable mitigation measures designed to minimise impact on 4 Recorded monuments, in particular Ovens Caves which are known to contain prehistoric material (Nodes 14-16).  There would be a total of four major, twenty moderate and ten minor adverse impacts on the archaeological resources along this route option.  This route would be preferable over the Green route, as although the Green route would have an adverse impact on fewer sites, it would include two additional major impacts, one of which would be an ecclesiastical enclosure at Ballineadig (NIS058).  In total this route would adversely impact on 25 sites and 4 areas of archaeological potential.  Of these, five would be major, 17 would be moderate, and 7 would be minor.

The Green/Link/Red route is preferred over the Green, Yellow and Blue routes.  This is due in part to the impact from the Green and Yellow route on built heritage sites, and the Blue route on Kilcrea Abbey and graveyard.  The route is also preferred over the Red route.  Although fewer monuments would be directly impacted by this route, the number of monuments and potential monuments which occur within 150m of the route, outweighs those of the other routes between Macroom and Ballincollig.  This suggests a dense archaeological landscape within the red route, and a greater potential for sub-surface archaeological sites.

To the east of Macroom, the routes in order of preference are as follows:

·       Green/Link/Red route – Preferred

·       Green route

·       Yellow/Link6/Blue route

·       Yellow route

·       Red route

·       Yellow/Link4/Blue route

·       Blue route – Least preferred.

 

Back to Contents