Sir, - Kevin Myers rightly congratulates Garret Fitzgerald for stimulating the very interesting debate on Luas (Saturday August 3rd). It seems to me that to resolve transport congestion in Dublin the Luas project, if mastered and implemented to good effect, would greatly help the city.
I fully agree with Mr Myers that an efficient interchange with the DART would enhance the project's chances of success, but I am not convinced that a central underground rail section would be needed for public transport. Rather, to make Luas successful, serious thought should be given to a central underground network of roads - perhaps two routes, one running north south, the other running east west - to be developed in conjunction with Luas.
Brussels, which is of a scale closer to Dublin's, has a good system of fast undercity roads. Paris has one or two and is thinking of building more. These "excess" or "overflow" roads would alleviate congestion by getting cars and trucks through the city faster. Their structure, cost and function would suit a low density, car friendly, city like Dublin. They would greatly benefit the pedestrian, who would still have to run the gauntlet of fast and furious vehicle traffic throughout central Dublin if Luas went underground. Finally, Luas would not have to enter into battle with the car in central Dublin, a battle that, in the light of culture and experience, it would surely lose.
To judge by the correspondence and articles in your pages, the Luas issue is likely to become a battle between those firmly in favour and those absolutely opposed; the football match "victory defeat" syndrome. Your paper appears to have taken sides on the matter. As a writer Mr Myers should know that compromise is not a bad thing in situations of conflicting views. The French may well build great bridges, as he observes; but they also like to remind themselves that "the best is often the enemy of the good".
The Luas project would seem to be at least a good project. And like all projects it needs to be worked on. So rather than slam it or be ruled by it, let's work to understand it and shape it to our needs. Or at least some of them. For it would be a disaster if talk and procrastination led us to the familiar situation of having no project at all. - Yours, etc.,
Western Europe Editor,
Economist Intelligence Unit,
London.