Sir, - Gerard Murphy, the project engineer for the Dublin Port Tunnel, finds it difficult to understand how I dispute the level of consultation and local democracy. In his detailed letter (September 9th) he fails to explain that before December 1995, resident/community groups adversely affected both along and adjacent to the A6 route were neither consulted about, nor informed of, this planned project. The first indication the majority of affected residents had that it was going ahead was in December 1995.
At this stage, all the major decisions such as route alignment, location of portals, ventilation method and the tunnelling method had been made final. In the 1991/1992 feasibility study for the Port Access and Eastern Relief Route. six routes from Whitehall to the port were examined, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 and A6. Two of these, A4 and A6, were put forward for further discussion. In 1993, the project - renamed as Northern Port Access Route identified A6 as the chosen route. Eventually, when the glossy brochures were made public, many Marino houses were omitted.
Mr Murphy is well aware of this. This, to me, is not consultation with the local people. If he is sincere about listening to the people on the ground, will he agree to an independent chairperson with everything on the table for discussion, including the route of the tunnel? Yours, etc.,
Charlemont, Griffith Avenue, Dublin 9.