I MUST respond to the numerous misapprehensions in today's letters regarding the recent traffic jam on the A80.
Unlike many of the most vociferous opponents of the so-called Kelvin Valley route for the completion of the M80, who I understand have only moved into the area in very recent years, I am a long-term resident of the area. I lived in Kilsyth as a child over 50 years ago, and moved back into the area 30 years ago, so I think I can fairly claim to a degree of local knowledge.
Frankly, I do not recognise the ''beautiful Kelvin Valley'', so often referred to - at least in reference to the proposed motorway route, part of which consists of former industrial sites, with the remainder either bog or very marginal-quality farmland.
With reference to Mrs Anne Fairley's comments on the A74 upgrade, only a small stretch is in fact on-line, and it is in very open countryside, and not threaded between built-up areas, as would be an on-line upgrade of the A80. A much more valid comparison would be the on-line upgrade of the A1 between Peterborough and Alconbury where, despite carrying considerably less traffic than the A80, delays are the norm.
Regarding Mr Dave Holladay's comments, I am well aware of the existence of the railway, and have been an enthusiastic supporter of the expansion of rail services for over 30 years, and still believe that railways are by far the best means of transport in an urban area or between centres of major population.
Given the rundown of rail services over the last 40 years this is not, however, the case in most of Scotland, and is frankly irrelevant to the A80 situation. There is no way that current or even expanded rail services could cope with the 70,000 daily journeys on the A80, much of which is freight traffic which, failing the existence of a railway siding to every shop, supermarket, and factory in the country, would still have to move by road at some stage of its journey, with consequent transfer costs.
For Mr Holladay's information, despite much local lobbying, there are no rail services from Cumbernauld to Stirling or indeed anywhere to the north or east. As for his comments on the M90, I can only conclude that he has obviously not travelled to Edinburgh on this road between 7 and 9 on any weekday morning.
Alan J Sneddon,
Chairman,
Campaign for M80 Bypass,
5 Gainburn Crescent,
Condorrat, Cumbernauld.
June 1.
IT was inevitable, really; one bad traffic jam and the Kelvin Valley is once again a ''wasteland'' ripe for destruction (May 29 and 30).
This priceless piece of countryside should not be discarded so lightly and if you support the view that it should not be destroyed by a motorway, then roadworks, such as those that disrupted the A80 on May 26, fall neatly into a conspiracy theory. They get worse every time the debate hots up and are done to justify the unjustifiable.
Other roads have traffic jams too. I have been in plenty on the A8/M8 this year, including the equally newsworthy one when an electric cable fell across the road - yet no-one responded with a call to plough up the countryside between Harthill and Whitburn. Why is the Kelvin Valley so dispensable?
The Forth and Clyde Canal Society operates a trip boat along the stretch of canal that would be worst affected by a motorway. It is lovely, and those who seek its destruction are welcome to come for a sail - Sunday afternoons throughout the summer season - and see what is at risk. The canal will soon be revitalised by the Millennium Link scheme; it would be perverse to wreck it at the same time.
Guthrie Hutton,
Chairman,
Forth and Clyde Canal Society,
20 Belhaven Terrace West,
Glasgow.
May 30.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article