AS justification for building the Glasgow Airport Rail Link (Garl), Dr John McCormick (Letters, August 22) rightly points out that the M8, just like many other motorways, suffers from predictable congestion on a daily basis. Dr McCormick fails to see the irony in his suggestion that somehow visitors to our fair city deserve better treatment than we who live here and whose money he is keen to spend.
In the case of the M8 congestion is exacerbated by the fact that connections to the M77 and M74 and the main exits for Glasgow commuter-traffic all happen in a few short miles. It is however the rate that commuter traffic leaves and enters the motorway that creates much of the congestion affecting through-traffic on the M8 and that is dictated by city traffic lights. Leaving aside the fact that some say Central Station would struggle to cope with an increase in the number of trains arriving there why don’t we concentrate on reducing peak-time congestion on the M8, as for most of the day there is no problem?
There are many measures that could be introduced to make travel on the M8 a more pleasurable experience for all of us, not just a handful of visitors on the airport shuttle-bus. Why don’t we have segregated lanes on the motorway? Cities such as LA have “carpool lanes”; why can’t we have them? We have bus and taxi only lanes in Glasgow, why not on its motorways? Much of the traffic on the M8 is just passing through, it should never stop, why not have a dedicated “through lane”? Why not ban commercial traffic during peak-time? Why not stagger the opening times of Glasgow schools and offices? Why ignore a solvable problem and spend money which is desperately needed in other sectors on a project that at best would be a marginal improvement on the current service?
What is conveniently forgotten in this debate is that Glasgow already has a woefully underused airport that has an existing rail-link direct to the heart of the city. That’s planners for you, they always get it right.
David J Crawford,
Flat 3/3 131 Shuna Street, Glasgow.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel