Traffic relegation paves the way for Glasgow Avenues extension
November 26 2019
Glasgow City Council has launched proposals for a further extension of the city Avenues project as part of a decade-long overhaul of the city centre.
The draft Central District Regeneration Framework sets out a vision to pedestrianise Bothwell Street and West George Street by 2030 as part of efforts to reduce the volume of cars and increase greenery.
These goals could be met through a radical reappraisal of feeder road networks centred on the demotion of the M8 to an inner-city relief road, closing off the city centre to through traffic. Instead, motorists would be funnelled into multi-storey car parks at the end of Sauchiehall Street and at a redeveloped Blythswood Court, with only pedestrians, public transport and cyclists permitted within the urban core.
Outlining how this might work the report states: “The upgraded M74-M73 is the ideal loop around the city centre to replace the M8 as a national thoroughfare. The M8 can be downgraded to become part of a local city centre ring that accommodates displaced through-traffic from the city centre.”
Removal of passenger vehicles would allow footpaths to be widened, enable new tree planting and permit all-weather canopies to be erected.
A 10-week consultation on the proposals, drawn up by lead designer MVRDV alongside local consultant Austin-Smith:Lord. is set to get underway from 6 December.
|
11 Comments
For instance, I'm keen to see/read how the full plan proposes to deal with traffic trying to get from the West (via the expressway) through to the East, where there is normally a gridlock at the Expressway/M8 on ramp junction at peak times. Will this impact on the Clyde Tunnel, and will the tunnel be (somehow) improved to deal with the greater traffic flow? What about the Kingston Bridge, does this get 'downgraded' too to be an elaborate on-ramp southbound, where you can't even (in its current format) directly get on to the M74 from it? Seems like (with most city centre-centric ideas) all that will happen is the heavy traffic gets pushed out to the surrounding areas. Trying not to be UR-standard negative, just curious.
#1 drivel.
Back on topic, there are numerous reasons why these proposals are unrealistic. To save time, I've only listed four:
(a) many people need cars for work or health reasons (our son is disabled and public transport simply isn't practical for him)
(b) cars are increasingly becoming hybrids or electric/hydrogen-powered, which will eventually negate any reason to ban them on environmental grounds
(c) these proposals would stop people who want/need/rely on cars from living in the city centre, at a time when GCC wants to double the urban core's population
(d) buses can never and will never be practical replacements for the car. Any student of post-war Glasgow and its housing/transport policies can tell you that. And having had to work from home for three days in a row because of cancelled trains, I don't think trains are the answer either.
Post your comments
Back to November 2019
Like us on Facebook
Become a fan and share