You don’t need to be a committed environmentalist to recognise the decision to plough a motorway through Glasgow’s once fashionable Charing Cross district was a travesty.
It’s easy to criticise political decisions taken more 60 years ago but the routing of the M8 directly through the heart of Scotland’s largest city was utterly bonkers.
A similar scheme was once mooted in Edinburgh in the 1960s but was shelved following fierce local resistance. And yet the Capital has managed to thrive without an urban motorway.
But Glasgow is stuck with the M8. No Government in Holyrood is going to consider getting rid of it. But could its future look radically different?
The concrete viaducts that carry the motorway past Woodside and Cowcaddens towards Charing Cross are falling apart. Tens of millions of pounds have already been spent on temporary repairs since 2021.
Lane restrictions have been in place and look set to remain indefinitely on a route that typically carries 150,000 vehicles per day.
Transport Scotland last week published a consultation document on what to do with the viaducts.
There are three options. Repairing and strengthening the viaducts would take at least another three years and cost £200m. Replacing the viaducts entirely with a new structure would cost an eye-watering £500m.
The third option is the most controversial. It would see the viaducts demolished and see vehicles rerouted into the city or on to the M74. There would still be a road connecting with the Kingston Bridge, with its future design still to be determined.
This scheme would be by far the cheapest and could be achieved in two years. Transport bosses have already briefed, however, that it is the least likely option to be signed off.
The document practically calls for SNP ministers to dismiss it out of hand. It claims that doing away with the viaducts would have “major detrimental impacts on traffic flows, connectivity, network resilience, and journey time reliability, both on the trunk road network and Glasgow’s local roads”.
There is little mention of the vast potential to greatly improve the north of Glasgow and its connectivity with the city centre. Huge areas of land could be freed up for housebuilding, shopping or leisure destinations.
Understandably, those who rely on the M8 take a different view. Paisley MP Alison Taylor summed it up: “Oh well then, let’s not bother having a road into the city. Great idea (not) for those leaving and entering the constituency I represent which includes Glasgow International Airport.
“This discussion not helpful to businesses and inward investment to Glasgow Region.”
Jonathan Brown, an advocate at the Faculty of Advocates, took a different view. “Alternatively, the M8 is a blight on Glasgow and one of the worst examples of post war urban vandalism anywhere in the UK, and before spending maybe £300m just to keep it open, we should with open minds and pragmatic cost/benefit analysis investigate the alternatives,” he said.
The consultation runs until March 25, with a shortlist being drawn up before the final decision is made.
Transport Scotland said: “We are keen to hear the thoughts of the local communities and road users on the permanent solution for the M8 Woodside viaducts project. Public engagement events are being held to provide local communities and road users with the opportunity to learn more and to share their feedback on the options.”
