Stumble It!Report recommends against third Don Crossing
30/08/07 13:40 Filed in: Forum
A report
from the Scottish Executive Reporters, following last year's
inquiry in the Local Plan 'Green Spaces - New Places', recommends
that the proposed Third Don Crossing “should not be pursued”.
The Reporters say the planned bridge and its link roads would not contribute to the principles contained in the Structure Plan of reducing the need for car travel and would not "help" people broaden their choice of travel to include walking, cycling or public transport.
.... but will you be miserable and disheartened trying to get there?
This may be all very well viewed from the perspective of tired political dogma and safe in the remoteness of some ivory tower in Edinburgh.
What this fails to recognise is the very real social and business cost of the horrendous traffic congestion which has blighted Bridge of Don and points north for years. This real cost is calculated in the misery for families caught up in it day after day, sitting wasting fuel, missing appointments. Equally important businesses is the massive waste for business, pouring thousands of pounds every day in lost work time and delayed deliveries and supplies down the drain.
The need for a new crossing over the Don has been recognised for years. If you look at the north entrance road into Danestone you can clearly see how close the project came to fruition. The road was clearly built so that it would carry straight on and over the new bridge. So, this is an issue that the authorities have prevaricated over for 30 years and more.
All that has happened in the interim is that matters have got worse and the costs and misery have piled up.
Time is not on our side.
Traffic growth may have reached a plateau, but – if the City of Aberdeen is to benefit from the massive potential that could flow from the proposed Trump International Golf Links, Scotland – then our transport network on the north side of Aberdeen has to be improved dramatically.
How many of the Trump visitors would be likely to patronise businesses and services in Aberdeen city centre if they can't get there because of traffic congestion at the Bridge of Don?
Reading between the lines, this report seems to suggest that we should deliberately allow traffic strangulation to "help" (for which read "force"?) people onto other means of transport.
That is barking mad! The carrot should always be preferable to the stick. Let other means of transport be so attractive that people will want to use them, not create such misery that people grudgingly use them!
In any case, government exists to serve the people, not to stop them exercising freedom of choice.
If Aberdeen City and Shire is to offer a "Brighter Outlook" it will not be achieved by beating the population into submission with tired, discredited political dogma. It will be by improving the quality of life for all and increasing the competitiveness of the business environment by providing efficiency in moving people and goods.
• The Reporters’ report can be accessed on the Aberdeen City Council website.
The Reporters say the planned bridge and its link roads would not contribute to the principles contained in the Structure Plan of reducing the need for car travel and would not "help" people broaden their choice of travel to include walking, cycling or public transport.
.... but will you be miserable and disheartened trying to get there?
This may be all very well viewed from the perspective of tired political dogma and safe in the remoteness of some ivory tower in Edinburgh.
What this fails to recognise is the very real social and business cost of the horrendous traffic congestion which has blighted Bridge of Don and points north for years. This real cost is calculated in the misery for families caught up in it day after day, sitting wasting fuel, missing appointments. Equally important businesses is the massive waste for business, pouring thousands of pounds every day in lost work time and delayed deliveries and supplies down the drain.
The need for a new crossing over the Don has been recognised for years. If you look at the north entrance road into Danestone you can clearly see how close the project came to fruition. The road was clearly built so that it would carry straight on and over the new bridge. So, this is an issue that the authorities have prevaricated over for 30 years and more.
All that has happened in the interim is that matters have got worse and the costs and misery have piled up.
Time is not on our side.
Traffic growth may have reached a plateau, but – if the City of Aberdeen is to benefit from the massive potential that could flow from the proposed Trump International Golf Links, Scotland – then our transport network on the north side of Aberdeen has to be improved dramatically.
How many of the Trump visitors would be likely to patronise businesses and services in Aberdeen city centre if they can't get there because of traffic congestion at the Bridge of Don?
Reading between the lines, this report seems to suggest that we should deliberately allow traffic strangulation to "help" (for which read "force"?) people onto other means of transport.
That is barking mad! The carrot should always be preferable to the stick. Let other means of transport be so attractive that people will want to use them, not create such misery that people grudgingly use them!
In any case, government exists to serve the people, not to stop them exercising freedom of choice.
If Aberdeen City and Shire is to offer a "Brighter Outlook" it will not be achieved by beating the population into submission with tired, discredited political dogma. It will be by improving the quality of life for all and increasing the competitiveness of the business environment by providing efficiency in moving people and goods.
• The Reporters’ report can be accessed on the Aberdeen City Council website.
|