Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 11th October 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Selkirk Weekend Advertiser site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Support gives bypass 'fighting chance' of becoming a reality



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 25 July 2008
ALTHOUGH reservations persist over cost and the impact on the town centre, the vast majority of Selkirk people who responded to a recent survey support a town bypass.
At the end of February, local Lib Dem MSP Jeremy Purvis sent townsfolk a questionnaire to ascertain their views on a project which was first mooted 60 years ago.

A feasibility study authorised by the Scottish Government had looked at the preferred A7 route – from Ladylands to Bridgeheugh, skirting Goslawdales and the cemetery – and concluded it represented value for money.

Costs were estimated at between £23million and £33million at 2006 prices, and Scottish transport minister Stewart Stevenson felt the project would "generate sufficient benefits to give a positive return for this outlay".

But Mr Purvis knew that local support for the bypass had to be demonstrated if the project was to stand any chance of being included in the Scottish Government's spending programme for transport in 2012 to 2022.

This week he announced the results of the ensuing survey to which 494 households responded.

Mr Purvis said 88.5 per cent were in favour of a bypass, 4 per cent were against and 7.5 per cent were undecided.

When asked if the scheme should be developed further as part of the Scottish Government's road spending plans, 93 per cent were in favour, 4 per cent were opposed and 3 per cent had no preference.

Mr Purvis told The Wee Paper: "I fully appreciate the views of constituents, including members of the Chamber of Trade, who are concerned about the impact of a bypass on town centre shops with 95 respondents citing this as the main drawback. Another 49 households felt the cost was too expensive and 65 felt it would take trade away from the town centre.

"After meetings and discussions with traders, I agree any bypass scheme must come with a full strategy to market and promote the town and support local traders.

"Many respondents cited Melrose as an example of how a town centre can be successfully promoted after a bypass has been built."

The survey also asked what people thought would be the main benefits of a bypass, with 241 believing it would make roads in Selkirk safer and 153 stating it would keep lorries, which struggle to negotiate the junction of Tower Street and High Street, out of the town.

This week, Mr Purvis wrote to Mr Stevenson, who is due to announce the 10-year spending programme this autumn, to reveal the survey results.

"I would hope the Scottish Government, in not only considering a Selkirk bypass as a priority for the south-east trunk road network, would also see it as part of an economic development strategy for Selkirk," he told the minister.

"There is major support for a scheme which would greatly assist in road safety as well as remove a serious bottleneck on the A7.

"I hope very much the scheme will be included in the plan you intend to announce.

The full article contains 507 words and appears in Selkirk Weekend Advertiser newspaper.
Page 1 of 2

  • Last Updated: 07 August 2008 2:01 PM
  • Source: Selkirk Weekend Advertiser
  • Location: Selkirk
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Do you think Scotland faces a serious threat from the effects of climate change?
Yes
No

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.