The Hidden Glasgow Forums

crusty_bint wrote:Construction of the IRR was better than doing nothing tho! I totally agree that cutting a swathe through the city for it probably wasnt the most effective solution but this was the first time such a project had been undertaken, as I said: "where no standards existed, they were invented".

As for draining the defunct canals and building the road on top of them: is that not a better solution than knocking down more of the city?

Fair enough, but it's probably the case that if the convenient, already cut/embanked course of the Monklands canal had not been available, this route would never have been considered. It meant that for about 90% of the (northside) route, very little demolition was required.

The Great Western Road plan (for example) was killed by local protest by residents and businesses. These objections would not have been there for the M8. Include a spanking great new bridge (people like bridges), the promise of urban regeneration and economic salvation and most people would buy into it. Spin is not a modern concept you know...

How they got away with the destruction of Garnethill, East Woodlands and Charing Cross however, I will never, ever understand...

crusty_bint wrote:As for draining the defunct canals and building the road on top of them: is that not a better solution than knocking down more of the city?

Since canals dont tend to be as wide as an 8-lane motorway, the point is moot.
A lot of worthy canal architecture was lost forever - the Blackhill locks
for example, and numerous swing and lift bridges.

On the subject of canals, I also recall some half-arsed talk (early 1990's)
of reopening the entire Monkland Canal (some sections remain at Easterhouse
and Coatbridge) although how this was to be achieved was never explained.
I think someone was trying to cash in on the re-development of the Forth
& Clyde Canal, to be honest.




James H

Don't get me wrong here, Im not defending the IRR in any way, it's just that I understand what was trying to be achieved by it.

The destruction of Garnet Hill, E Woodlands and Charing Cross is unforgivable for want of a better word, indeed Mackintosh's Scotland and Townhead schools were only saved after a draughtsman traced the route of the IRR on the Glasgow street map and found the IRR was heading straight for them!

Building on top of the Monkland Canal was undoubtedly due to the savings that could be made in time and money, but ask anyone old enough to remember what it had become by the time of construction and I think you'll find the general consensus is that it was a health hazard as it had become a dumping ground for all sorts of waste.

If only they had considered tunneling under the City! In saying that, you cant make all of the people happy all of the time

Crusty

james73 wrote:

crusty_bint wrote:As for draining the defunct canals and building the road on top of them: is that not a better solution than knocking down more of the city?

Since canals dont tend to be as wide as an 8-lane motorway, the point is moot.
A lot of worthy canal architecture was lost forever - the Blackhill locks
for example, and numerous swing and lift bridges.

On the subject of canals, I also recall some half-arsed talk (early 1990's)
of reopening the entire Monkland Canal (some sections remain at Easterhouse
and Coatbridge) although how this was to be achieved was never explained.
I think someone was trying to cash in on the re-development of the Forth
& Clyde Canal, to be honest.




James H

Speaking of canals, specifically the Forth and Clyde Canal, has the whole thing been reopened, or only sections of it? I ask because I go past parts of it in the Maryhill area on the bus to uni. In all this time, I have never seen any kind of water-based mode of transportation there.

Speaking of canals, specifically the Forth and Clyde Canal, has the whole thing been reopened, or only sections of it? I ask because I go past parts of it in the Maryhill area on the bus to uni. In all this time, I have never seen any kind of water-based mode of transportation there.

it is indeed possible to make the coast to coast trip. Quite whether anyone would ever want to run the gaunlet of Maryhill is another story. I don't know how long it would take to get a boat through the locks at Maryhill, except that it would be a long time. A long time as a big slow moving or indeed stationary target!! I doubt i'd fancy it. Nice idea but...

Sharon wrote:

Speaking of canals, specifically the Forth and Clyde Canal, has the whole thing been reopened, or only sections of it? I ask because I go past parts of it in the Maryhill area on the bus to uni. In all this time, I have never seen any kind of water-based mode of transportation there.

it is indeed possible to make the coast to coast trip. Quite whether anyone would ever want to run the gaunlet of Maryhill is another story. I don't know how long it would take to get a boat through the locks at Maryhill, except that it would be a long time. A long time as a big slow moving or indeed stationary target!! I doubt i'd fancy it. Nice idea but...

Yes, the canal is completely restored, though it could clearly do with some
dredging in places. A number of locks were covered over and filled in. Most
swing/lift bridges were culverted, the most notable being the one at Dumbarton
Road. This proved impossible/financially prohibitive to replace, so they came
up with an ingenious drop-lock on the canal, either side of the road. They
actually built a road over the lock walls at Blairdardie, and in fact this road
was removed upon the restoration of the canal.

I regularly cycle the canal towpath, and have seen many canal barges on
the water in the last few years. Also, somewhat surprisingly, the canal isn't
as big a ned-magnet as some might imagine. There's always folk walking
their mutts, people on bikes/out jogging etc.

As for the time taken to get through locks, yes, it would take a fair while to
get through Maryhill locks. I remember last summer stopping at the restored
Blairdardie locks to watch a wee boat move down lock. There's two locks
and it took about 10-15 minutes in total, I'd say.




James H

john & skintobalinto wrote: Where did you get this from?

Pics taken from Rebuilding Scotland: The Postwar Vision 1945-1975
Edited by Miles Glendinning (ISBN -898410-33-X)

Thanks Crusty_Bint, it's appreciated.

Talking of futuristic schemes for regenerating Glasgow... have a look at this from the britishpathe.com site.

http://www.britishpathe.com/thumbnails.php?id=68985&searchfilm=kelvin

It shows a huge model (of Glasgow?) built in the Kelvin Hall.... Skyscraper city

Download the free preview of the film, it's fascinating viewing.
Because of the stupid way i've linked to this, you have to click the view film bit and then navigate to the main page http://www.pathe.com and view the contents of your basket. Sorry. Couldn't find a better way! You have to fill in some details but it is free.

All i can say about those pics are WOW.

How much more screwed up would glasgow's inhabitants be if they had succeeded

Posted by AMCD on another thread

Sixties planners and architects were so full of themselves.

There designs failed, they always went for the cheapest option and used shoddy construction techniques and had a total disregard for anything that went before them.

It was just unbelievable arrogance and ego from the council that they could just smash straight through the city, why not go round? Or underneath? More logical?

THE REALITY

What the planners did really is horrible - but south of Argyle Street or so, was there really much in the way of interesting architecture? From the aerial photos, it seems to have been mostly industry, so at least the Clydeside Expressway didn't deprive us of too much.

It still amazes me that they thought a motorway through Charing Cross was a good idea though. Although then again, seeing the other plans they have, I guess a lot of the tenements weren't destined to stay around for much longer either.

amcd wrote:Talking of futuristic schemes for regenerating Glasgow... have a look at this from the britishpathe.com site.

http://www.britishpathe.com/thumbnails.php?id=68985&searchfilm=kelvin

It shows a huge model (of Glasgow?) built in the Kelvin Hall.... Skyscraper city

Download the free preview of the film, it's fascinating viewing.
Because of the stupid way i've linked to this, you have to click the view film bit and then navigate to the main page http://www.pathe.com and view the contents of your basket. Sorry. Couldn't find a better way! You have to fill in some details but it is free.

http://www.britishpathe.com/still_image.php?id=68985&frame=200&searchfilm=kelvin&size=d1

What the hell's that supposed to be? No Central station was bad enough, but
where's that meant to be??


And this one:

http://www.britishpathe.com/still_image.php?id=68985&frame=260&searchfilm=kelvin&size=d1

That looks lke the St Enoch bypass line, ironically still in existence. Those
images are extraordinary - bulldoze the entire city and rebuild it. They
must been hoping the Russians were going to drop the bomb...




James H

http://www.nollybarge.co.uk/seecanal.html

Here's a wee link to those who may be interested, they organise trips up and down the canal, its great, a bit dodgy when you go through Ruchill, the trip to cadder church is great , a lovely wee graveyard with steel coffins (interest to Ronnie maybe!!) in it to stop the likes of Burke & Hare stealing bodies, I've been on the nolly a few times, you can even stay on it, nae bevvy though. if your nice to the skipper he even gies ye a shot o drivin it

They have a wealth of info about the canal, and if anyone can get you the full length of it, they can.