How about entertaining the idea that the Museum of Transport being located next to the Clyde will prove more beneficial in the longrun. Rather than the museum being overshadowed by its newly improved (to the tune of £27million) neighbour is it not befitting that it should be given a setting on a par with Kelvingrove to showcase the treasures it holds? Is it not right that the Museum of transport should be sited on the banks of our river, in a place which will be more accessable for a huge number of Glaswegians than its present local, and hopefully act as a cornerstone for the regeneration of the Clyde harbour? Does the Museum of Transport not deserve the money being spent on it? Should we not continue to add to the legacy of our forebears in securing a purpose-built place and future for this facility?
The rumours of the Kelvin Hall becoming luxury flats are exactly that at present: rumours! Indeed, if you read the glasgow and Clyde Valley 2025 Consultative Draft Structure Plan (2005) it actually states that:
"The 2005 Plan will also give consideration to recognising
the international significance of the Educational and Cultural Quarter
centred on the complex of national assetts centred on the West End of Glasgow City, namely
Glasgow university, the Kelvingrove and Hunterian Museums, Kelvin Hall Sports Arena
and related assetts."
This document is freely available online