Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Worry over M8 extension could kill me, claims pensioner living on route

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 The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

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

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: 17 July 2008
AN ELDERLY man would die if he was forced to move house to make way for a new section of the M8, an inquiry into the scheme has heard.
William Barrie, 85, has become ill every time there are discussions about moving from the farmhouse where he has spent half his life, his solicitor said.

Mr Barrie and his wife Christina, 79, are making a last stand against completion of the Edin
burgh-Glasgow motorway, which threatens to flatten their home.

They have rejected both a £515,000 offer to move and revised plans to reroute the road south of their house, which would add £1 million to the construction cost.

Their case was put yesterday at a public inquiry into the seven-mile scheme, which would close the final "missing link" in the M8 by upgrading the A8 dual carriageway just east of Glasgow.

The Barries have been fighting plans to complete the road since moving to Braehead farmhouse, beside the A8 near Bargeddie, 41 years ago.

They want to stay close to their children who live nearby, while their grandchildren have horses stabled at the three-acre site.

Rod McCrae, a solicitor for the Barries, told the hearing: "The loss of their property would mean everything to Mr and Mrs Barrie. If (it] was taken away from them, Mr Barrie could well die."

Mr McCrae earlier told the inquiry: "Every time a discussion takes place, he becomes very ill. The Barries are adamant they want to stay in their house."

The solicitor said the couple had rejected a £1 million compromise plan to reroute the M8 just south of the house as being unacceptable.

It would involve safety fencing being built about 40ft from the house to guard a 40ft cliff down to the new road. Mr McCrae said moving the road further away, so it was 80ft from the house, might be acceptable.

However, the Barries believe previous plans to build the M8 on the current line of the A8, which would save their house, should be adopted instead.

Experts representing the Scottish Government's Transport Scotland agency at the inquiry said it had rejected this 1995 scheme because the option did not separate local and longer-distance traffic.

The scheme was shelved after Labour came to power in 1997, while the A8 has since been upgraded.

Dr Jo Blewett, of Transport Scotland, said: "It does not make sense not to use that corridor and move strategic traffic offline (on to a separate road]."

The Barries were originally offered £410,000 to move, which has since been increased to £515,000.

However, Mr McCrae said they had found it impossible to find a seven-bedroom house with outbuildings and stables in a quiet location in the area. They effectively gave up looking last year.

The solicitor said their home was secluded because it was above the A8, but he admitted it probably would not have remained quiet if the 1995 scheme had been built.

The current project would involve five miles of new three-lane motorway south of the A8 between the Baillieston and the Eurocentral junctions.

A further mile of three-lane motorway would follow the current A8 route between Eurocentral and Chapelhall, with the remaining mile of dual carriageway to Newhouse upgraded to two-lane motorway.

It is expected to cost up to £210 million and be completed in 2013, with journey times reduced by four minutes.

Transport Scotland has said the A8 upgrade would bring "significant benefits" to the Scottish economy and the travelling public.

The inquiry is half way through its expected three-week duration.





The full article contains 612 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 16 July 2008 9:25 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Press Complaints Commissioner,

17/07/2008 00:41:45
Is it me being overly cynical here, or do I detect a subtle sub-text that booms ***SNP THUGS....STEAL OLD MAN'S DEATH BED***.

EXCELLENT! ***air guitar interlude***, Rock on....Scotsman DUDES!

2

Guga II,

Rockall 17/07/2008 07:15:06
The word thrawn comes to mind.
3

Louis Catorze,

17/07/2008 07:56:30
What about compulsory purchase?

But it. Flatten it. End of.

It wouldn't be the first.
4

Louis Catorze,

17/07/2008 07:56:47
Buy it...not but it..
5

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 17/07/2008 08:35:41
What the hell do they need seven bedrooms for?
6

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/07/2008 09:17:12
"It does not make sense not to use that corridor and move strategic traffic offline."

Can anyone explain what this means? Is this person supporting the re-use of the A8 corridor, or the creation of a separate route?
7

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 17/07/2008 10:44:56
I fail to see that this is an issue. They have been offered over half a million for christs sake. And if they also have the alternative of the road being re-routed round them.

The next step should be to give them an ultimatum that either they accept one of the options or a compulsory purchase will be performed and the bulldozers will flatten the place---with them in it if needs be.

One old man should not be allowed to get in the way of progress in this manner.
8

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 17/07/2008 11:13:10
I think they are being very unreasonable and to bring in the issue that the move may kill the old man is just a ploy for sympathy. Is he senile?

A compensation of over half-a-million pounds is enough for both of them to have comfortable accomodation, round-the-clock medical care, and furnish their new residence in luxurious comfort.

Moving is a traumatic experience at any age but I think the authorities in this case have bent over backwards to try and satisfy a crusty curmudgeon.

Besides, he has spent half his life in the place.

TIME TO MOVE ON!
9

lulach mac gille coemgain,

17/07/2008 13:17:32
Proof puddin’ that human rights (government don’t have right to interfere in yer home etc ) don’t exist for people born in the UK - eh ?

William Barrie - Claim Asylum - and Skrew the fascist compulsors on this notice board - if they threatened my home - I would use reasonable force to protect it !
10

Glasgow Bill,

Glasgow 17/07/2008 13:47:56
#9
Well spoken.You are correct.They talk about human rights but it seems to be overlooked in this case.It seems that not enough is done for people who have served this country well throughout their lives.Mr Barrie is not senile.One contributor commented that "it is time to move on,he has spent half his life there."Exactly.that is the very reason the couple do not want to move.Mr Barrie has said that he is not in the way of progress.The government could stick to their original plan,and widen the A8, but it is a far easier option for them to go straight through their home.I hope this is resolved to your satisfaction and you get to keep your house and the government get their road.
11

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 17/07/2008 13:50:40
#9:

"I would use reasonable force to protect it !"

And you would loose. The powers that be can apply a lot more "reasonable force" than you can---including the "reasonable force" of law, which would probably be in their side if you got agressive with them.

This isn't a case of the old man just being thrown out of his house and made homeless. It is a case of him being offered a substantial sum in compensation or given the alternative of having the road re-routed. How much more does he want? He is just a pain in the a**s time waster who cannot see beyond the sparks from grinding his own personal axe.
12

Glasgow Bill,

17/07/2008 15:20:10
could #11 have his own axe to grind?Does he use this road on a regular basis commuting from Edinburgh into Glasgow?Is it so important that he saves himself 4 minutes on his journey that he is willing to see two elderly people removed from their home.
13

La5t_minit,

17/07/2008 16:34:21
If he owns the land then its his choice. Stuff the developers as they are only interested in the backhanders they will receive anyway.

Everyone has the right to decide how the land and property they own is altered, age doesnt come into it and everyone has lost the plot over ownership and precieved rights.

If the routing is worth so much then offer to build a similar property wherever the owner wants it to be. No matter the cost it will still be in the developers best interest.

14

Neil,

Glasgow 17/07/2008 17:33:23
I'm willing to bet him half his £515,000 that he doesn't die within 6 months of being moved. I'm willing to bet anybody else that he doesn't take my bet.

There are very few roads which are not built on land used by somebody else beforehand but I suspect that hasn't prevented him driving.
15

Willie Mor,

17/07/2008 21:18:07
There are valid considerations about individual rights versus society's needs.

However, indviduals rights are often taken from them only for large private enterprises to benefit hugely at a later date.

A classic example of this was the Stansted Airport where huge tracts of land were taken by compulsary purchase some ttqwent years ago for the public good, only for the land to now be wort an absolute fortune some 20 or so years later on when the airport is is private ownership.


Take it off the small saying it is for the public good and then let a private business make millions on something that was taken for a peppercorn price is something that all to often happens.

Maybe not in this case, but something that does happen.
16

truthsleuth,

17/07/2008 23:51:01
Its amazing how those who are not faced with the destruction of their home accuse others of being NIMBYS.
The trith is of course that it is they that are the NIMBYS THEY do NOT want it in THEIR BACK YARD.
It is also symptomatic that those same people have an affinity for petrol fumes and treat their car like a toy typical of the little boys who would be men.

Just when they will grow up is not a question they ask of themselves after all their god is JC and those are not the initials of the star of the New Testament.
17

truthsleuth,

17/07/2008 23:53:36
South of the Border the Englishmans home is his castle until of course the D(a)fT want to lay more concrete for their petrol heads and motormouth friends to huertle up and down trying to prove their manhood or something.
18

John N,

Edinburgh 07/08/2008 13:24:51
From reading some of the comments here you might think that it's the big nasty developers who are persecuting these two old folks. It's not. It's the big nasty politicians, advised by the planning officials, representing all of us and paying for it with our tax money.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


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.