I WAS interested to read your report which said that the Scottish Government is considering proposals for a programme of capital expenditure which includes a new road crossing of the Forth ("Mapping out a £70bn bid to boost Scottish economy", The Herald, December 7)).

If the outcome of the investigation of the cables of the existing Forth Bridge shows that protective treatment of the cables is possible (say by instalments), then the budget for a new bridge should be re-allocated to other capital projects.

These could include, for example, urgent improvement to the A9 trunk route to Inverness, the long-awaited high-speed rail network, and the Edinburgh trams project.

The observation, first made by Professor Holford of University College London, at the time when the M1 motorway was promulgated, that "traffic expands to fill the space available" is as true today as it was 50 years ago.

In other words, more road space will always equate to more traffic.

In planning terms, the case for a second Forth road bridge is contradictory.

If it does not increase capacity then it serves little purpose.

If it is intended to increase capacity, the existing residential areas, especially Corstorphine, will suffer increasing stress.

The case for a tunnel under the Forth from Granton is growing ever more compelling.

Alan Wightman,

Inveralavaig,

Portree.