I am a very proud Helensburgh man this week and I am sure there are hundreds like me who were over the moon to see Gordon Reid win not one, but two, Wimbledon titles at the weekend.

This young man, who is still just 24 years of age, has brought honour to the town and to the game through his undoubted skill and his evident spirit.

It was such a delight too to see him surrounded by his family and friends after each of his matches and I know from social media that his 'absent' support from the people of Helensburgh and Lomond was massive.

I had the honour of meeting Gordon and his family at the recent official opening of the Helensburgh Civic Centre and I was impressed then by his quiet humility and his energy and determination.

The local Argyll and Bute Council members are to be congratulated on their choice of 'celebrity' to perform the opening ceremony and Gordon's name will forever be part of the town's history through his own sporting success and the engraved plaque in the Civic Centre.

It is indeed true that “coming events cast their shadows before” and possibly Gordon's success might just be the spark that sees Helensburgh become a centre of excellence for wheelchair tennis.

I would like once again to congratulate Gordon on his amazing triumphs and wish him every continued success as he moves forward in his sparkling career and prepares for the Olympic Games.

Billy Petrie, John Street, Helensburgh

I should like to propose that the horrendous and almost universally disliked Face on the new Council Building on East Clyde Street be replaced by an appropriate tribute to Gordon Reid, in lasting recognition of his amazing achievement in winning two Wimbledon titles and in becoming the first ever winner of the Wimbledon men's wheelchair singles.

I would hope that our councillors, community council and many residents of Helensburgh and Lomond will support this suggestion.

Should our councillors not see fit to fund this from council funds, I would suggest that a petition be started and that the funds be raised by public donation. I shall be happy to help in any way that I can.

David Russell, via email

I would like to share my experience of using the local bus service from Helensburgh to the Vale of Leven Hospital, Alexandria and onward to the Royal Alexandra Hospital, Paisley.

My husband was admitted to RAH in the early hours of Wednesday, June 29, and I decided to use this service, as I feel that it is not wise to drive when in an anxious state of mind.

I took the bus from Helensburgh to VOLH and as we arrived , ready to change buses, the Helensburgh driver said: "I see he is away. He is five minutes early.”

I said: "He can't be. This is a connecting service." He then offered to take me to the next stop to see if he was waiting there.

As we drew up we saw the bus disappearing.

I did not know the area we were in but the driver pointed out the railway station, so I went there.

The lady in the ticket office suggested I get a train to Partick and a bus from there. I bought a ticket and as we were on our way I began to calculate that I would reach the RAH with about 15 minutes or so left of visiting time, as I would have to get the bus back to VOLH. I therefore got off the train at Dumbarton and took a taxi to the RAH which cost £30.

I got in touch with both bus companies on my return and each one blames the other. One alleges the other was early and the other claims the first one was late. Each one says time sheets have been carefully verified.

When I said the website clearly states "Scheduled to match visiting times at RAH with connections at VOLH", I was told that the bus must depart at its scheduled time, that it is very important that this schedule is kept as they are a public service. This seems to take precedence over customer care.

The Oxford English Dictionary gives the following definition: “Connect', when used of a bus or train, to arrive at a destination just before another departs so that passengers can transfer.”

I hope readers have more success than I have had with our bus service, which was obtained after a lot of local effort.

Kathleen Gorrie, via email

I must say that I quite like the Face on the council offices.

However, for those who think it is a bit bland, perhaps our newspaper could run a competition for the best Face paint enhancement. After all, the addition of a traffic cone to Donald Dewar’s statue in Glasgow, has made it quite famous.

The possibilities are enormous. The enhanced Face could for instance be projected at night onto the front of a building in our new town square.

R.L. Mackie, Helensburgh

I would like to make a comment on the article in last week's Advertiser, "Academy site scheme moves closer after sale".

First of all your opening paragraph: "An agreement has been reached 'in principle' which should see the development of the former Hermitage Academy site move a step closer.

“ Members of Argyll and Bute Council approved the purchase of part of Helensburgh Amateur Athletic Club's grounds at a meeting on June 30.”

Can I just clarify, in the interest of factual reporting, that this agreement was not in consultation at any time with the residents who were the principle objectors to the route being taken for this development. I can therefore, only assume, that the agreement was between the principle benefactors of the development and not the objectors to it.

A rather easy agreement to come to I would imagine, perhaps, who knows, but one that was agreed well in advance of the meeting that granted permission to build the driveway.

There is also no recorded minutes of this 'agreement' on the council website, or if there is, it is well hidden.

I have to stress that the ownership of the land where this new driveway is proposed, is clearly shown on the title deeds of our properties and is also shown on the Land Registry Scotland database as belonging to the residences opposite, not the council.

There has been no agreement or approval given by any of the residents for the council to "adopt" or purchase our land to pursue this development.

In fact, I was informed by Charles Reppke, Head of Governance and Law, that ownership of property is not considered during the planning process, unless of course, it's council property, then there may be concerns raised??

So if I read that as a legal layman, the council can approve planning permission to develop and then sort out legal ownership retrospectively.

It would seem now that the use of our street to provide an access to the car park was merely a bluff by the council to allow HAAC, the council and ultimately Taylor Wimpey a chance to acquire more land to build on.

In fact, this is the first that we have received any notification of this new matter of the clubhouse selling off the land. According to the original planning permission, we, the nearby residents, were under the understanding that the land was already Argyll and Bute's property. In fact, all the documents I have from the council website clearly show the old tennis courts as being part of the driveway development. There is no mention of HAAC ownership of any of the property on that land, and that  includes the clubhouse, there is only reference to the fact that they lease it from the council.

The HAAC, in the person of Kevin Johnstone, have continually stressed during the planning process, that they have a very long lease for the land and that there was no question of them giving up that lease, yet, barely a week after their driveway is approved HAAC publicly announce that they are "selling off the remainder of their 'leased land' and the council are reimbursing them for it.

What kind of deal is that? How can you sell land that you do not own?

I can only assume therefore, that public notification of these facts and this  "deal" struck by the HAAC and A&B Council was tactically delayed until after the decision was made to build the clubhouse access.

As I stated in the paper last week, the objections to the proposed route of the new access were unanimous. There are, however, absolutely no objections ?to the fact that the clubhouse needs a car park.

There is also the matter of asbestos being found on the old Academy site. It was recommended that prior to any development, an investigation would be carried out to assess potential health risks to the public, so how can you grant permission prior to that task being completed?

Another tick box process, like, it would appear this whole process has been.

Just to recap, all this has come about after the council had realised that they had marooned the clubhouse in the middle of a new development with no vehicular access.

The logical route taken to remedy this, would be an adoption of the the route they have at present - an area which is already earmarked to be developed anyway.

It would seem however, that the principles of logic, local democracy and community harmony have once again been sacrificed to what I consider to be an initial measure of panic from the council when this "marooning" was discovered.

There has, it would seem, to have been an agreement of silence as to the ownership of the property made between HAAC and the Council to be deliberately kept secret from the nearby residents until after the crucial driveway permission was granted.

This makes me suspect that all this was primarily driven to acquire a financial bonus for both the HAAC and the council, and a property bonus for Taylor Wimpey who now acquire an extended site to build on.

Unlike the members of the clubhouse, or the local council, or Taylor Wimpey, we live here 24/7, and for our concerns and objections to be overridden as seemingly trivial matters, and then subjected to a decision made by faceless people and bureaucrats many miles away in Lochgilphead, does not strike me as a democratic process.

Can I just say, that throughout all this process, none of the residents of our street has ever been visited by, or has personally met, with the exception of Kevin Johnson, any of the faceless people involved in this decision.

Both parties - HAAC and Argyll and Bute Council – should be asked why these important details of ownership and the anticipated selling of property was not revealed before the car park application was approved? 

It must have been just too trivial to warrant their attention as doesn't really affect any of them..

I would have thought, just as a matter of interest and courtesy to his constituents, that our local councillor Richard Trail, who was present at the decision to permit the driveway, may have sought our concerns about this new development of the transfer of "ownership of land", but as of today, he has not shown any interest in this matter whatsoever at any stage.

John Scullion

Redgauntlet Road, Helensburgh