roads: Fears over cuts to Incident Support Units for busy roads
YOUR article last week on the cuts to the Incident Support Unit staff covering the A12, A120, A14 and parts of the M25 were both worrying and illuminating.
Illuminating in that the response of Simon Burns gives away his strategy for dealing with Government cuts and their effects.
Like Pontius Pilate he will simply wash his hands of any responsibility for the effects of his Tory/Lib Dem Government policies.
This is bad enough when considering the issue of local road safety. How much more worrying is it that his plans for the entire NHS are bound to cause untold problems as more and more frontline staff are sacked, or posts not replaced, as a result of his Government's cuts.
When disaster strikes Mr Burns will no doubt say that it is nothing to do with him and that it is the fault of local decision-makers.
I wonder if, like me, many readers will think that when you make decisions you should have the courage to accept responsibility for the effects of those decisions.
That courage seems to be sadly lacking in Mr Burns.
Dr Roy Chad
I AM absolutely fed up with all these people thinking that the roads and the flyover are dangerous.
Drivers are the danger, because they seem unable to only concentrate on driving and are always racing everywhere.
I suggest that anyone involved in incidents /crashes should be forced to use large L-plates until they have achieved their driving re-test, HGVs, lorries and vans especially, and an automatic ban if death is involved.
It is appalling that magistrates regard jobs more important than life.
This may make drivers be more thoughtful and careful.
Improving the Army & Navy will only result in the Odeon Roundabout becoming even worse.
Put the money into supporting buses to reduce students' fares so students do not have to go straight to cars and hence reduce the overloaded parking in Princes Road College.
Why are there no bus routes down Princes Road?
Lobbying for cheaper fuel is crazy and short-sighted, because they will ultimately become less available and more costly.
We have to change to localism and change our behaviour to solve the problem.
Children unable to walk to their local school is a typical example of our wrong ideas.
Dr Peter Foreman
Campaign for the Protection of Essex, Chairman Transport
AFTER reading the debate about the Army & Navy flyover, it came to my attention why people may be driving over the bridge while it is closed.
It is commonly reported in the media that drivers follow satellite navigation systems over common sense. While driving home from an evening in south end, my TomTom sat-nav was turned on as I do not know the Southend area.
However, I know the Chelmsford area well, so was ignoring it by the time I reached the flyover. It was then that I realised that the sat-nav had routed me over the flyover even though it was closed.
I saw the bridge was closed so ignored the device. Could this be the reason for the high number of accidents?
I HAVE followed the correspondence in your paper and like all those whose letters have been published, I agree that the situation is dreadful, and that a remedy is urgently needed.
The words used are all about improving the present flyover and making it a two-way structure. Nobody mentions pulling it down and building what should have been built in the first place, namely a two-way flyover from Van Diemans Road to Chelmer Road.
No structure running parallel to Baddow Road is ever going to segregate the east/west traffic from the north/south. It needs to be at right-angles to Baddow Road and over the top of it.
Please, somebody go and look at Gallows Corner and the flyovers on the A13 near Barking. If the Chelmsford flyover is ever turned through 90 degrees there will be hell to pay, but that is the only cure.