More scrutiny of plan needed

Quite rightly, you have reported on the Communities, Highways and Environment Scrutiny Committee meeting on February 24 about the

A27 Arundel Bypass – but on the same day, another agenda item was to scrutinise the draft Local Transport Plan 2022-2036.

Not only was it not reported by you, the councillors themselves seemed relatively unconcerned by such a farreaching plan and it was passed through to the next full council meeting with few critical comments.

However, there is indeed a lot to be said about a plan that fails to recognise the hugely damaging effects of climate change.

More roads, more traffic is perhaps in tune with people’s wants for economic activity; but it comes at a price.

You’ll see by my signature that I think that active travel is a good thing and should play an increasingly significant part in the way we all move about.

In fact, WSCC thinks so too. Consider this paragraph from the plan – but there is a sting in the tail:

“5.29 In order to achieve our vision, it is vital that we accelerate the shift to active travel.

“The footway network is extensive but there are only 75km (47miles) of cycleway in West Sussex, the quality of routes is variable and severance can be particularly problematic for some users: e.g. equestrians.

The cost of new infrastructure is likely to outweigh the available funding for the foreseeable future and reallocating road space can result in conflict between different road users.”

So – active travel is vital but we can’t do it. What?

First, councillors should question this in the context of the plan but second, whatever the subject and whatever one’s viewpoint, an incongruity such as this needs addressing.

GEOFF FARRELL

Chair West Sussex Cycle Forum Roundle Square Road

Felpham