Listen more to what people say

The county council's proposal for the village presents the first opportunity (in the 30 years I have lived here) to do something effective about the excessive and dangerous level of road traffic.

As Ken implies, it is important to grasp this opportunity, without causing delay. That does not mean to say, of course, that we must not try to help the council get these first proposals right and, at the same time, highlight any perceived short-falls in their scope.

I was saddened, however, by both the thrust and tone of Ken's letter.

I have known Ken for 25 years and his letter does no justice to his long record of public service in the county or his dedication to serving Flackwell Heath.

I too have heard what Ken regards as "rumours" and "ill-informed comment" about the possible knock-on effects of the proposed scheme.

I heard several village residents quietly and objectively expressing such views to the county's representatives on the first day of the public exhibition of the scheme. Ken was there at the same time.

Far from being ill-informed comment or rumours, those views represented genuine feedback and concerns based on local knowledge.

The people concerned were consultees not "rumour-mongers".

There would be no point in conducting public consultation if such views were ignored or ridiculed. In fairness to the county's officers and consultants present, I observed that they conscientiously listened to and discussed every point put to them.

Counter to what Ken says, it is not "difficult to see" that, if traffic were slowed down through the village centre, some traffic would elect to take alternative routes.

There are two obvious candidate routes, one of which passes a school. Indeed, they are already used as alternative routes at peak hours. (I will not promote them for rat-running commuters by naming them in the BFP).

Let me now try to put the important issues into context.

First, Ken is right to warn that funds are limited.

The objective of the proposal is, we are told, to deal solely with problem areas identified by injury accident statistics. In other words, it is a wholly reactive proposition.

As such, it runs the risk of not addressing fully some of the most dangerous spots where, so far, there have been no significant injury accidents. We must therefore use this consultation first to ensure that the council is aware of the road safety weaknesses of the current proposal (including any potential knock-on safety impacts). We then have to rely on the council to ensure that the available funds are sensibly prioritised, within the planned time-scale.

Secondly, the council should plan now to measure and assess the potential knock-on effects of whatever is implemented.

For example, it would be easy to monitor the before and after traffic levels on the two alternative routes referred to above.

Any necessary consequential measures could then be prioritised for early funding.

Ideally, this first phase work should be accompanied by a separate review of any safety and environmental benefits that might be gained from traffic calming measures in other parts of the village.

In each respect, we would look to our councillors to ensure delivery.

Mike Overall

Magpie Close

Flackwell Heath