|
CLLR: Stuart
Hughes Reply to Margaret Rogers letter Sidmouth Herald 31st May 02 "FACT
NOT FICTION"
|
|
|
Sir, Cllr
In
the letter Ted Pinney said that when he was 1.
To
enable those who had bought their houses backing onto the proposed
route to live out their time undisturbed. Which had
now happened. 2.
He
opposed the then recommended scheme (which included a fly over of
the In
his letter he mentioned Clyst St Mary which had been by passed and
the dramatic increase in traffic on the A3052.(Now well over 15,000
a day passing through Sidford).
He finishes the letter by saying to Brian Greenslade “It
would make it a statesmanlike decision to hold over any sale of the
Sidford land until the long term needs of the A3052 are
determined”. Needless
to say Cllr Mrs Rogers and her greed driven Lib Dem collegues took
no notice, they didn’t even have the decency to consult with the
residents of Sidford on the future of the relief road. Why? Because
they had spent all the reserves that had been built up by the
previous prudent Conservative administration, and had ordered their
henchman Cllr John Glanvill from Woodbury to see what assets could
be sold off to enable them to go on another spending spree in their
strong holds. John Prescott’s was made the scapegoat for
abandoning the scheme when he announced that Labour
wouldn’t support the building of any further By-Passes and whilst
a U-turn followed a
fortnight later the Lib Dems turned a deaf ear.
Oh by the way Mrs Rogers
North Devon As
for my supposedly cavalier treatment of those who objected to the
traffic lights at Sidford Cross, what a cheek! I
requested that the officers should carry out a survey to see what
effect the lights (which were then a temporary requirement for the
building of the Sewage Treatment Works ) had on local businesses,
which was agreed by the Partnership Committee. At that time I gave
my assurance that if there were to be an effect I would request
their removal. (This was well documented in the Sidmouth Herald) Mrs
Rogers was present at the Partnership Committee when
the findings were reported and voted for the retention of the lights
without I might add even uttering a word. Gill
Purkiss says that Drakes Avenue and other roads are being used as
rat runs to avoid the lights, well it
is quite obvious Mrs Purkiss didn’t
see what it was like before the lights were installed, as those
locals that have spoken to me say the situation has improved not
deteriorated, it is only at rush hour when there is a problem,
however this should improve once the 20mph limit and relevant
traffic calming has been implemented. The
lights have removed the serious dangers drivers used to face
crossing the junction where it was like playing a game of Russian
roulette. I
would also remind both Cllr Mrs Rogers & Mrs Purkiss that the
traffic lights formed one of two trade offs in the Lib Dems
recommendations for the abandonment of the relief road the other was
for the creation of a footway on Trow Hill. It was only through my
representations ( having carried
out my own consultation with the majority of residents in Sidford)
that the further measures now approved were taken on board. As
for the problems Mrs Purkiss refers to in |