Created; <2009, Changed; 08/10/2017, 01/03/2020
Old this webpage; http://ww1.andrew-lohmann.me.uk/environment/a21-at-castle-hill/access-to-hastings/p00a21_1/
Letters, xx, xxxx Road,
Tunbridge Wells and Crowborough Leader, High Brooms,
Roxby House, Tunbridge Wells,
Station Road, Kent, TN4 xxx .
Sidcup, Tel: 01892 xxxx
Kent. 01892 xxxx (work)
E-MAIL: AndrewHLohmann@compuserve.com
FILE: p00a21-1.doc
11 August, 2000
For Publication
Dear Sir,
I agree that strategy 5 is ludicrous. I’m referring to your article on Access to Hastings Multi-modal study “John dubs A21 plan ludicrous” with a picture of the exhibition strategy 5 and a representative standing by it. Only the dirtiest vision of the future has been promoted locally, but that’s not the only view.
A few years ago the Leader gave good coverage to concerns people like myself have about a new section of trunk road at Castle Hill. Our concerns are visual intrusion, noise carried across the valley between, poor air quality in Longfield Road, and harm to the natural environment. The study’s strategies are either old grandiose road building schemes or the widening of the A21 through villages that has already occurred since. All strategies include measures on the A26, are these the same as the bus and cycle lanes on the A26. How sustainable are the strategies? I would have liked a strategy with a widened for dual working of the Tunbridge Wells Central south east tunnel, restoration of the rail line Tunbridge Wells to Lewes, A local transport authority, to make the buses arrive and on time.
Perhaps traffic lights at Longfield Road /A21 junction give everyone a fair turn? People in Tunbridge Wells wish traffic moderation and to that end, they support public transport, and presumably non-transport alternative solutions, what ever there view of trunk road building. Readers may be minded to make comments to the study and their MP’s.
Yours faithfully
Andrew Lohmann
Stop the Road (A21)