"That is the way I want it to be and the way I plan for it to be because there is no alternative, apart from leaving the bridge open to traffic which I'm not prepared to do."

Leaving aside the breathtaking arrogance of this statement by Councillor Terry Gazzard, it makes it pretty clear that the current public consultation over the closure of Pulteney Bridge is a hollow exercise, and he has no intention of taking any notice of any views expressed.

Earlier this year the taxi drivers of Bath were asked for their views on the proposed closure. Pretty well all who replied said that it would lead to massive congestion on Pulteney Road and North Parade, particularly at the junctions at either end of the latter. It would also significantly increase the cost of a journey to or from town for anyone living in the Bathwick, Claverton or Bathampton areas. At a subsequent liaison meeting we were thanked for our comments, but we were told that the closure would be going ahead anyway. We were also told that the closure was not a result (as Mr Gazzard claims), of damage caused by traffic to the bridge, but rather was part of a plan to create open public spaces in the city. This was several months before the current public consultation exercise.

This closure will take away one of only six road crossings over the River Avon in the city. It will have a significant effect on many Bathonians, not just those who live and trade adjacent to the bridge. Surely this alone is sufficient reason for the matter to be properly debated and decided by our council in a full meeting, open to the public, after a serious period of public consultation.

Let us remember this statement when Councillor Gazzard is up for re-election. Councilors are elected to office to reflect the views of the voters, not to rule over them.

JOHN A GUEST Stonehouse Lane Combe Down Bath

There are about 50 flats for elderly folk at Fitzroy House, and quite a number of the residents rely on taxis to get to Waitrose and to other shops in Bath. The cost of taxis, I understand, is quite a lot and if they went on the route proposed it would be likely to treble.

At the moment this does not affect me personally, but at 88 it would not be surprising if it soon did. I already have got to the stage of needing a stick to get me there.

I would be personally affected by not being able to get a bus back with the shopping. Buses that stopped for us at the bottom of Bathwick Hill would be little help if we got on at the High Street as we might just as well walk.

MISS D G SCULLARD Fitzroy House Great Pulteney Street Bath

Many people in the Pulteney area are very angry to hear that the street is to be deprived of its bus services.

With two consecutive bus stops removed, residents will have to walk up Bathwick Hill to get a bus to town. This is too much for many in their eighties. They feel not only deprived of their bus service, but almost of their bus passes.

There is a lot of anger. Fitzroy House has resigned from PERA (Pulteney Estate Residents Association) after its chairman was quoted as saying that everyone was keen on the scheme.

So why is Councillor Gazzard so determined to push this through?

Yes, the bridge is an architectural gem if viewed from Grand Parade.

However, the bridge itself is unimpressive. I have often been asked by tourists, when standing in Argyle Street "Where is the bridge?"

But the whole city will pay for this as the traffic removed from Pulteney Bridge is dumped on North Parade Bridge.

AGNES MELLING Gerrard Buildings Pulteney Mews, Bath

The letters from Richard Parker ("Do we need these costly path works") and Agnes Melling ("Closing Pulteney Bridge – is it a "bridge too far" for residents?) in the Chronicle of August 12 raise some interesting questions.

You also report on page 4 a suggestion that there are plans to introduce two traffic lanes from Caroline Buildings to the Widcombe Hill junction on Pulteney Road.

Residents of Widcombe have long campaigned to have the bulk of the traffic removed from Widcombe Parade but the proposal to prevent traffic turning right into Dorchester Street from Manvers would increase traffic in Widcombe Parade.

All this leads me to wonder whether B&NES council has any sort of overall pedestrian/traffic management strategy. There does appear to be an increasing tendency to do a bit here and a bit there with no obviously coherent theme.

It seems increasingly likely the BTP/BRT plans will be thankfully ditched as a result of the Con/Dem Government cutbacks – this will give the council the time it needs to stop the current piecemeal works and enter into a wide ranging debate about how to manage the acknowledged problems. Will they take up this idea?

MARY YOUNG Alexandra Road Bath

I was reading the Bath Chronicle just now while eating my lunch and when I read Terry Gazzard's comments I nearly choked. Does he not realise he is a public servant? Does he not realise that Bath is not a museum?

I do not live in Bath, but since I moved from London to Frome 32 years ago I have worked in and visited Bath regularly and I seem to remember another arrogant councillor with a rank, who ruined transport in the centre of Bath. Thankfully Sir Elgar Jenkins was voted off, hopefully the outcome for Councillor Gazzard.

BARRY CAMPBELL North Parade Frome

I find it inconceivable that more concern has not been shown to the very real inconvenience and expense to be caused to those with walking difficulties and old age.

Public transport is to be denied to this area; surely taxis must be allowed to operate over Pulteney Bridge in these more difficult times when ' incomes have been reduced.

MRS CHRISTINE STOUGHTON Great Pulteney Street