The Department for Transport have confirmed my suspicion that the “informal crossings” planned for the Historic Core Zone in Bradford on Avon are completely unregulated, which is why they are not even mentioned in the Highway Code. Pedestrians have no right to cross on them and drivers are not obliged to stop even when pedestrians have left the kerb. ‘Priority for People’ apparently involves removing their rights and making them entirely dependent on drivers’ discretion.

If a pedestrian were to be knocked down on a foggy November evening, the driver would probably argue that he was not obliged to stop and that, compared with a zebra, the crossing was not clearly visible – both indisputable. This will do nothing to help any possible prosecution.

HCZ supporters argue that that these crossings are as safe as existing arrangements. I think the onus is on them to justify this assertion: do they have robust statistical evidence to support this? Even if the planned arrangements were just as safe statistically, I think it is important that elderly and vulnerable people also feel safe and have the confidence to cross the road independently, but HCZ does not meet this need.

The (HCZ) organisers admit that delays to vehicles will increase. This is almost certain to result in greater carbon dioxide emissions, not to mention wasted fuel. If some drivers take a longer route to avoid the HCZ this will again increase emissions. It is ironic that this increase will take place just as scientists are beginning to cautiously agree that we are seeing the first serious effects of climate change, as flood victims know to their cost.

The expensive HCZ is neither pedestrian friendly nor climate friendly.

Martin Wood, Grove Leaze, Bradford on Avon.