The proposal reported in the Selby Times of raised tables and pedestrian crossing alterations – 'Ludicrous' crossing scheme slammed (January 28) – shows how out of touch are those who purport to be knowledgeable in such matters.

The problems created in the Renaissance scheme are well chronicled. To now try to hold the citizens to ransom by saying altering the raised table (outside Boots) would mean the loss of the light-controlled crossing by Abbey Walk entrance beggars belief.

All the raised tables along Gowthorpe may have calmed traffic, but created dangers for pedestrians. Oh, and what about a proper centre line?

Or, are the proposals vindictive as we the citizens dared to point out the problems? My crystal ball must have been working well when I forecast as soon as the SDC/new hospital site was underway there would be a crossing in the vicinity and, taking the same principle, does it mean we shall have a proposal the crossing in Portholme Road to the front of the SDC offices be decommissioned?

Access Selby removed much of the foot traffic on this route, and the move to Doncaster Road will almost clear the remainder. I doubt it.

Should the criteria of Doncaster Road be applied fairly to many other locations in town, we now need many more safe crossing points – the junction of Flaxley Road/Scott Road, Canal Road off the little bridge (no reported accidents, they say; none on Doncaster Road either) and many other points from the Abbots Road area.

To make the excuse of cost doesn't hold up very well when a footpath can be upgraded/installed along the A162 in Barkston Ash where foot traffic is at best guess not one per cent of many town locations.

The traffic lights sequence Gowthorpe/Scott Road/Brook Street have been raised repeatedly but, once again, sorry you citizens is wrong and we is right, them says.

Barry Hague,

Haig Street, Selby