IS there room for both pavements and cycle tracks on Byres Road (Letters, May 30, June 1 and June 6)? Answer: an emphatic yes. This was the opinion of a Glasgow City Council officer at the recent public consultation. Then why no segregation? His answer: because the design brief requires maximisation of pavement widths. Each segregated cycle lane would be half a metre wider, hence on-highway cycle lanes are proposed.

The proposed road improvement shows much wider pavements. On plans, existing pavement lines shown in red are set behind proposed pavement line along almost the entire length of the road. So segregated cycle lanes can be fitted in, easily in most places. Where things are tight at a bus stop the proposed carriageway alignment can be moved sideways slightly, as is already proposed elsewhere.

Designers appear to have opted to propose a scheme that pits pedestrian and cyclist needs against each other to divert attention from their preference not to constrain vehicle movements wherever possible. That designers favour and prioritise unhindered vehicle flows is apparent as no speed tables at junctions are proposed, to calm traffic and emphasis pedestrian rights. When asked why the omission an officer explained speed tables aren't used on a bus route. This omission is a Glasgow designer preference, travel south by coach to Newcastle and Salford city centres and cross speed tables on busy main roads at many junctions. There, vehicles on inner city roads used by many pedestrians are required to go slow.

On Byres Road where pedestrian traffic outnumbers vehicles most of the day pedestrians should be given direct routes in a busy shopping street. Yet inadequate pedestrian facilities are proposed. Besides existing pelicans, several additional zebra crossings are needed. But they would give priority to pedestrians, so pro-car land and environmental services designers don't want them. Better just a few pelican crossings to constrain pedestrian traffic in favour of vehicles.

Why are readers having to air views about this local matter in the national Herald? Because Glasgow councillors don't arrange for public debate of issues between technical advocates for active travel interests and highway designers. The council's Active Travel Forum doesn't consider contentious issues, see recent agendas. Whilst officers are allowed to make proposals that don't conform to council policies on active travel, the forum appears to be political window dressing.

Pat Toms,

Flat 1/2, 68 Shakespeare Street, Glasgow