SIR – Re the Worcester City Council booklet ‘Your Services 2018-19’, principally the planned pedestrian bridge north of the city.

I have to admit finding their terminology confusing! When is a pedestrian bridge not a footbridge?

Evidently, their definition is contrary to the Oxford English Dictionary, stating ‘For a person walking’.

It was revealed in a recent report of a Policy and Resources committee meeting. The proposed pedestrian bridge will be for cyclist, not exclusively for walkers as indicated in the leaflet.

Should these councillors also find this designation confusing, the clue is found in the title!

Based on their definition, is the intention of this group of cross-party councillors to totally de-restrict pedestrianised areas?

Sanctioning cycling, including the electric variety, unrestricted freedom to ride through locations, presently deemed traffic free for shoppers and visitors.

Those utilising pedestrian bridges, footpaths, canal and riverside walks, already endure a constant threat, whilst co-sharing with cyclist passing in close proximity.

Do these officials actually want to further their boundaries, with its inevitable consequences. I believe, those aspiring councillors who may appear on our doorstep, nearing the May elections should be asked to define their ‘Duty of care’ relating to the safety of persons walking?