COUNCILLOR David Hitchiner (Letters, February 29) puts the convenience of one third of the county’s population ahead of the needs of the other two-thirds.

This is unfair and unwise.

A second bridge will enable those who live on one side of Hereford city to reach the other side more quickly, perhaps by public transport. Unlike a bypass (whether to west or east) it will not benefit people trying to get into the city from the county’s rural hinterland by reducing traffic congestion nor people trying to get from one Herefordshire town to another – Kington to Ross, for example.

What are your thoughts?

You can send a letter to the editor to have your say by clicking here.

Letters should not exceed 250 words and local issues take precedence.

Nor will it help the many drivers, both private and commercial, who don’t want to be anywhere near Hereford in the first place but are simply trying to travel across the county.

Though cheaper than a bypass (who knew?) this second city bridge will cost a significant amount of money. Coun Hitchiner suggests this will be well spent and the rest of the county can “go hang” until squillions of pounds turn up in the council’s coffers from some unknown source. This is phoney economy; by that line of reasoning just build a footbridge which will be cheaper still!

Must we rural-dwelling council-tax payers foot this bill?

JULIA C EVANS

Lyonshall