SIR – I was disappointed to read your article headlined ‘We don’t need another ring road’.

Having read John Hobbs’ explanation of why the north west section of the ring road is not to be completed I came to the conclusion that it was a very good example of post-rationalisation for a decision that is clearly in error and designed to support a poorly constructed bid.

Making the southern link road a dual carriageway might solve today’s traffic demands but what happens when it is hit by the traffic from the proposed 6,500 new homes, together with the development of employment, education, retail and health, not to mention the expansion planned around Malvern? I could take a guess.

All this traffic cannot be reasonably funnelled along the southern link road. It is madness. Why is there such an aversion to increasing the use of junction six of the M5? Why should the traffic be channelled to junction seven?

I saw John Hobbs’ comment regarding junction six and I’d make two comments.

One would be: when will we break junction seven?

And, the second is: if there is a risk of Worcester being a dormitory town why are the county planners proposing to build 3,000 new homes adjacent to the approach road to junction seven of the M5?

COUNCILLOR ROGER KNIGHT,

St Peter’s parish ward, Worcester City Council