I read with interest the letter from Miles Guerrini which appeared in this week’s edition of your paper and there are a number of points which I would like to make.

In his letter about the proposed development of The Waterloo, Mr Guerrini makes the point that The Waterloo “...seemed like an inspired position - really central and not affecting a huge amount of residents...” (Incidentally, later on, in his penultimate paragraph, Mr Guerrini refers to The Waterloo as being on “the edge of town”).

In fact, of all the possible sites available, The Waterloo affects the greatest number of residents.

Many dozens of people reside in the area immediately surrounding the existing carpark and those dozens turn into hundreds when you consider all the people who would be affected by having such a large carpark as proposed.

It is not just residents of The Waterloo itself, but those also in Corinium Gate, who will back directly on to the structure, Victoria Road, Dyer Street, London Road and others who will be affected.

The congestion and pollution in the area leading up to, and at, the traffic lights into The Waterloo, already very bad at peak times, will experience a very significant increase if the development goes ahead and many of the residents affected are elderly and vulnerable.

Mr Guerrini goes on to say that he has heard rumours that the development may not now take place.

I have heard no such rumours, but, if they are true, the Cotswold District Council leadership and the parking board should be applauded, not pilloried, for having the courage to step back and reconsider their whole strategy in the light of changing circumstances.

Cotswold District Council have clearly taken the perceived parking problems in Cirencester very seriously and are in the process of creating hundreds of extra car parking places - the Old Hospital site, the Kennels in Cirencester Park and at the Rugby Club (note that two of those really are on the edge of town) - and it may well be that they have solved the problem without spending millions of pounds.

I, for one, would much rather see £15m+ being spent on providing care for the elderly, helping the homeless and disadvantaged, addressing environmental issues, etc, etc than on a gargantuan structure whose only purpose is to encourage drivers to bring their vehicles into the town.

Things have moved on quite significantly in recent months regarding climate change, nationally and internationally, and it is encouraging that national and local government are beginning to take responsibility for the climate emergency.

Local government in particular can make a huge difference by discouraging, not encouraging, the use of motor vehicles in and around the centre of towns and cities.

Colin Young