Floral tributes near the scene of the collision

• LET me first express condolences to the family and friends of the young man who lost his life, (Cyclist death leads to questions over rush hour construction lorry traffic, June 1).

The least Camden owes him is to learn some lessons. Your report, and the summary of the council meeting last October, raise a number of points.

First: the council owes a duty to the public in reviewing a construction management plan (CMP).

Second: if the council knows a plan is not going to be monitored or enforced, it should take a particularly prudent approach in reviewing it and make a point of not allowing activities or procedures, including routes, which are inherently dangerous.

Third: it sounds as if the council has not heard of the principle that “polluter pays”. If the council does not have the resources to monitor compliance, then an independent expert should be appointed to discharge that function, at the cost of the developer; and produce regular public reports. Alternatively this could be funded out of the CIL, community infrastructure levy.

Increasingly one gets the impression that developers submit their proposals for grandiose schemes in central London without fully working out the methodology or implications.

It is only when they achieve the permission which uplifts the value of their asset that they address in sufficient detail (and with less public scrutiny) the question of how or, indeed, whether their project can be carried out safely, and consistent with Camden residents’ legitimate expectations of retaining some degree of amenity.

PETER BLOXHAM, WC2