Denise Lloyd Posted June 15, 2015 Report Posted June 15, 2015 I like that well done GK - how are the in laws?
greenknight Posted June 15, 2015 Report Posted June 15, 2015 Gone..I've taken the day off to recover.
Cambo Posted June 18, 2015 Report Posted June 18, 2015 Is it deadline day today to get your objections in?
Cloudberry Posted June 18, 2015 Report Posted June 18, 2015 Yes, today is the deadline. Don't be fooled that the Environment Agency and Highways England apparently have few objections. They don't live here, probably just glanced at a map in a hurry... There's no doubt. This road can't do what they say it will. It won't help reduce congestion, won't reduce carbon emissions, won't reduce traffic noise, won't reduce accidents, won't encourage physical activity. How could it? All it could do would be to link two main roads (from Abergavenny and Ross) that still converge on ASDA roundabout. It wouldn't be dual carriageway and would have no cycle lanes. It might help access the Enterprise Zone a bit, but not that much. All this is going to cost £27 million, which makes it a VERY expensive piece of road!
Aylestone Voice Posted June 18, 2015 Report Posted June 18, 2015 If you send a support ( ) or and objection after today it will still be considered. But you will not be able to use the online form - send an e-mail to the case officer or a letter
Cloudberry Posted June 18, 2015 Report Posted June 18, 2015 Why do you want to support it AV? You think that opening up land for new housing is a good thing perhaps? And maybe that putting houses around Grafton (irrespective of ancient woodland etc.) is a great choice? And that it won't matter that all those extra cars from all those new houses will be ADDING to congestion on Ross Road and Belmont Road? And perhaps you think that extending a southern link road into a "western relief road" will solve all Hereford's congestion problems?! If this is what you think, dream on! "Relief roads" can only ever address congestion issues if there are NO new houses, with NO new people each relying on their car. What do you think the people of Worcester were promised? And what have they got now?
Aylestone Voice Posted June 18, 2015 Report Posted June 18, 2015 Sorry if my post led you to believe I was in support - I could not find a tongue in cheek symbol! Actually I am not sure either way I believe that for the city to progress there is a need for new housing and new jobs. They are most likely to have to go on the edge of the city as apart from ESG there is little brownfield land available. That is unless you relocate Heineken and Cargill. That said when I last looked the Core Strategy did not propose new housing at Grafton, but at Three Elms Whitecross, Bullinghope and Holmer. And new housing needs access because as much as many would want the occupants will drive cars. I am not convinced that there will be enough support to get people out of their cars and I cannot see P&R/bus lanes working so perhaps a by-pass is needed and the SLR looks like it is the first phase with the rest to be built on the back of new housing. I am all for less cars on the road - I cycle every day Actually reading your post again I cannot understand why you are so aggressive towards me. So I will say no more
jeanharris Posted June 18, 2015 Report Posted June 18, 2015 I can understand why Cloudberry is so cross. None of this has been properly thought through by the council. They have not done cost/benefit analysis on the link road and cannot prove that this is value for money - Our money remember!! Do we really want to see Broiler houses popping up everywhere on the landscape Do we want to see the destruction of beautiful 300+ year old trees that the council say are only 40+ yrs I think you can rest assured AV that Grafton will be developed and council farms sold off - our farms remember as we are the rate payers The SLR does not mean that the WRR will be built. The CS has not yet been approved and within that document it states that the corridor for the WRR will remain open until 2032, so we are left with this piddling little road to nowhere at a cost of 27 millions of pounds. Enough said!!!
Cloudberry Posted June 18, 2015 Report Posted June 18, 2015 Sorry AV, I didn't mean to sound agressive, just arguing a case! And there were lots of "perhaps"! The rest of my reply is addressed to everyone! Are you sure that Hereford really does need to "progress" to such an extent? If you want a town where you can develop economic growth with "house and jobs", do you choose somewhere like Hereford in the first place? Do you choose a relatively remote town/city where central congestion is already bad and unless you can get people out of cars there aren't really any remedies? The Council's own transport studies have shown that a by-pass would be poor value for money because the majority of journeys are all in and out of Hereford and relatively few are through it. We are stuck with congestion, a by-pass won't help, and more houses/people/cars can only make it very much worse. Do you think Cargill and Heineken will expand and provide more jobs? What other job opportunities might there be? We do have the Enterprise Zone, but why has it not been supported properly, e.g. with a railhead? Not that many new jobs yet there, are there? Do you think new jobs rely on new homes being built? There are still brand new homes for sale at The Furlongs they don't seem able to sell. And many of the people who really do need homes in Hereford actually need the affordable variety, that the developers aren't so keen on building, not so much profit. I don't want to see so much money spent on road schemes that can't do what they are promising, when there are so many other things crying out for support.
Maggie May Posted June 18, 2015 Report Posted June 18, 2015 I didnt realise until it was too late when I was talking to someone today, that apparently to widen the Belmont Road for the bus lane that the houses between the Railway Bridge and Walnut Tree Avenue are all to lose their front garden!! It doesn't make sense as I thought the road in the public display showed trees down the middle of the road somewhere in Belmont. Is this why they have only shown the route of the new Road and not what will be happening in Hereford.My friend also said that there were to be other changes along Belmont road to widen the carriageway but they couldn't remember what. Perhaps Cllr Phil Edwards will be able to explain what is happening as I understand he supports this plan.
megilleland Posted June 18, 2015 Author Report Posted June 18, 2015 Photo montage of Belmont Road in this topic here (post 9 & 10).
Maggie May Posted June 18, 2015 Report Posted June 18, 2015 Thanks Megilleland for the link to the pictures. I see they only show the Belmont road looking up towards the Oval development, with lots of trees in the middle of the road. The pictures dont seem to show the section of the road looking the other way towards the Asda roundabout, as surely that is where the Council will be grabbing peoples' front gardens for the Walnut Tree Avenue junction. Jean Harris got a nasty shock about losing oak trees in her garden for the Clehonger Road link but there are going to be quite a few more people directly affected if suddenly the buses along Belmont road are literally going right past your doorstep!. I don't think any of these people are aware of what is likely to be happening until like Jean they get a letter on their doormat. This was kept very quiet during the election wasn't it.
Amanda Martin Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 Final call for Hereford Transport Forum's meeting tonight in the Shire Hall at 7.30pm. Speakers are John Stewart and Cllr Anthony Powers. Should be a really good evening - entertaining and informative. We desperately need to stimulate debate about this issue in Herefordshire before the Council drags the county into decay and poverty. Meanwhile, I've been busy mashing my head with the plethora of reports the Council has commissioned over recent years. At what must have been vast public expense, the Council have commissioned numerous reports and it's clear that they decided what their objective was and then looked for the appraisal result they wanted to fit it but the results are the same: the bottom line is that by 2032, even with the western bypass, various pinch points and Southern Link Road, congestion along north and south route corridors will be as bad if not worse than it was in 2012. JMP Consultants Ltd were commissioned to identify the "trigger" point at which further intervention i.e. the western bypass would become irresistible. That year is 2027 by which time any benefits of interim capacity increases will have been "completely eroded". So we will have lost the trees, Grafton Wood and a huge area of irreplaceable landscape west of Hereford for nothing and will still have an intractable traffic problem. By 2032 the Council's triumph of a transport "strategy", including the western bypass, the number of annual average daily cycling trips will have increased from 3% of all trips into and around the city compared to 2% today for the AM peak. Result eh? JMP found that in 2012 , 99% of trips between Whitecross and Rotherwas were made by car, even though this is a twenty minute bike ride, with 62% of trips made between Westfields and the centre. The centre of the city was found to be the main trip destination at any one time, which is logical. So there is our problem - not through traffic. I learned yesterday evening, from someone who knows about these things, that for the purpose of assessing a scheme's economic case, a scheme's time savings benefits can be seconds for each person using the road but they are aggregated. Therefore, those tiny and unnoticeable seconds are multiplied by the number of forecast road users to make the scheme's benefit:cost ratio stack up. It's insane but the politicians won't stand up to the road lobby and the professionals just want to keep drawing their salaries.
Denise Lloyd Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 More about this incredible news on our blog: http://bettertransport.org.uk/…/230615-hastings-pollution-v… Victory in Hastings: permission for Gateway road quashed News just in: Hastings Borough Council has accepted that it made an error of law in granting planning permission for the £15 million Queensway Gateway road, and... BETTERTRANSPORT.ORG.UK
Amanda Martin Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 Just shows what can be done with an informed challenge. John Stewart may know about this.
jeanharris Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 Interesting Representation posted today commenting on SLR PA151314. Guess who from - YES you have got it Mrs Phil Edwards. Quite selfish comments may I suggest. I don't want the road going through the field next to me and most definitely not through my garden. Nothing constructive from her. Is he responsible for suggesting that people in Belmont Road may lose their precious gardens
Amanda Martin Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 Just read it - what can you say? Speechless for once.
Denise Lloyd Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 It was a very poor letter did not really make that much sense to me - she was obviously being advised as to what to say
Maggie May Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 I have read Mrs Phil Edwards comments on the SLR and I am quite surprised at what she says. If all the lorries are to go on the A49 into Hereford surely that will be a nightmare for all the residents along the Ross Road. The Ross Road includes the access to a lot of the primary and secondary schools in South Wye so surely this will discourage children walking or cycling to school and make things even worse! Instead of asking for measures to tackle the traffic and reduce congestion she just seems to want to put in front of someone else's garden, house or community area. Surely the noise and the fumes from the new road will carry across the land and cause more noise and pollution to the Country Park, especially with a 9m high railway bridge. She might have a rather nasty shock when this road is built.
Denise Lloyd Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 Of course it makes sense now - that was his selling point when he was canvassing. What most people complain about is traffic - he would have said don't worry we will put right - and that explains why so few people are interested and think the SLR is the saviour - there needs to be some serious re-education in a short space of time. Glenda I think was one the few who was against this road and so the result of the election.
dippyhippy Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 Just read the Edwards' representation. What on earth can you say to that?? I just do not understand the thought process behind that.... and whoever wrote it, doesn't appear to understand the issue at all. My blood pressure was on the rise. I then read John Harringtons. I feel better now.
Amanda Martin Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 Hope you can come tonight Dippy. It will do your blood pressure the world of good to hear John Stewart talking sense.
jeanharris Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 I think she tried to disguise herself. She is not a MS as she is now married to the infamous Phil Edwards. She is always known as Bobbie. Obviously he has put her up to objecting - probably wrote it himself as I know she is more educated that this letter implies You are absolutely right Maggie May These residents down the Callow want a quiet life so why should this crazy road be moved to affect my life.. Why should the people in Belmont Road lose their front gardens and where will they park their cars
Denise Lloyd Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 Love the repesentation on behalf of the The Green. My mother's first cousin Miss Winifred Prosser lived there with her parents Harry and Maud Prosser all absolutely lovely people. They would turn in their graves if they knew what the Council had up their sleeves for the Green.
dippyhippy Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 A very interesting meeting, and quite well attended, which is encouraging. I listened intently. One thing struck me, more than anything else. We have report after report. (Many of which are littered with inaccuracies.)We have consultation after consultation.(Many of which are meaningless box ticking exercises.) We have expert after expert, advisor after advisor, and a few consultants thrown in for good measure. (We are constantly told we have no money..... this little lot must have cost a small fortune.) Lovely. But it really isn't rocket science. It really shouldn't be too difficult a concept to grasp, that we should start easing Hereford's traffic issues, with small, sustainable, relatively cheap changes first. Evaluate the impact these have, before even considering permanently scarring the face of our beautiful county. The road will not solve any problems. It will not aid the so called Enterprise Zone. It is not the answer to Hereford's prayers. It quite simply is an idea which has been mis - sold to many. Those who really want to stop this, now need to work together, under one umbrella. Lots of groups, forums, Facebook pages etc. only serve to confuse. Folks need a clear sign post to a one stop shop, for information about a campaign. Amanda Martin and the other speakers did a great job of sharing information,and their vision, for how things could be.(John Stewart's common sense approach did indeed lower my blood pressure!.) This now needs to be presented to,and heard by, a much wider audience. As Tony Johnson also attended, perhaps he could make a start, by sharing with members of the cabinet........
Glenda Powell Posted June 24, 2015 Report Posted June 24, 2015 can someone post what Bobby Edwards wrote here please, thank you.
jeanharris Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 Sorry I can't copy and paste it but if you go onto the council's planning site. Type in 151314 you will see the report by Roberta Edwards.
Amanda Martin Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 You're so right Dippy. The principles are straightforward but embracing them, for some people, entails a step change in thinking and that takes time. Also you weren't the only one to comment on the need to rationalise the various forums. Since the Edgar Street trees campaign John Perkins has doggedly kept the media presence going and the sites are his babies but this is something I think he may be considering now. We have to go and sort out my daughter's mouldy bathroom shortly but two things occur: 1. In the light of Tony Johnson's observation that we could have asked one of the Cabinet along to join in and put an opposing view, I think we should organise another meeting and do just that - a question time style format but with the kind of public interaction we had last night; 2. Better late than never, but I'm all for organising that study trip to the Netherlands, open to anyone who wants to come. You read about their bikes and buses and home zones but seeing it for yourself and talking to transport professionals out there just blows you away . I'm thinking September. John Stewart will help me organise it. Thanks to all of you who came along - we really appreciate it. Heroine of the hour was Kate who really lit a fire under proceedings. I need to track her down. Colin, someone mentioned trams. I realised that you had dropped below the radar a little bit because of your trips abroad but it would be great if you could stay involved.
Cloudberry Posted June 25, 2015 Report Posted June 25, 2015 For me the meeting was disappointing as I expected more than just preaching to the converted. Opportunities were missed. I expected the meeting to at least collect contact details so that those people there could be contacted easily. Why was the meeting not advertised through lots of other groups' email circulation lists (Three Elms, parish councils, wildlife groups maybe?) Why were not ALL Councillors invited? Various people had ideas but there was no effort to collect those ideas and consider their implications. What happens next? This should be the time to explore all the options that could really work best for Herefordians.
Recommended Posts