Jump to content

twowheelsgood

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,658

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    125

 Content Type 

Everything posted by twowheelsgood

  1. twowheelsgood
    As I said nearly a year ago, the ward councillor should be on top of this (perhaps not literally) and pulling together various bodies to get it sorted. It's not too long now until the elections, so all the councillors that we haven't seen for several years will be door knocking to tell us what a good job they're done and asking for our vote. Perhaps walk them round this mess.
  2. twowheelsgood
    Shockingly mediocre scheme, clearly done by people who've never been to Hereford, or been made aware of things like the May Fair. Why are there two major consultants working on this (one of whom specialise in motorways and airports, with no record at all of sensitive historic centre townscapes)? Cost to us?!! Visuals must have been done by the work experience lad/ladess on a Friday afternoon. Why do we keep paying for this sort of rubbish. There's already a very good and adopted townscape document - stick to it, make a decision, do it.
  3. twowheelsgood
    Planning permission has just been granted to replace the glazing with insulated panels. This follows a change in ownership of the freehold in 2017. Companies House shows no charges against the property, so where is the Council's charge?
  4. twowheelsgood
    We're in the middle of the most extraordinary reset in living history - Brexit, covid, energy costs, Putin's madness, rudderless government, climate change and so on - never has it been more important to concentrate on the UK becoming more self-sufficient, in food and energy at least. The madness of building houses on prime quality agricultural land has to stop. It's bad enough that out of touch politicians are now telling farmers to stop growing wheat and plant trees instead and paying them handsomely to do it. Trees won't feed us. Housing targets come from central government, the volume builders (who largely fund the tory party) will always take the easiest route (green fields) if allowed. We have huge amounts of brownfield land, even in Herefordshire - use that first. Yes, it costs more, but so be it - build more intensively to help with costs - the Victorian terraces that people love to live in are some of the most intensive housing ever built. Secondary (and some pride) shopping areas declining rapidly - lots of space there for housing. It all takes a bit more effort, which is something public servants are generally averse to.
  5. twowheelsgood
    Councillor Harrington's 'strong commitment to addressing the climate and ecological emergency' would be better demonstrated by making even a token effort at sorting out the traffic lights and traffic flows in and through the City (as promised at the last elections) - standing traffic here, there and everywhere belching out toxic fumes, resulting in parts of the City not even safe to breathe in. A Mickey Mouse moss pile at one such spot is a sticking plaster on a massive boil - addressing the problem, rather than masking it, would surely be a more honest way to go. As for EV's - few can afford the massive premium they initially attract, especially in the face of fiscal storm hitting this country. New ev points are not going to win the election in just nine months time.
  6. twowheelsgood
    Work is starting at the end of the month, despite detailed concerns by 33 objectors, including the ward councillor. The section between Cantilupe St and Bath St is to have vertical posts included with the lane demarcation features and the spacing of these be reduced to ensure vehicles cannot enter the contraflow cycle lane. I am reliably informed that costs have already further risen to £1m. Politically and economically, the timing could not be worse, but still the Cabinet Member ploughs on (despite saying, only a little while ago, that he was uneasy at the then cost of £300k).
  7. twowheelsgood
    I think energy companies have discovered that the direct debit mandate effectively provides them with free money. The Direct Debit Guarantee to the consumer seems to be worthless, despite claiming to be 'monitored and protected by your own bank or building society' (which, given banking's reputation, isn't saying much). I've had issues in the past with the major suppliers, and had a smaller one go bust on me, but have been with Octopus for a couple of years and found them reasonably fair and open. I think if you have a SMETS2 smart meter (as I have), that makes a big difference to how they manage their direct debit, as it makes their projections forecast more accurate. The downside of course is that come the energy shortages, they can shut off your supplies remotely! So far, it's gone up once from £106 to £183, they've told me it should be £221 but I've ignored that. Unfortunately, this government have no interest in sorting the mess out - it suits their friends in business very well and I don't see Truss changing the status quo.
  8. twowheelsgood
    Seems bizarre - why don't they just put it in their own bin?
  9. twowheelsgood
    You can still report them via the website in my link above.
  10. twowheelsgood
    All it needs is a couple of teams of conscientious men/women/other gender with vans with a selection of kit whose job it would be to permanently go around the City, street by street, clearing weeds, debris, graffitti, broken and illegal signs, getting gullies cleared and generally proactively tidying and maintaining, and within twelve months the place would look completely different. Our street hasn't been swept for three years - it used to happen about every 6 months, it's that constant unseen reduction in services that is increasingly manifesting in the run down appearance of the City (and the County). Yes, councillors will bleat on about reduction in income, but what they have is still being squandered at an alarming level, so that argument doesn't really stack up in my view. It's nitty gritty housekeeping we need, not endless vanity projects, but then it was ever thus.
  11. twowheelsgood
    Yes, I'm afraid they've had plenty of time to make significant differences to traffic and air quality with small, common sense changes, but no, nothing. The City itself is filthy, run down, covered in weeds and graffiti, roads full of holes etc etc. On the ground, nothing has changed for visitors in 3 years. "We are working hard in a number of ways to reduce emissions from vehicles" - really? Has JH even read what some dopey staff member has written for him?
  12. twowheelsgood
    After decades of neglect, I doubt £25k is going to make any dent at all, especially at BBLP's rates (and standards of work).
  13. twowheelsgood
    Can't help but think this is a sticking plaster on the much bigger problem of just too much traffic, which this Council have failed to do anything about in the last 3 years. Perhaps if they followed through on election pledges and turned off some traffic lights to reduce standing traffic, things might improve.
  14. twowheelsgood
    That image is misleading (from the previous consultation, one of so many) - the scheme has been changed (again) and the cycle lane now runs between the footpath and the parked cars and will sport green macadam.
  15. twowheelsgood
    How about you give me the £20 and keep the strimmer? We both win ...
  16. twowheelsgood
    Would you accept £40?
  17. twowheelsgood
    The grandly titled Director of Assurance and Resources is not very reassuring in this report. £54k for a piece of software is a lot of money. The report is badly written and doesn't justify the spend. There are no other comparative costs mentioned, nor, crucially, does it refer to any ongoing costs - yes, full breakdown should have been in the report, but the decision has been made. This isn't 'negative council bashing' or 'tripe', it's questions being asked about the spending of our money when, all the time, we are given the message that there isn't money for essentials, whilst spending on planters and the like is seemingly out of control. This forum has a very long history of calling out the Council when needs be - it's not jumping on anything.
  18. twowheelsgood
    Both links have bene taken down ... read into that what you will. I did manage to read the auditors report before it disappeared - good grief! For 14 months, officers and staff concealed the facts from councillors that BBLP is a non-trading company with £100 in the bank! What on earth were they on (apart from huge salaries)? What an unholy mess - we've been paying £20m+ a year to a company that doesn't exist! Were these the same officers and staff that concealed the facts and lied to councillors about the massive overspend (and protracted legal wrangles over compulsory purchase) for the link road? What will ti take for this administration (or the next one) to sort out the pervading culture in Plough Lane?
  19. twowheelsgood
    So, this is what you get for £60k of our money - really, not a lot is it? About £6k per square metre - for about a third of that rate, you can comfortably build a new house. Overdue on delivery, of course, should have been finished last week.
  20. twowheelsgood
    Precisely, the road is already there, £850k with the so called management plan fee - it's just under 0.25 mile, so that’s £3.4m a mile. That's without officer time, and the last 20 years of reports, consultations, designs, four separate measured surveys and so on. Seriously, no one has a clue in Plough Lane. I thought they were bringing in a new project manager to get a grip on these things (away from BBLP). The fact that it is ring fenced money is immaterial - all of these projects and costs have come from the council to go in the application.
  21. twowheelsgood
    Couldn't agree more. The recent Consumer Data Research Centre (CDRC) report in the HT highlights the City Centre as having air quality as bad as in London in many places. This isn't new, but this administration were elected on the promise that they would sort out the traffic in the City and sort out BBLP. They haven't done either, nor have they delivered a single piece of cycling infrastructure, all of which would have contributed to cleaner air and better health. Instead we have profligate spending on endless consultations, planters and vanity projects and, with the elections barely a year away, the spectre of a return to tory rule. The City roads are crumbling whilst unclassified lanes in the middle of nowhere continue to get complete resurfacing. The Great Western Way desperately needs improvement - proposals were tabled in 2019 as part of the Hereford Transport Package - a relatively cheap investment into green transport, but again, nothing has happened. £770k + 10% management fee for St Owen's Street cyclepath - the road is already there, this is lunacy, a year ago this scheme was costed at £300k. This administration are keen to blame the last administration for overspends, but they've very rapidly gone the same route.
  22. twowheelsgood
    Yes, complete demolition by the look of it. Very sustainable.
  23. twowheelsgood
    Where will the Council hold their meetings now? They've block booked the hotel for the last 18 months or so at some considerable expense, despite owning numerous other buildings they could use for no cost, not the least their own £multi-million HQ in Plough Lane. As for the application, the Council will be happy to take the money, so it's likely a done deal.
  24. twowheelsgood
    Here's a better idea to encourage people to cycle - make the roads safer. Bath St is a rutted nightmare and of course the St Owens St cycle path is still missing, 21 years and counting. Very few of the City's roads are actually pleasant or safe to cycle on and even the Great Western Way needs some love after so many ears providing sterling service (the mooted improvements publicised three years ago have not materialised). Nearly three years in and this green/indie council have yet to deliver a single piece of new cycling infrastructure (or turn off a traffic light) in the City and no, bits of white paint don't count. Who locks their bike in Gaol Street to go shopping anyway? Why not more racks in High Town which are always full. SO many issues to resolve.
  25. twowheelsgood
    The obvious thing to do is introduce residents parking permits for use in the car parks, for those residents who live in the middle of Kington, and who are minimising the use of their vehicles (as prescribed by this eco-Council) by being able to walk to the shops, school etc. To then penalise them them for a) doing the right thing and b) helping to keep the core of the town alive and c) not being able to park on their property because of the street patterns is really not a good look (and counter to everything the Council claim to stand for). So yeah, lets throw (more than) a few grand at a study that no one will read and which could be better spent on our crumbling infrastructure. I expressed these views to Cllr Harrington before the meeting - no reply. I note the last paragraph - deliver economic benefits (to Plough Lane) ie not benefits to the residents. Did the lazy officers who proposed this nonsense not think to align it with the 'emerging scoping work', due to be published in just a few weeks? After three years, time has run out to keep blaming it all on previous incumbents - we're still waiting for those traffic lights to be turned off, amongst so many other things. Herefordshire Council - never knowingly achieving.
×
×
  • Create New...