twowheelsgood

That Medical Centre sign is big enough for Cummings to use for testing his eyesight. The one on the gable facing the Station is even bigger. It's worth noting (or perhaps not) that none of the signs have planning permission/advertising consent.

Here is her response to the usual mis-informed and abusive chatter on facebook after the event; "Just for clarification I was already in tenby. My husband, budgie and I came away on Friday. I took time out of my holiday to attend the meeting ( smallest violin in the world I'm sure youre all saying). I wish I could say that I've had loads of days off due to covid but given that I am chair of staff side (head of the joint trade unions)at WVT I haven't had a day off since December including weekends. I put every working hour into the good of herefordshire in my professional role at WVT and my councillor role. I'm leading the project to get more local business into the council via our crazy procurement process. The debate today (which wasn't a debate) was theatre of local politics, something that could have been done by everyone sitting down and discussing it. I asked for the question to be put on the motion as the motion asked for a simple yes or no answer to allowing a debate. Had I not have asked that we could've been faced with another hour of debate before agreeing to debate which is absolutely crazy. The tenby comment was put in because a number of people talked about key workers and the importance of looking after them and i pointed out that this key worker was on her first break since the beginning of covid. I genuinely apologise if it caused offence, if wasnt intended"

Councillor Gemma Davies, Saxon Gate Ward, Cabinet Member - Commissioning, Procurement and Assets, no less. To be fair to her, she was arguing the protocol - it was a badly worded motion that suggested a vote for a discussion, not to then enter into the discussion itself at that point. It was poor chairmanship.

Council meeting - well, that's 3 hours of my life I'll never get back - what tedium. Motion debated by some who even admitted to not knowing Hereford, Central Ward councillor didn't speak and it was ultimately withdrawn.

Yes, I was hoping for a mass storming of the Shire Hall by the proletariat, demanding the heads of the 7 on spikes (metaphorically speaking) for this latest omnishambles, but presumably it will be a zoom meeting and the common sense of the masses will not be given a digital voice.

Shades of the infamous traffic reversal scheme!

I'll bet there's a 100 cyclists going the wrong way up St Owen's St for every 1 you'll see on Newmarket St - as AV says, you have to negotiate the Edgar Street roundabout and not many cyclists with a will to live want to do that - I cycle '000's of miles a year, but will go out of my way to avoid it. There's more of this nonsense to come - cycle lanes in both directions on Commercial Road and one on Ledbury Road ('uphill' it says, presumably eastbound). The full horror is listed in the first post. I know everyone's rightly complaining that this is a Council decision, and it is, but it was designed by BBLP, who should be called to account in no short order, likewise the Officers that signed it off.

Or a bus. From discussions with the Central Ward Councillor, it's pretty obvious that BBLP are now running the show - they weren't interested in any input from anyone. The result is that the Govt considered it such a poorly designed proposal they only offered 50% of the £40k claimed. Guess who's paying the rest?

It beggars belief that we now learn the cost for this minor repair is £2.65m - is any of BBLP's work independently audited and if not why not? Are we really getting 'best value'?

Tremendous gesture - I didn't even know this course existed! Where is it?

BBLP really are the pits. So much for the fundamental review of their contract we were promised at the last election by the present Council.

Very disappointed with the latest Council - promised so much but have yet to deliver anything in over 12 months. They appear to be frozen in the headlights, with Officers leading them a merry dance in the background. Let's commission some more reports to avoid any decisions!!

Yes, we've used them a couple of times - first class service.

But ... Cllr Davies is saying 'we have a vision' in the PR fluff piece above. If that isn't the case, why is she saying the contrary? "The fees of the management company will be covered by rental income" - that's either outrageous management fees or pitiful income. Either way, passing it off as one covering the other is hardly presenting a good business case. She's basically saying it doesn't make any money. What about servicing the cost of the capital borrowing? Is that covered by the rental income? Insurance, rates, cleaning, landlords costs etc? I did have high hopes for this Council but sadly, they are shaping up to be no better than previous incumbents - no coincidence the Officers are still the same perhaps? The ones really running the Council it seems, unelected and unaccountable.

I'm seeing quite a lot dumped onto verges and hedges, along with gloves, when I'm out on my bike. Being mostly blue, they are very obvious. People are disgusting for sure.

Completely baffling that there is no provision made in St Owens St for neither contra-flow cycling or widened footpaths for pedestrians. This despite a long standing desire for a cycle contra-flow, three very expensive consultations and detailed designs over decades and a shovel-ready scheme ready to go for the last two years. Perhaps it isn't baffling, just par for the course. It is disappointing though.

The traffic scheme? No point in even commenting on the detail - I've been increasingly disappointed by this Council - I had high hopes that they were a genuine force for good (and I'm sure they thought that too), but, after over a year in office, I'm just not seeing this being delivered. Officers will do what they want to do and whatever helps them climb the greasy pole - public comments are a necessary evil they have to go through, but we all know they are always ignored.

That 'BID' sign outside Left Bank (in the photo) is an absolute eyesore. Affects the setting of a Listed Building? I should say so! We're supposed to be getting rid of pointless street furniture not adding to it (and blocking a good chunk of pavement at the same time).

Stupid moves are Herefordshire Council's stock-in-trade - equally stupid was the closure of the hugely expensive toilets in East Street and Gaol Street - let's have these re-opened as well, especially as they give direct access off the street.

Very badly written press release (no surprise there) - this is NOT free parking for car park users (contradicting the opening para). Read the small print to say this is for "on street pay and display in Hereford". The Cabinet Members words are written to conveniently omit this. Cue lots of outraged letters by car park users who snaffle a penalty. The photo simply reinforces the error - perhaps change this for an on-street one?

Given that the controversial and universally unpopular on-street charges raise only £275k, less manpower and other costs, is there really a case for keeping it, given the huge financial hit the shops have taken because of it, even before the present crisis. Time to scrap it with immediate effect (I know, this Council do nothing immediately, but hey). Also, why are they paying a lease on the Maylords car park when they own the freehold? Some creative accounting?

Rent and rates have reached the level where many businesses simply cannot make any money and so premises stand empty. Supporting information for this application showed no demand for the shop, with rent and rates of £25k. Bridge St is changing from commercial to residential. This proposal is actually half decent in terms of the space it provides, unlike the others listed above.

Ridiculous, but it does show just how addictive junk food is.

I suspect many saw that moaning on forums was ultimately futile - it hasn't changed the Council, for instance, they are still staggeringly inefficient and incompetent. I foolishly thought this latest bunch would be better than the last bunch, but sadly not.

Was it part of the approved planning drawings? If so, it might be worth a question to Planning (and Keepmoat), although there is not usually a time limit to finish a development once it has started.