Bilbobobby

I see that at long last the pillar posts have been fixed at the Widemarsh entrance towards High Town. Perhaps that will stop 'random drivers' thinking they can enter the area on a whim. Next get a proper traffic order to prevent haphazard dangerous parking in a day time pedestrianised zone. (I see many business are putting a-boards out to stop vehicles parking on the paved areas). How much longer will this go on ?

Corporate spiel my axxxs Where's the public duty of reporting information of crimes and who did it. Gossip on a social media site is not evidence and may just be that pure gossip without foundation

The application is still within the 28 day consultation period. So if anyone has any representations for or against the application and based on the licensing objectives they can submit them direct to the licensing authority Additionally if anyone has evidence or information about illegal activities with regards to counterfeit/illegal alcohol or tobacco sales at any shop or private premises - licensed or otherwise- they can report it to the council Trading Standards, the police or to Crimestoppers.

As you know traffic is prohibited from entering or leaving the High Town side of Widemarsh St., between 1030 & 1630 daily. We all also know the council failed to put in place traffic regulations to prevent/manage parking at all times. So what's happening At great expense the road layout was upgraded with a defined road and footpaths. Now mornings involve cars and delivery vehicles filling the delivery bays and straddling the footpaths. This is further compounded with builders vans parking on the footpaths all day whilst working at the new fish restaurant. Car owners have caught on quite quickly to beat the parking costs and parking all day for free. Cyclists ride along the street (road and footpath) in both directions all day. So how long will it be before harm is caused to pedestrians through driver disregard and no enforcement. Worcester has a similar problem in The Shambles with an elderly lady crushed by a lorry last year. The council there are undertaking a public consultation to see what the local needs are Who is the enforcement authority and who will take responsibility and sort out the obvious dangers that I feel will get worse Debate!

The guidance issued under section 182 Licensing Act 2003 covers licensing reviews. Within this part of the guidance it lists a number of criminal activities that the Home Secretary has decided as serious and as such the police or other responsibe authorities should consider using the review process to deter such conduct. If a review is launched, the regulatory committee should consider revocation even if the first occasion. Activities covered (summary) include location for criminal gangs; child exploration, drug dealing, illegal alcohol/tobacco, pornography, employment of illegal immigrants..there are more named... So the principle to use this process is to check if the premises has a licence to sell alcohol. If it does not or is purely licensed for late night refreshment or regulated entertainment from a licensing point of view NOTHING can be done. I am not aware of any laws which can close a shop if not a licensed premises if caught selling non duty paid or illegal alcohol or tobacco. So if a premises looses it's licence to sell alcohol and continues to sell such stuff it will be down to the local Trading Standards office to take action, that's their remit, they have additional powers and are expected to take appropriate action supported by the police and others.

For those who are interested. The full licensing review hearing is to be held at 1100hrs on Tuesday 29 March. A decision should be made on the day.

For those who are interested. The full licensing review hearing is to be held at 1100hrs on Tuesday 29 March. A decision should be made on the day.

Briefly work in progress. Any PSPO is owned by the council, who responsible for all aspects of the consultation. Anything included in the order has to be evidenced based - easy to say there's a problem, but has to be 'evidence' to say there is a problem. I can't say what will be included or what particular areas will be covered, nor when it will be introduced - that's all down to the council

Good or bad...anyone with a messured opinion?

Good or bad...anyone with a messured opinion?

Good or bad...anyone with a messured opinion?

Has anyone considered asking the council how many employees of all grades are provided with a free parking permit or subsidised parking to park on council managed car parks? I have seen cars parked with council permits across the length and breadth of county & especially in the city centre. Why? What makes them entitled? Is it time that there is a level playing field for all...

Apparent legal advice HT have/work to is - if receive a complaint they will delete the post, but under no circumstances will they edit it. Reason being is they did they become legally liable

Public Space Protection Order - PSPO owned by the local authority who can introduce a local order that is deemed necessary to deal with ASB that has a detrimental effect on the public/community. You may be aware of 'alcohol free areas' that again are owned by the council and cover various locations across the county intended to prevent street drinking that could result in ASB - these orders are purely about alcohol unlike PSPO which are about the wider issue of ASB. So bear with me. The alcohol free zones 'die' late 2017, hopefully the local authority will likely introduce PSPO prior to this, PSPO have a life span of 3 years and have to subject to regular review to see if still relevant or need extending/amending/revoking. A PSPO can be used to deal with areas that should be alcohol free zones plus numerous other broader issues such as the following- Dog control - numerous aspects Vehicle nuisance Begging Busking Unlicensed street trading Charity collectors Cycling in pedestrian areas Urinating/deficating in public spaces Driving off road Remote control vehicles such as drones These are purely broad headings and many will not be relevant to the city or others in the county, there may be other matters which can be considered. You are probably thing it's a bit big brother, but I can say that many of the issues that could be included are already included in UK law. The pupose of the PSPO is to be specific with regards to ASB issues that effect your own communities. The whole purpose is to stop the behaviour and whilst some limited matters will likely end up with a fine, most will be dealt by saying stop and only result in a fine if the behaviour continues. There are a number of PSPO in existence across England and Wales, for example many purely cover alcohol free zones, but some - especially in bigger cities cover issues such as vehicle nuisance (car cruising in Kensington High Street) chugger, busking, begging and even feeding pigeons! The council if they consider introducing an order have to consult with the police, the office of the PCC and any other interested parties - I would hope the last aspect covers the public. Any matters covered by a PSPO have to be evidenced based - not purely nice to have through a big brother approach. Enforcement would be down to the police,local authority or any other authorised person. This is not a cash cow for any local authority, the way the law is written is about stopping the ASB that does have a detrimental impact on the quality of life of our communities - and that includes you, me and the businesses that support the economy of our county

Well perhaps someone with a vested interest - not alleged victim/suspect - decided to blow a story up into something that it isn't. Perhaps to be a bit mischievous or something a bit more spiteful?

I agree with Roger and know 100% that there is no approved authorised council rank in Bewell Street, however the thread is about an alleged incident at the location. Police are investigating, but who slipped it to the press and why? This type of reporting does nothing to portray the city as it really is...

To assist. Orginally application was granted. No objection against application made by the police. Objector appealed to mags court as is their right. Matter referred back to licensing committee for 'new' hearing. Both sides represented by licensing solicitors/barristers - adjourned once but hopefully will be heard late January 2016. No secrets here all part of public record!..

Choices. Empty run down shops. Boarded up pubs. Scruffy unkempt frontages. Pop up Christmas shops. Too many restaurants. So whats the issue with a bit of blue paint brightening up an area of the city which is lost and pretty much out on a limb ..

Planning is one side of the application. Licensing is the other. The venue is within the council CIZ, the police will support applications within the CIZ if all the 'i's' are dotted and the 't's' are crossed. The 28 day consultation period has started and until this ends the true position on who has what view won't be known. So watch this space....

To make the rank legal in Bewell St Tesco have been asked a number of times to put their hand in their pocket to pay for road lay-out work. No was the answer. To change or put in place a new road order can take years. Look at the mess in Widemarsh St with delivery vehicles and taxis making the road a straight line mornings before 1030 and evenings after 430pm Plus cars left there all day with no enforcement in a supposed traffic free area. Why. Because the council forgot to put in place a traffic order when the road lay out was changed. Put ranks where they are needed Put traffic orders where they are needed Enforce where required

First - have the council/Balfour been approached and asked to put it right. Second - community clean-up? Third - community art walls Make it safe, bright & welcoming

Correction Its actually 3am all days PLUS 4.30am Friday, Saturday and Sunday BEFORE BH's. ActualBH's are 3am This is what the owners wanted and was agreed with the police prior to the hearing Other venues can look at demand and consider their options - so give it a go I say

I found the actual programme a very poor reflection on the city and the attitude of the one CEO disgraceful - arrogant and smarmy to say the very least. The programme also proported to show the 'head of parking' in Hereford - well unless they have a rapid change of manager, it definitely wasn't him!!

The council say to increase taxi spaces or to create new ranks is not a priority unless its a clear road safety issue. It will normally take 2-3 YEARS to get it sorted. In the meantime unofficial ranks continue to operate without challenge by street enforcement (traffic wardens in old money) because its too confrontational/unsafe to ask a taxi to move. One rule 4 one, another rule for others. Vast majority of taxi drivers are law abiding citizens, its the few who take the p... who ruin it for the majority by blatantly ignoring parking restrictions or basic common sense.

After reading the article in the HT about the over zealous street warden, I thought a debate should be started about the number - or lack of - taxi ranks in the city. I understand that ranks are based in - 1 St Peters Sq - 2 spaces 2. Commercial Rd - both sides numerous from 7pm 3. Broad St 4. Bridge Street 5. Maylord Orchards slip road That means there are NO official ranks in Widemarsh Street, St Owen Street near the Barrels, Bluschool Street near Play and Bewell Street near Tescos. So what to do. Quite clear not enough spaces and ranks in the wrong places Perhaps something for the council to look at to ensure a proper regulated service with enough spaces at the right locations and at right time of the day and night