Frank Smith

Good news for the club 

8 hours ago, Alex said:

I hate seeing poor animals stuck in cars, if I ever see a dog stuck in a hot car I will just smash the window and call the police

I would probably do the same thing. Annoys me because people wouldn't leave a small child in the car so why leave their dog, no excuse.

I was at the Spur retail park yesterday and Halfords area has been cleaned up, lets hope that they keep it looking as good as it did this week

More housing too close to the city centre, more traffic jams and traffic lights to follow 

8 minutes ago, Alex said:

They should just close these shops down! Funny how it is always non European people who own these so called European shops, it is all a front for their illegal activities! 

I completely agree Alex

This is tragic news, I was only thinking today that we had not seen any updates. RIP 

It is still not good 

4 hours ago, Aylestone Voice said:

There may be good reasons why planning permission should or should not be granted but does it matter what religion those attending practise?

Not to me anyway

If you are referring to my previous post, I merely pointed out that this looks like it could become a mosque, personally, I am not sure Hereford is ready for a mosque, especially in this location, just my opinion. There were plenty of people complaining about the Freedom Church so I do not see what the difference is here. This location is totally wrong in my view.

I think this is going to be a mosque, looking at the prayer times

May this man rest in peace, he certainly deserves too.

This is good news, well done to the council for supporting our ex-forces, we do not look after them enough. 'Thank you for your service'

I hope the police catch these scumbags 

Thank you for all the updates, it is all looking nice and fresh 

12 hours ago, ragwert said:

From what I can see of what is being built it looks nothing like the plans

 

I am surprised that Hereford Housing never purchased the cottages to make the new apartments go all the way around, there is a fenced off area where Ray Bubbs used to be full of weeds that have now turned into mini trees it looks a right eyesore.

Classic Ha ha Happy New Year Bobby47 have a good one my friend.

Ooo I will have to go and have a look but this is a good idea and will drive traffic to both websites.

I love the independent quarters, nice shops, nice people and nice coffee 

Congratulations Bill this is a beautiful photograph 

I use this Oval as a rat run and I have done for many years, why wouldn't I? It saves me at least 20 mins or more from my journey, tbh only local people would be aware and it will only be for an hour or so during the week, so i do not see what the problem is here? I have been using this rat run way before these houses were ever there. I am not being awkward but if local people didn't use these little runs there would be even more traffic sat on the belmont rd.

First class well done to you all

I love this idea and I already see that the HT have misinformed everyone over the costs.

Hello Frank. My guess is that these figures and statistics reflect the fact that cyclist fatalities and serious injury are low throughout the Country because most cyclists are riding on pavements rather than upon our roads.

Do we ever see Moms and Dads riding bikes with their little ones in the City centre and in amongst the heavy congested traffic? Very rarely if ever at all. It's simply not safe and so they make use of the safety of a pavement.

If anyone can acknowledge that parts of our City are unsafe for cyclists, then it follows that there are real and valid reasons why people ride their bikes on our pavements.

 

Prove it!

 

You are just guessing in order for your argument to suit your agenda.

There are very few locations within our City that can accomadate people, cyclists and vehicular traffic and so I feel it's for the best that cyclists use footpaths to maintain their own safety.

In an ideal place, which our City is not, the Police could enforce the law and prosecute cyclists for riding on the pavement, but thankfully, they like many of us see that it's better to have pedestrians and cyclists on our footpaths rather than people getting killed cycling on roads that are no longer fit for purpose.

If I were a cyclist, and I'm not, I'd be on the footpath with the rest of them who see our roads and their congested traffic as a chance to get flattened and dead.

Just to put this into perspective bobby, here are a few facts.

 

 

20. How risky is cycling? Is cycling really that dangerous?

No. In general, cycling in Britain is a relatively safe activity.

Using official police-reported road casualty figures, road traffic reports, population stats and the National Travel Survey, Cycling UK calculates that, on average, over 2012-16:

• One cyclist was killed on Britain’s roads for every 30 million miles travelled by cycle - the equivalent to well over 1,000 times around the world;
• There were around 9.4 million cycle trips for every cyclist death;
• The general risk of injury of any severity whilst cycling was just 0.05 per 1,000 hours of cycling.

Also:

• According to a paper that looked at sports injuries, tennis is riskier than ‘outdoor cycling’ (5 injuries per 1,000 hours for tennis, 3.5 for cycling). ‘Rowing machine exercise’ came in at 6 injuries per 1,000 hours;
• As mentioned above, the health benefits of cycling outweigh the injury risks by between 13:1 and 415:1, according to various studies (and depending on the benefits/disbenefits considered).

These facts, together with the reference sources, are included in our road safety briefing.

Despite this, many people are put off cycling because they think it's unsafe, although the 'British Social Attitudes Survey 2016' found that people are less worried about it than they were in 2011, when they were first asked about it:

• Around 59% of non-cyclists in Britain feel that it is too dangerous for them to cycle on the roads. (ATT Statistical Release, August 2017).

Nevertheless, Cycling UK believes that, unfortunately, the behaviour and attitudes of some road users, sub-standard highway layout and motor traffic volume and speed all conspire to make cycling feel and look more dangerous than it actually is.

Risk per billion miles: is it going up or down?

We think it’s important not to measure the risk of cycling by the number of cyclist casualties alone (i.e. absolute numbers). How much cycling is going on comes into it too: i.e. more cycling casualties could simply reflect the fact that more people are out on their bikes. We therefore look at the risk of cycling per mile (or per trip) etc.:

• Calculations based on traffic counts suggest that the risk of being killed whilst cycling per billion miles cycled has dropped since 2005. In contrast, though, when cyclist fatalities are combined with reported serious injuries (KSI), the record for recent years is mixed, but it seems clear that the risk is higher than the 2005-2009 baseline average:

Source for both the above charts: RRCGB (RAS 30013).

For more background on cyclist road casualties, see:

• Cycling UK news story on the Dept for Transport's 'Reported Road Casualties Great Britain 2016' (published September 2017) 
• Dept for Transport's useful summary, Focus on Pedal Cyclists

The 'safety in numbers' effect

There is good evidence to suggest that increasing cycling exposes each individual to a lower risk of injury: a doubling in cycling has been linked with a 40% increase in cycling casualties – or a 34% reduction in the relative risk to each individual. In 2009, Cycling UK compiled evidence from over 100 English local authorities and found that it appears to be less risky to cycle in places where there are higher levels of cycle commuting. Providing well for cycling, of course, is key to such success.

See our Safety in Numbers campaign for more.

Absolute numbers

In absolute numbers, reported cyclist casualties for the last few years are as follows:

Source RRCGB (RAS 30001)

How risky is cycling when compared to other forms of transport?

Per mile, cyclists are about as likely as pedestrians to be killed on the roads - in fact, in both 2014 and 2015, pedestrians seemed to be more at risk. Cycling and walking, however, are both more risky than car driving, although motorcycling is the most risky kind of transport of all - around 3 - 3.5 times more so than walking or cycling:

Source: RRCGB (RAS 30070)

The number of pedestrians left dead or seriously injured after being hit by cyclists has doubled in the past decade according to a Telegraph analysis of official data.

 

In 2016 three pedestrians died in such incidents across Great Britain while a further 108 sustained serious injury.

 

While this is a small proportion of the total number of serious injuries sustained by pedestrians annually, it continues an upward trend

This is an interesting article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/07/number-pedestrians-fatally-seriously-injured-cyclists-has-doubled/

 

 

Cyclists kill or maim two pedestrians every week, according to statistics

 

ALARMING accident statistics have shown a record number of pedestrians are being killed or seriously injured in crashes with cyclists

Here is another article http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/863550/cyclist-killed-bicycle-accident-two-pedestrians-every-week

This is terrible, I did not realise it was that bad.