twowheelsgood

Miller Court in Ledbury Road is seemingly no longer required by the University in the endless game of property shuffle - there is a planning application submitted by Platinum Care Services for a change of use to a care home.

Hideous. Does it enhance the Conservation Area? I think not. Mind you, the state of the car park opposite doesn't do much either, but money talks, as they say.

This seems to have been slipped out very quietly and there's precious little information on how it will work. I believe if you already have a broadband connection, your existing analogue phone will continue to work (or it might need a small adapter). BT are pushing their own new 'digital voice' phones for home use, but as their current offerings are pretty poor compared to the likes of Panasonic, that doesn't bode too well. The pricing structure has yet to be announced - I'd be amazed if it wasn't more expensive. As ever, it is the most disadvantaged that will be hit hardest by all of this. Of course, if the internet goes down then the phone won't work to call the emergency services ...

The City Council working with the County Council would be a first - they've been at each others throats for 21 years now. Only now, when it suits a political argument, are we hearing about muti-million pound repair costs. Are these even realistic? What are they for and how have they been arrived at? This Council has demonstrated beyond doubt that they are incapable of managing large (or any) construction projects, so why should we believe anything they say about this one? We saw how they managed a very minor repair to the Porch of the Town Hall - scaffolded for 2 years was it? The Council seem happy to throw millions at the Shire Hall yet not at the Town Hall - perhaps because the City Council are there? No, this is a public building for the City of Hereford, built with our money for us. It must not be sold.

Out of interest, I had a look around - you are right, I think that branch of the NHS is fast disappearing. Kyrle St Dental Practice offered something called 'NHS Dental Prototypes – Dental Contract Reform England' - although it sits under a NHS banner it is, it seems, paid for treatment.

"The practice is taking part in the NHS Dental Prototype Scheme, this is being implemented by the NHS and the Department of Health to look at new ways of providing the care you need to improve your oral health." I think the ways of providing care are well established - it’s the charging for something which I've paid into all my life - via tax and NI - and then being asked to pay again that's new.

Trolleywise links takes you to https://www.wanzl.com/en_GB/360-degree-service/TrolleyWise

Works for me. Statistics are staggering;

520,000 abandoned shopping trolleys returned to UK supermarkets in 2017 (1,400 per day).
Industry estimates actual abandoned shopping trolley numbers closer to one million per year.
Cost to British business is £35m per year (more than £95,000 every day).
40% of UK shoppers do not think there is a problem with trolley theft.

After much perseverance by the Ward Councillor, the historic Booth Passage, an ancient right of way, has been reopened, with the gate padlocked open. This gate wasn't shown on any planning drawings, nor the artists impression shown above, and it does not have planning permission Next job is to find the light switch ...

Yet another example of the appalling driving that we see all the time now, as well as being drunk, drugged and having no licence, mot, tax or insurance, take your pick. It's fast becoming like the wild west, we need some Sheriffs!

On 29/06/2021 at 08:19, Aylestone Voice said:

Update - This is what the Council say

Jacobs Court has a long convoluted history. It has been approx. 10 years since the structure was deemed dangerous and scaffold erected, to protect the structure and glazing, which has remained in situ ever since. Due to their historically being no resident management company the tower and communal areas fell to the crown. Due to concerns over the deterioration of the scaffold and the health and safety requirements monthly scaffold inspections were commissioned in 2015 at a cost of £400 + vat pcm ((£400x 12) 6years = £28k.) There is a charge on the property in relation to the dangerous structure and the initial cost of the scaffold erection of (£32 890 + vat) which we hope to use as a mechanism to recoup the ongoing expenditure. We are now currently in talks with the newly reformed residents management company to try and resolve this, which we hope will finally end the ongoing costs.

So even if the Council can end the monthly charge the chances of getting the money back are almost nil. Poor work by the developer and yet again we foot the bills - currently over £60K and increasing every month

I'm not sure that's full disclosure by the Council - where is the weekly/monthly hire cost for the scaffold itself? It's very unlikely that they bought it at the outset, that's just an erection cost (as they say). Further, those figures don't accord with those in the Hereford Times report.

Given the length of time that has elapsed, I would say the Council have a duty to reassess the situation, just as long as BBLP and a certain local builder don't get involved!

Approval isn't automatic and certainly isn't when the buildings are listed or in a conservation area. All of the work opposite Steels needed planning permission and I've complained to the Council that the as built doesn't accord with the approved scheme, but with no response. Enforcement is now practically non-existent.

If only they would start delivering at least some of their last election pledges instead of plotting for the next election. Turning off traffic lights anyone?

Property Services and Balfour Beatty prepared a survey and scheme of repairs and applied for listed building consent last year - this was withdrawn, after the Civic Society amongst commented that it was inadequate for a building of such importance. It looks like the Council have now done the right thing and gone to one of the leading conservation practices in the Country. Let's hope the usual suspects don't get to do the actual building work.

I raised the issue of these yellow lines with the ward councillor - they are the wrong pattern for a conservation area. They should be the thinner (50/50/50mm pattern rather than 100/100/100mm) and paler buttercup yellow, as stipulated by all the heritage bodies. I see they made the same error in Ledbury. The response basically was that the Council isn't consulted (they don't need to be, it's good practice) and BBLP are essentially autonomous and lack expertise to deliver what could be reasonably expected. For a minimum of £20m a year, that doesn't seem acceptable in any form to me. 

To keep it on thread, the ruling parties were voted in because people wanted to see something happening about the City's frustrating traffic problems. They said they would address it, they had the answers, lights would be turned off. They have failed to deliver. More consultants have had more money for no demonstrable benefit to the City. I do wonder if there isn't some hidden payoff for all these traffic lights - like a never ending lucrative maintenance contract for instance. 

Having waited for a ridiculous time on my bike at the equally ridiculous Link Rd/Commercial Rd lights this morning, I was reminded that there's no reason why traffic lights could not have been turned off/resequenced throughout the City - last year's lockdown would have been the perfect time to do it and give people time to get used to it. But, yet again, the Council seem to be paralysed in the headlights, unable to do anything. Cllr Harrington really needs to do something, anything, and now.

Well, a referendum was never going to happen, no matter who was promising it. The present ruling group have delivered very little of what was promised two years ago, yet another disappointment. I know they're up against entrenched and belligerent officers, and an autonomous BBLP, but ultimately that should be firmly dealt with. 

Yes, look at the Canary Bridge and the Greenway - I did report the graffiti there for a while but no one took any notice - ward councillors make it clear BBLP are autonomous and the Council simply have no say or control of what they do (or don't) do. There were lots of requests for cctv at the time the Canary Bridge was being designed, but they were disregarded. It's death by a thousand cuts for the County, I don't see how we can ever pull it back.

Resurfacing roads that barely see any traffic is all well and good, but what about the main infrastructure, especially in the City, which is in a terrible state and taking 000's of vehicles every day? Not to mention the hazards it presents to cyclists. It seems a skewed process to me.

4 hours ago, Aylestone Voice said:

I believe that this refers to the former Essex Arms land - now the water storage area.

Ah, what was grandly promoted as a canal basin in the heady days of ESG low traffic boulevards and civic buildings. Heaven forfend the Council should clearly identify land in their reports.

On 12/02/2021 at 08:40, Aylestone Voice said:

Just how many years is it going to take for the transport hub to be provided at the railway station? Once that is in place the existing bus station (with the cinema) can be redeveloped to provide housing. Surely it is not that difficult?

Nah, seemingly easier to abandon it and let the weeds and rubbish welcome visitors.

800m2?! That's massive - £2m upwards. It isn't going to happen unless it was legally tied down at the original permission stage. 

I'm sure they will all say they'll sort it out in exchange for a vote - following through will be another matter altogether.

Take it down and rebuild it on a better site?

Seven candidates pitching for this - given the 2019 election garnered less than 1000 votes, they'll be spread very thin this time.

Newton_Farm_Ward_SPN.docx.pdf

I quickly gave up on YH and had completely forgotten about it - provocative click bait and little of substance.