Jump to content

twowheelsgood

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,647

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    125

 Content Type 

Everything posted by twowheelsgood

  1. twowheelsgood
    The last of those is for Poundland going into the old TKMaxx - internally illuminated signs were a complete no-go in the City until the OLM arrived, and then all the rules were quietly put to one side. Those Debenhams signs are a travesty. I shall object to these outside signs being internally illuminated.
  2. twowheelsgood
    The civilian fireman at the public consultation told me categorically that the new station is not a PFI project - the funding is coming from central Government. It is still designed by an estate agent though. I think the new Gloucs ones are PFI funded.
  3. twowheelsgood
    Decant in the context of the councils's response to Colin's FOI request is the cost of moving offices - they have £0.5m set aside for shuffling around the city as they come up with increasingly ridiculous property strategies. Seems a lot money to pay removal men ... dippyhippy - the £4m is for Plough Lane refurb only. The Shire Hall is a separate cost, I believe in the region of £3m. They have also just taken on and refurbished the old job centre in Bath Street at a cost as yet unknown. As if that were not enough, of course they also now have the old Bulmer lab in Whitecross Road (Nelson House?) which is being re-roofed following a couple of slates blowing off in the bad winter. Cost - £silly. Odd that Plough Lane was originally meant to be the HQ to enable all other buildings to be sold and services centralised. Instead they keep expanding, despite claims of reducing staff levels. Brockington Towers is scheduled to go on sale this year - for lots of housing in the grounds no doubt. Is there any hope they will get the market rate, or will it be a quiet London sale again?
  4. twowheelsgood
    Generally capital budgets attract specific grant monies from government, which is why councils prefer to knock things down and start again. They build something with a capital grant, spend nothing on maintenance at all for say 25 years, declare it beyond reasonable repair and then apply to government for a grant for a new one. This equally applies to our roads. Of course, during those 25 years, the accounts and council tax collect for repairs and the like, which they are then free to divert to the latest crackpot scheme or senior salary. It’s a very lazy, unattractive, environmentally damaging and and ultimately costly way of doing things. Another example is the ridiculous 'improvements' to King Street - some while ago, a perfectly normal junction was changed, resulting in something which was dangerous, with literally dozens of accidents there. After a while the council could demonstrate to government that this was a dangerous section of road and got a grant to improve it (£0.6m). This they have now done, building a dangerous 'improvement' which in due course will be ripped up again. Lets just that say the construction business does very nicely out of these arrangements ...
  5. twowheelsgood
    And, as we've come to expect, no comments allowed on the HT site - censorship still alive and well under the new editor then.
  6. twowheelsgood
    A monopoly will never result in prices being reduced! Just the opposite I imagine.
  7. twowheelsgood
    Another good word for the Journal - I've always liked it - it seems to me that the letters page was better and, perhaps not so much now, but they used to do some pretty good digging of council dirt (of which there is always plenty to dig).
  8. twowheelsgood
    Another slice of madness not widely discussed or known is that BB are concentrating on resurfacing C class and unclassified roads throughout the county - this was a harebrained scheme developed by the former Cllr Hamilton before he had a tantrum and resigned. The remotest of lanes that might only see a few vehicles a day are now being completely resurfaced, yet the plan, confirmed to me personally by Hamilton in a letter, is to effectively abandon B and A class roads for the time being, with only makeshift repairs, which is what we are seeing. Some of these roads, such as at Hampton Bishop are benefitting from government flood money, but they wouldn't have been done otherwise. Hard to fathom the level of idiocy that pushes through a scheme like this. Similar to one that abandons mowing the grass I guess.
  9. twowheelsgood
    Dear Lord, we're getting there! For the last time, they did it as a 'goodwill gesture', having been leant on by Jim Kenyon to help.
  10. twowheelsgood
    Bins are nothing to do with Balfour Beatty - that service was flogged off to Focsa some years ago. Focsa Services UK Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of FCC Fomento de Construcciones y Contratas, S.A., a global, market leading Spanish company. So, a good share of our council tax goes to shareholders in Europe. Here You Can keep it global.
  11. twowheelsgood
    The ward councillor will be pivotal in the process.
  12. twowheelsgood
    The well is indeed bone dry - the council only have £100k in general reserves ... that last minute £500k bung to Stanhope doesn't look so smart now (not that it ever did).
  13. twowheelsgood
    No, Roger!! Been recycling yoghurt pots for years - it's quite clear on the council info - "Plastic containers e.g. yogurt pots, margarine / ice cream tubs fruit / vegetable punnets plastic meat / fish trays cream / custard pots /cake / pastry trays soup / sauce pots egg boxes ! Rinse bottles and containers ! No black plastic ! No tops, lids, pumps, film, foil etc" Not much joined up thinking between councils and the recycling world then.
  14. twowheelsgood
    Blimey, this is a struggle - HH don't own the buildings or the land! The Quarry park is owned by the council. The houses around it are private. The grass was cut by HH as a goodwill gesture. That’s it! As to your last para - Leader Johnson has said publicly that this is the council's doing and not to blame BB. However, as I understand it, we the rate payers have paid for it, so councillors who represent us need to be asking questions of the leadership.
  15. twowheelsgood
    It's not their product at Tupsley - it's the council's (ie ours). They did it as a one off goodwill gesture.
  16. twowheelsgood
    No, the original link still doesn't work - it’s a link to this page! The link in the quote does work though. If the government can set out national planning policy in 50 pages, then why on earth does Herefordshire Council need 1000's?
  17. twowheelsgood
    bobby47 - you must know that you can check out but you can never leave!!! You've inspired a whole army of bloggers to get tapping and there are big battles to be fought - we are less than a year from the elections, which must see the present bunch of miscreants dragged out of Brockington Towers and into the Wyeside nettles! The county needs your wit and wisdom to lead this!!
  18. twowheelsgood
    Which it doesn't do! Refer to the 'artists impressions' submitted with the planning application - not a single bloody light!
  19. twowheelsgood
    On Thursday of last week, I was sat going nowhere in Blueschool St (westbound) watching workman digging up new paving which I had seen them digging up a couple of weeks previously. In front of me were 8 - count 'em - 8 red lights at the Widemarsh St junction, all new. I wanted to turn right into Widemarsh St - this filter cycled through to green twice whilst I couldn't move. Far from turning the damned things off, somehow we've ended up with even more lights, and, worse, they don't appear to be intelligently controlled.
  20. twowheelsgood
    Jim posted the picture on his own facebook page. IOC were not mentioned and it is not on their site. I think he's trying to get the message out that things can be changed. It looks to be a good job. As I've said before - take it out of BB's contract and get it done better and cheaper by local labour.
  21. twowheelsgood
    Yes, and the council's record on 'partnerships' is really not that good is it? Ironic that the council slash funding to the arts, and the courtyard, and then decide to hitch a ride on this initiative. No guesses as to who'll be doing all the real work.
  22. twowheelsgood
    Easily sorted at the elections next year. By 2021 it is probably safe to say that none of the present incumbents will be around, so they can promise the earth with impunity.
  23. twowheelsgood
    Jim (not Bill) Kenyon. Good on him. Begs the question if another corporation can do part of the City, why not all of it? Just delete it from BB's contract and with the money saved, pay someone else on a more realistic scale. Leader Johnson has publicly stated it is the Council calling the tune not BB, so let the council call this one.
  24. twowheelsgood
    The link works now. Until the planning department deliver a core strategy with a five year housing plan, developers will continue to make hay whilst the sun shines (and whilst Mr Ashcroft stays at his post).
  25. twowheelsgood
    Majority vote, chairman has the casting vote.
×
×
  • Create New...