twowheelsgood

Kirsty Williams AM, Peter Hain MP, Neil Hamilton and Jesse Norman MP on Any Questions tonight, Radio 4, 8pm.

Any Questions, or as I call it 'The Jonathan Dimbleby show, its all about me, me interrupting and then some more of me'.

Great programme spoilt by the opinionated Chair (and very often appallingly amateurish sound).

Jesse will be up against the deputy chair of UKIP and two others!

Why would the Council need an excuse?

Quite. Expect a resounding silence from the Council - and indeed Hereford Futures, bless em, it'll all be someone else's fault. Personally, I couldn't give a monkeys - I won't be going there any time soon.

South West Audit Partnership are recruiting for posts in Coleford/Hereford - 'We are looking to recruit to a number of permanent posts and are offering you the opportunity to embark on a career as an internal auditor.  No previous experience is necessary, although a higher starting salary may be available for exceptional candidates who have some previous audit experience.'

I understood it was £70k per week ...

An appeal against non-determination has been lodged. Probably after the agenda was put together. See the Committee Update papers on the Council website. The Committee will have been asked what their decision would have been. Silly I know but those are the rules. The developer will look a bit stupid if the Committee would have approved it as they will now have to wait for the appeal and it could be dismissed!!

Oh dear, ridiculous move by the developers - particularly when it was recommended for approval. They'll be looking at a 6 month delay to get a decision from the Planning Inspectorate now.

But the Council won't be making a decision as an appeal has been lodged

Eh? That doesn't make sense. There has to be a decision to appeal against, unless they're appealing against non-determination, and that can't be the case  because its in front of the committee to determine!

Good man, thanks.

Hereford Housing (HHL) paid £46 Million Pounds for the Housing Stock from Herefordshire Council...so I was wrong they did not get them for free

 

So what did the Council do with the £46m? Given that they've admitted they're bumping along the bottom with only £100k of reserves?

Whoever thought the installation of these bloody lights needs shooting.And what is it with this council and their love of them.

The only way to reduce congestion is to keep the traffic moving

 

Absolutely. I believe it was a unilateral decision by a certain lady councillor to bestow this horror on us … time for it to go.

I am happy to support the removal of these lights or restrict them to predestrain crossing on demand lights.

This application goes to Planning Committee on 2 April - it is recommended for approval. Some £150k is sought as a 106 contribution to 'sustainable transport measures'. The Traffic Manager acknowledges the potential for non-car borne access to local shops, schools and employment opportunities and it is this potential that off-sets concerns in relation to the potential for increased pressure on the signalised junction at Ledbury Road / Folly Lane junction. In other words, everyone will walk to the shops, schools and employment and there will no impact at the Ledbury Road/Folly Lane junction - in his dreams, what planet are these people on?

This is a golden opportunity - and probably the only one - to get rid of these lights and do something much better. It will need councillors to call it - I really hope Cllrs Kenyon and North can do something worthwhile here.

Just posting this again, because since megilleland posted it at the start of this thread, a lot has been said, but the application for Listing by the Woolhope Naturalists’ Field Club has only been viewed 10 times! It behoves us all to read this thorough and fascinating report on the history of this building and why it must be saved somehow. How English Heritage can say it has no historic interest is baffling.

Woolhope Listed Boys Home appn.doc

To be fair to mark smartieno he doesn't get paid a lot & he doesn't claim a lot of expensive. I've checked out HC website you can find out who gets wot & how much they claim! The thing is mark is fighting against a tidal surge & wot we need is people like him to stand for councillors so that they can fight back against the injustices that go on with local authorities.

So I'm very happy to hear you will be standing in next yrs elections where I'm sure that both you & mark will find your an asset to one another should you not get elected which I hope you both will??!!

I (think I) recall that Cllr Hubbard said a little while ago that he was going to stand down at the next election.

Correct link 

https://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/transport-and-highways/transport-schemes/edgar-street-grid-and-hereford-link-road

Guys, just a thought with reference to something both Dippy and Mark mention. It might be an idea to have sight of the originals title deeds of the Working Boys Home or any other docs relating to John Venn's bequest (technically his 'devise' as it relates to real property which includes physical property as opposed to personal items). These would probably be held at the Record's Office and no doubt may at present be packed up awaiting the move to the new premises but I am sure access to them could still be requested (or even demanded).

It may come to nothing but if someone (or a few) had the time to see the deeds and any restrictions concerning the properties use after it passes out of control of the Council may be helpful.  

John Bothamley from the Civic Society says 'Have paid to see the land registry title and there appears to be no restrictive covenant.' I'd still be interested to know how the site came to be in the Council's possession.

Dead link reported to the Council.

Without wishing to give away confidences, there are some very sneaky CO's in this order - small snippets of land (and as such practically worthless) not really required for the link road, being compulsorily purchased to effectively block access to much larger pieces of land, changing them from valuable development land to landlocked worthless land. Dirty tricks? You bet.

 

And also at Herefordshire Housing: Following their new corporate image change more expenditure at HQ.

 

 

 

Compare and contrast with the 'Housing the Homeless' thread - these people, like most senior public sector employees are so far removed from reality that they can no longer see how ridiculous their jargon is or how obscene their profligate spending.

Surely it would have to be a pair of semi-detached houses? Or if it was one, would it still be semi-detached? Suggest a meeting with some blue sky thinking to ensure we're heading in the right direction with bottled water on hand to quench thirst. Followed by manual labour breaking downs silo's.

Tragic. Those giant coat hangers on the cinema are possibly the most ridiculous detail of this project so far.

Dare I say it - there is a massive building on Bath Street, recently vacated - nothing is going to happen there for at least 12 months (at least, if due process is followed). Quite apt that they should use a building founded by the Hereford Society for Aiding the Industrious, don't you think? 

The Council have contributed 12% of £550k ie £66k, which isn't much.

Re Dippy's Q2, a close friend e-mailed Cllr Harry Bramer asking him this very question a week ago.  To date - total silence!

 

Perhaps TwoWheels can shed some light here: if a building in the council's ownership become surplus to requirements (eg: Bath Street Offices), wouldn't you think that that nice rolly-polly Mr Pickles would expect the council's Property Services Division to invite expressions of interest in the said property, thus ensuring that the asset (our asset) is disposed of for the best price possible? 

 

I would be extremely surprised if the developer who converted the old General Hospital (I believe it was Laings) has had a phone call from Cllr Bramer.

Yes, it was Laing Homes (now subsumed into Taylor Wimpey) that did the General Hospital scheme. I would expect it to be incumbent upon the Council to get the 'best value' (their much abused phrase) for any asset that was no longer required. Even a 'swap' as such should pass over the District Valuers desk. The whole thing was being pushed forward with indecent haste, which raises alarm bells - why? who benefits? has the planning department been leaned on during their 'street scape assessment' of the Bath St buildings importance? do the Council really believe they are 'consulting' the great unwashed by saying we can comment when the planning application is made?

There are a lot of mucky people about - look at all the vile specimens spitting in the street. It was drummed into me at school not to spit, drop litter and all manner of simple social mores - no more it seems, we're knee deep in litter and can barely stay upright for all the phlegm lining the pavements. People don't wash their hands, cough and sneeze everywhere and are generally quite disgusting, and that's before we even get to the STD's.

With all respect mr kenyon but have you been reading any of this thread @ all???

Hear, hear! With all due respect to the Cllr, for goodness sake, punctuate your comments. It won't make it any easier to agree with your stance, but it will make it easier to understand!

"… before we start hugging this building let's work out what can be practically done with it going forward." You'll be calling us mendacious meddlers next. Yes, let's practically work out what can be done - this is what Cllr Hubbard is trying to arrange. Unfortunately, the Cabinet have learned nothing  from the mass, and mess, of mistakes all around us and continue being contemptuous of those they are supposed to be serving. They seem intent on doing a quick deal in secrecy, without even a courtesy call to the ward councillor. Its hard to work out what can be done under those circumstances.

I'm completely baffled as to why the fire brigade has to demolish the current building (as part of the deal) - it just makes no sense at all. It is a major cost and seriously devalues the site. As I've said, it’s a valuable building - both architecturally and fiscally - put it on the open market and get the best possible price, but no, once again the council are simply failing to see any sense and are hell bent on demolishing a perfectly good building for a fecking car park! Its Rockfield 2! Its madness!