twowheelsgood

The first thing I read was 'Manage demographic pressures/Improvements in Demand Management'. Written in the best management speak to ensure councillors don't have a clue what they're voting on. Just some highlights; Reduction in all regulatory services to the statutory minimum. Reduction in other regulatory services likely to result in increased antisocial behaviour, environmental degradation and community safety issues. Grass will not be cut as frequently and litter not collected as often. Remove funding from all libraries with the exception of Hereford, Leominster and Ross. Remaining funding withdrawn from Hereford Futures executive team and from the Chamber of Commerce for their Strategic Business Engagement contract. Reduction in infrastructure investment. Workforce reshaping. Fortnightly bin collection.

I'm not against a velodrome per se. I am against a single penny of public money being spent on it, in whatever form. If the County purse was bulging and everything was running at 100%, the roads were perfect and the elderly and disadvantaged had no worries about their care etc, etc, then, and only then, should the Council be looking forward to invest in new facilities. As we're unlikely to be in that position for the foreseeable future, leave it to the market.

37 and 38 are not shown as part of the CPO's for urban development (according to the Council's Compensation Guide for Owners and Occupiers). I can't find a planning application for 16 (to be turned into self contained flats) and it wouldn't accord with policy anyway - where has this info come from?

I'd support the idea of a library in Maylords - the additional footfall would be welcome by all of the shops I'm sure. It would need planning permission of course - and that’s where it all may go go a bit pear shaped - senior offices with their own agendas ...

Some people may recall (and others may not want us to) that Maylord Orchards anchor tenant was C & A. Yet once the benefits of rent and rates free deals had faded, they packed up and left. Maylords has never really recovered, and soon to lose TKMaxx as well.

The Solicitors changed their mind. The whole Left Bank building and adjacent offices (in the stables) are still empty and for sale.

Given Jim's reassurance that no Herefordshire Council money will be spent on this initiative, does it matter? Private funding will be forthcoming if its viable - that's for them to determine. The Swinden Playing Fields circuit that mgelliland quotes from BikeRadar above is part funded by the Council.

All of this routine maintenance should have been done PROPERLY through the summer - but of course it wasn't. In fact Amey had already stopped doing pretty much anything by then and what they did was shoddy beyond belief. So, once again we're subjected to floods because of blocked gullies, potholes hidden by floods, potholes made worse by floods and, as megilleland says, further damage when it all freezes. I've submitted a load of reports this weekend via FixMyStreet of items I reported 12 months or more ago that were never dealt with then and as a result are even worse now. As a cyclist, standing water on the roads conceals goodness know what - its genuinely frightening trying to move around the county at the moment.

Bravo. I can see now why Patricia is so keen to climb aboard, regardless of nettles, thorns or anything else ...

It’s a sales brochure, not necessarily telling the whole story. By showing lots of parking, its meant to entice prospective shops to rush to sign up - the fact that some of those spaces aren't necessarily available isn't allowed to get in the way of a sale ...

That developer drawing is a complete nonsense and should be disregarded. Wall St is not going - the exit onto Newmarket St (and right turn across) is clearly shown on the latest CGI on the front of HT. Quite how they are going to make up the space I'm not sure, but I'm guessing the central reservation will more or less disappear as it heads towards Edgar St and they may make the present pavement narrower to grab some space. The City wall is a scheduled monument - they can't just start moving things and digging willy nilly. In fact, I think the latest proposals require a variation to the planning permission, but no application has been made as far as I can see. Same old story of bad communication isn't it?

Which I believe the NHS paid for.

Smart move - 50 year lease. Dumb move - 250 year lease by the Council to British Land for the OLM site ... not fiction.

bobby47 - you've known me long enough to realise I don't kick around a number like 250 lightly. Its true, every word, and confirmed some while ago by a 2009 FOI request - Q4 On what basis was 250 year lease decided to be the most appropriate term? A The market for lease length was tested competitively and the response was for a 250 year lease term. This lease term gives the investment market the confidence to provide funding for large development schemes of this nature. It also attracts the `blue chip' pension funds and investment funds. Q5 Provide a copy of the cost/benefit analysis for the sale of the ESG land. A I understand that no specific cost/benefit analysis has been commissioned or taken place with regard to this sale. So they stumbled into it without any analysis as to whether it would benefit the County or not ... As for Jarvis, I'm not sure but he may be off the butchers hook, this time, as I think it was Roger Phillips in the driving seat at that time (recently departed from the Cabinet and its offshoots).

At last, some common sense spoken. A bridge is never going to happen. It was never in the original scheme and for sure it won't be added as an afterthought. As I've said before, the cost would be huge - £m's - the benefits to the developers marginal at best and it would have to fly over the City Wall, which English Heritage would never allow. The Council lost all control of this site once they handed it over with that ridiculous 250 year lease. Developers only build things that will make them money - the majority of people will arrive and depart in cars - that’s why there is masses of on-site parking. They have no interest in Widemarsh Street or High Town. The connectivity as originally designed was ideal, but is now being compromised by retaining the dual carriageway, due to the Council's inability to progress the link road.

Did they deliver the much delayed letting report? If not, why not?

A 'number of times topic viewed' counter for each topic would be very useful, if this could be added. I know its on the forums page, but I rarely look at that, just jump straight to new content.

Much was made during the selling of this proposal to the masses of 'connectivity' between old and new, with big arrows on drawings to link Eign Gate and Bewell Street with the OLM - and much more as outlined in the 2007 Edgar Street Grid Design Framework Supplementary Planning Document, against which the application should have been determined. Yet, somehow, all we've ended up with is a typically crass highway engineers solution - pedestrian cattle pens to herd pedestrians across a dual carriageway where the subway was, and not much else.

It would need planning permission - given the Council's record of blocking other developments in favour of their own - OLM - I doubt it would be forthcoming. All those fast food joints allocated to the OLM will need every penny to survive.

Bus shelters - I thought these were handled at Deputy Leader level ...

Nominations close tomorrow. I believe the date has yet to be set (but not later than 19 February). www.herefordcitycouncil.gov.uk

The Highways Agency have objected because the illumination level at 600CD/m2 will be in excess of the maximum allowed and will dazzle drivers. Our City Council, bless 'em, have no objection - did they even look at the drawings? Not to late to object - comments close tomorrow - if you can face the horror that is the Council website, start here https://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/planningapplicationsearch/details/?id=133004

Ah dippyhippy, patience my friend - they'll be hammered onto the salty walls once the planners have done as they're told and rubber stamped the application. For those not up to speed, Herefordshire Council Planning has a long standing policy, for good reason, of not allowing internally illuminated shop signs and the City looks all the better for it. Debenhams OLM have submitted a planning application for no less than 14 internally illuminated shop signs - most are about 4.2m long, a couple are 6.3m. A couple more are 9m long x 1.3m and there's a real whopper at 14m x 2m - light pollution anyone? As for the dented panels - and mismatched colour as well - there are some good pics of it over on www.facebook.com/esgpics

You'll be lucky getting a response from a Cllr - I doubt if any of them had a clue what they were putting their hands up to - no right minded individual could think the monstrous elevation facing the Tesco roundabout was worth voting for. And its going to get worse - Debenhams are proposing massive illuminated signs - up to 14m x 2m in size, as the crowning glory. The Newmarket pub is a listed building - its shabby and run down because the Council owned it (I assume they've now quietly given it away to Stanhope) and that's how all Council buildings look. Ordinarily, the setting of a listed building should not be compromised, and its an excuse/reason trotted out almost daily by planners to stop development throughout the County. Yet, here, well , you decide … (photo credit to www.facebook.com/esgpics)

Excellent, the toady tories on the back foot and the return of the bizarre love triangle that is b47, Liz and a slab of dough … things are looking up!