twowheelsgood

But ... Cllr Davies is saying 'we have a vision' in the PR fluff piece above. If that isn't the case, why is she saying the contrary? "The fees of the management company will be covered by rental income" - that's either outrageous management fees or pitiful income. Either way, passing it off as one covering the other is hardly presenting a good business case. She's basically saying it doesn't make any money. What about servicing the cost of the capital borrowing? Is that covered by the rental income? Insurance, rates, cleaning, landlords costs etc? I did have high hopes for this Council but sadly, they are shaping up to be no better than previous incumbents - no coincidence the Officers are still the same perhaps? The ones really running the Council it seems, unelected and unaccountable.

I'm seeing quite a lot dumped onto verges and hedges, along with gloves, when I'm out on my bike. Being mostly blue, they are very obvious. People are disgusting for sure.

Completely baffling that there is no provision made in St Owens St for neither contra-flow cycling or widened footpaths for pedestrians. This despite a long standing desire for a cycle contra-flow, three very expensive consultations and detailed designs over decades and a shovel-ready scheme ready to go for the last two years. Perhaps it isn't baffling, just par for the course. It is disappointing though.

The traffic scheme? No point in even commenting on the detail - I've been increasingly disappointed by this Council - I had high hopes that they were a genuine force for good (and I'm sure they thought that too), but, after over a year in office, I'm just not seeing this being delivered. Officers will do what they want to do and whatever helps them climb the greasy pole - public comments are a necessary evil they have to go through, but we all know they are always ignored.

That 'BID' sign outside Left Bank (in the photo) is an absolute eyesore. Affects the setting of a Listed Building? I should say so! We're supposed to be getting rid of pointless street furniture not adding to it (and blocking a good chunk of pavement at the same time).

Stupid moves are Herefordshire Council's stock-in-trade - equally stupid was the closure of the hugely expensive toilets in East Street and Gaol Street - let's have these re-opened as well, especially as they give direct access off the street.

Very badly written press release (no surprise there) - this is NOT free parking for car park users (contradicting the opening para). Read the small print to say this is for "on street pay and display in Hereford". The Cabinet Members words are written to conveniently omit this. Cue lots of outraged letters by car park users who snaffle a penalty. The photo simply reinforces the error - perhaps change this for an on-street one?

Given that the controversial and universally unpopular on-street charges raise only £275k, less manpower and other costs, is there really a case for keeping it, given the huge financial hit the shops have taken because of it, even before the present crisis. Time to scrap it with immediate effect (I know, this Council do nothing immediately, but hey). Also, why are they paying a lease on the Maylords car park when they own the freehold? Some creative accounting?

Rent and rates have reached the level where many businesses simply cannot make any money and so premises stand empty. Supporting information for this application showed no demand for the shop, with rent and rates of £25k. Bridge St is changing from commercial to residential. This proposal is actually half decent in terms of the space it provides, unlike the others listed above.

Ridiculous, but it does show just how addictive junk food is.

I suspect many saw that moaning on forums was ultimately futile - it hasn't changed the Council, for instance, they are still staggeringly inefficient and incompetent. I foolishly thought this latest bunch would be better than the last bunch, but sadly not.

Was it part of the approved planning drawings? If so, it might be worth a question to Planning (and Keepmoat), although there is not usually a time limit to finish a development once it has started.

Yes, it's not there at 17.28pm. Think of all the ad revenue they're losing. Error 503 Backend fetch failed Backend fetch failed Guru Meditation: XID: 355795525 Varnish cache server

I'm not sure which is more alarming - the sight of Boris at his press call yesterday looking like a terrified rabbit caught in the headlights or our Council taking charge if things get really bad. Remind me, where is the Council nuclear bunker that they'll all be scurrying down into?

Indeed, and the representatives I spoke to at the exhibition of the Bath St proposals were absolutely adamant that the police and the fire brigade could not and would not share a building - they had tried it at Bromsgrove, it hadn't worked and that was that. Until the next time it seems.

All of the 'historic core' and St James & Bartonsham has had 20mph zoning for several years. Living in the middle of it, I can honestly say it hasn't made a jot of difference to traffic speed. Even people who live here are either unaware of it or don't give monkeys. When it was first put in place, our ward councillor assured us a mobile camera would be put on hot spots eg Harold St (Cathedral School mothers in your massive SUV's, you're the worst offenders), but needless to say this never happened. As for this proposal, just an excuse for officers to justify their jobs, spend some money, put up yet more signs and then move on to the next pointless exercise. Completely pointless. Perchance any councillors should be reading this, how about doing something really, useful like turning off traffic lights? The other point about 20mph is that it has no legal status - it cannot be enforced by the Police.

Sensible move on the flooding - the much vaunted £4m Yazor Brook flood alleviation scheme doesn't seem to be cutting it, as we have seen over the last couple of weeks. Bear in mind this was designed to withstand a 1:1000 year flood, yet it is under water barely 10 years later. I was told a year ago by Planning that, as far as they were concerned, the whole of the ESG 'Urban Village' was still a flood zone and they would not "encourage submission of an application until this has been addressed through a holistic approach across the Edgar Street Grid".

Ditto the horrific Surgery building ...

I had high hopes following the local election results 9 months ago. However, aside from kicking the bypass into the long grass (but at a ridiculous £0.5m cost) absolutely nothing tangible has happened to improve life in the County. Nothing. I appreciate a lot of problems were inherited and they want to fundamentally change policies but it's also about PR with the Council Tax payers, and all we're seeing is press releases for this, that and the other review. From reading the Hereford Times and comments, it seems the initial goodwill is quickly evaporating, because we're not seeing anything tangible on the ground. Do something, anything, no matter how small - turn off one set of traffic lights for instance. As for salary scales for 'Officers' how did that happen? Are these people worth £100k or more for so little done so badly? Of course not, but they're all looking after each other instead of doing the job. A benevolent dictatorship has never looked so attractive.

You'd like to think so wouldn’t you, but I'd no longer trust the Council to cross the potholed road, let alone take this on. Why has the £4m+ Yazor Brook flood alleviation scheme failed less than 10 years after building it? It was 'designed' for a 1 in a 1000 year extreme event. This throws into doubt all of the ESG development land along the Link Road. The Council knew it wasn't working even before this - I've been told by Planning. A lot of the lesser flooding could have been avoided if the gullies and drains had been properly maintained - I gave up reporting blocked gullies as nothing was ever done. And so on. At some point, you just pull up the drawbridge.

You can follow the river level live at https://flood-warning-information.service.gov.uk/station/4017 Currently at 4.69m and rising.

This application has been withdrawn by the applicants, the reason not being stated.

Good point, and not one I've seen raised before, but I'm sure he'll find a way! There's no standardised verifiable way of measuring how much electricity a charge takes at the moment, which is why a lot of charge points are free or a nominal charge or via a monthly charge. Once that is resolved, I expect the Chancellor will be able to slap on a tax per kW or whatever. Of course, by then the emergency dirty diesel generators (such as recently built at Dormington) needed to provide the electricity will be running flat out!

They're 7kW, they are free if you spend £20 in Waitrose! If I had an EV, I'd use the 50kW ones in Texaco Ledbury Rd or, better still, the Chargemaster ones at Rotherwas- they even have a 150kW one (well they would I guess, as it's now BP Chargemaster offices).

Just when you thought the madness couldn't possibly get any madder (another £0.5m bypass review - please), comes this news via the BBC. Shropshire have Kier - we have BBLP, both in a race to the bottom of the potholes. Shropshire has its own £1,000 a day pothole consultant If you needed reminding of the state of Britain's pothole-laden roads, the BBC report that Shropshire Council have appointed a dedicated 'pothole consultant', charging £1,000 a day. The council say this is “comparable with usual consultancy costs”, and say they hope the appointment will improve their current “unproductive” strategy and speed up repair of the 3,500 reported road defects in the county. Steve Davenport of Shropshire Council claims even though the consultant will earn £130,000 working five days a week over the six month contract, they will actually save millions in the long run by “getting the right people on the ground doing a better job." Pothole repair in Shropshire is currently outsourced to construction and infrastructure company Keir, who the council say have been “allowed to mark their own homework” for too long.