Back bid to bloom again

I AM writing in my capacity as vice-chairman of Leominster in Bloom to highlight the fact that there will be reduced local authority planting this year in the Herefordshire towns.

As a result of this decision, planting will be in the hands of volunteers, and Leominster in Bloom will strive to plant its own containers and take over some of those previously planted by Hereford Council.

Now, more than ever before, we are asking the people of Leominster to come to our aid and help raise the extra funding necessary to do this.

The cost of providing plants for one tub to help keep Leominster looking beautiful is £20. We would like to encourage local families, individuals, or organisations such as schools, scouts, the Ramblers or Women’s Institute to consider sponsoring a tub this year.

Sponsoring a tub would involve providing the funds, planting and some help with maintenance – there are about 15 of them.

Plants can be supplied at cost from Leominster in Bloom, or sponsors can choose their own.

There will be a prize for the most original and best maintained, and a special prize for local garden centres or plant providers who wish to showcase and advertise their businesses.

Contact Carolin Lowry on 01568 20157, or Mike Thornhill on 01568 614336 for more information by April 14.

Herefordshire has for a number of years had the largest number of entrants in the Heart of England in Bloom competition, a fact we take great pride in.

Please help us to make Leominster look wonderful again this year.

CAROLIN LOWRY Ivington, Leominster, Herefordshire.

Brass necked

YOUR analysis of the paving problems in High Town is unlikely to be correct.

The most likely explanation is metal theft.

A stout hammer will easily break the surrounding stone, and leave the brass lettering to be easily prised out.

The most important contribution to the enhancement of High Town would be the restoration of the burnt-out shell of the building on the south side.

ALAN MORRIS Kenchester

Ledbury has led the way

IT was good to see the letter from council leader Tony Johnson in the Hereford Times , February 27. He confirms the full council’s unanimous intention to delay, beyond the next election, the implementation of his administration’s damaging plans withdrawing free transport for many children attending their catchment schools in Herefordshire. Thankfully, this is now what will actually happen on the ground.

It is disappointing to see at the end of his letter that Cllr Johnson was unable to resist the temptation to imply that opposition groups behaved illogically in not supporting his administration’s budget, while attempting to paint his Conservative group as the real champions of parents and schools.

It is a fallacy to suppose that the Conservative group’s backing for the opposition’s two budget amendments (amounting to a re-prioritisation of less than 0.2% of the finances) buys opposition approval for 100% of the administration’s plans.

The continuation of the arts commissioning grants and school transport provision for edge-of-county children and post-16 SEN students prevents the damage to our cultural groups, to our schools and to our future citizens which these policies would have caused ... but we see elsewhere in the same edition of the paper the damage still to be done to our parks and countryside, to our libraries, our day-care centres, our youth provision, our road infrastructure, our street scene, our villages.

The budget council meeting on February 7 was guillotined by councillors more interested in having their lunch than allowing a full and meaningful debate on the budget. Had the meeting been allowed to continue, councillors could have explained what we don’t like about this council’s plans. Sadly this was denied us.

In Ledbury, at the same time as the council was consulting publicly on its budget back in November, 53% of local residents were using the town plan survey to state clearly they would pay more council tax to secure the retention of important local services.

Just to be clear, that was over 1,300 people voting ‘Yes’ — that’s twice as many people as replied to any part of the administration’s clunky consultation.

Fewer than 20 people in the county council’s survey came out clearly against any form of council tax increase, and yet this was painted as a ‘clear rejection’ of the option by this administration. It just depends on who you are, how you ask the question, and what you do with the response, I suppose.

It’s a real shame that the intelligent and long-suffering residents of this county are not to be asked a simple question about the redistribution of funds through local taxation. Proper consultation, participatory budgeting, ring-fencing council tax for joint projects with parish councils, more locality working could all give residents the assurance they need to make the commitment we’ve already seen from people in Ledbury.

Just a very little more money raised locally and spent locally would ensure we retain much more of the best that this county has to offer than we shall be getting from this Conservative, top-down, ‘we’re in charge’ (just) approach.

Yes, opposition councillors voted against your budget plans, Cllr Johnson — for all sorts of really important reasons, which many of us were never given the chance to explain.

LIZ HARVEY Chairman, Ledbury Town Plan Ledbury Town Councillor Ward Councillor, Ledbury

Houses will add to chaos

FOLLOWING your report on the planning application for 40 dwellings to be erected off Gadbridge Road, Weobley, and its likely flooding effects, I would like to point out the additional and dangerous traffic hazard this would impose, especially for children on their way to school.

The council recently carried out a new traffic survey in Gadbridge Road but about 50 yards from the corner where children cross the road. This survey has thus missed the nine houses of Unicorn Court, whose exit for their cars and their 17 vehicles presently involved.

During the morning rush hour now there is chaos at the junction of Gadbridge Road, Hereford Road and High Street, with school buses as well as private cars and trade vehicles all using the road.

I hate to think what the future will hold for the young and the elderly on their mobility scooters.

This junction cannot be widened as each property on this corner is listed and have negative space between them and the current road.

Will the county council actually have some sense and reject this scheme?

PETER WATSON High Street Weobley

Sale is not good value

IN the Hereford Times February 27 issue, you report the council’s proposed ‘fire sale’ of their Bath Street offices to the fire service for them to build a new fire station.

This apparently involves a swap of sites between the council and fire service, demolition of the existing historic building and the existing fire station becoming a car park.

The council is in the process of selling as much of its surplus property as possible, but this should not be at the expense of realising full value of a site or the heritage of the city.

A well-designed housing scheme and retention of the historic building would result in proper realisation of the value of this valuable asset. It should be an open council decision and not left in the hands of a single cabinet member behind closed doors.

The article says the deal could be done by March, but it should have been reconsidered by the whole council at its meeting on March 7. On the agenda for this meeting there was already a ‘question from the public’ lodged by Mrs Protherough of Clehonger.

This deserved wider publicity and a considered answer from the council before any decision was made.

Mrs Protherough asked: “With an urgent need for sustainable housing developments in the city centre, why does this council feel that it can achieve best value for the local taxpayer by selling the Bath Street site to the Hereford and Worcester Fire Authority, rather than as a prime residential development site, which could include sensitive redevelopment of a building of historical significance in the city?”

Absolutely correct.

JOHN FAULKNER Aylestone Hill Hereford

Superstores not all bad

I WAS disappointed with the planning news refusing the supermarket development in Mill Street, Leominster.

The no campaign was well organised, masterminded by a number of local people, many of whom have worked tirelessly for years for the improvement of the town.

I don’t doubt their integrity for one moment; I just don’t share their conclusions.

I am not convinced that the presence of this supermarket will cause the sky to fall in on Leominster.

If supermarkets kill towns, why hasn’t Leominster been killed off by three major supermarket chains and a dozen or more street-corner minimarkets?

A few years ago the prophets of doom told us that a Focus store in Mill Street would spell the end of hardware shops in the town — we still have at least four trading successfully.

The one retailer likely to be most affected by the development is Morrisons; would a little more competition there be such a bad thing?

Sure, there are serious issues around the way supermarkets trade, their stranglehold on the supply chain in particular.

But are busy, working adults with families to shop for, going to dash out in their lunchtimes to trudge the streets, with heavy shopping baskets, in all weathers?

Or are they going to shop after work, under one roof in the warm and the dry with a trolley to take it to the car? It is, as they say, a no-brainer.

The increase of traffic in Mill Street is a valid point; would that the energy expended on the no campaign had been used to work for the much-needed east-west link road. Not only would that reduce the volume of traffic on the rail crossing and through Mill Street massively, it might also improve the quality of life for dozens of people living in the Bargates.

My vote would be to permit the development, in return requiring a substantial section 106 funding.

For starters, why not refurbish the footpath from Mill Street into town, providing a really attractive walk from the new free car park into the town centre?

C E EMBREY Godiva Road Leominster