Adam
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
[quote quote=164558]Well, only a complete idiot would award listed status to the Police Station and:
Did anyone check and see if the listed request was a sneaky cross-border sabotage from Chester to keep our town in the doldrums.[/quote]
Good point, Chester will be sh*ting themselves if we get another Lidl.
What was the point of the Town Centre Master-Plan? Apart from to chase after VVP funding. Has it been abandoned?
Jimbow: “Rex Ham, I often drive to Broughton. Firstly easy parking without a cost, secondly easy access to all the shops including a super market, thirdly all shopping can be done in one go, fourthly clean tidy and free of undesirables. The extra cost if any in fuel costs to me is well worth it.”
Sounds pretty logical to me.
Ten years ago Broughton was pretty grim.. But it’s now thriving.
It does have advantages such as accessibility and of course free parking, but equally you could say EM is central to residential areas so should be pulling in walking visitors..Fundamentally, it’s Broughton’s smart investment and good management that now sets the two apart..
Waiting for their suncream..
Had to call in to town this morning to pick up a passport form, first time we’ve been since February. We had to walk through a group by the bandstand on the way in. On the way out we passed through the same group however two of them were having sex at the side of the path, the rest oblivious. The last time we walked back from the cinema with the kids we passed by a guy having a dump, this was trickier to explain.
So, we’re off in the car to Broughton for the afternoon once again. Instead of walking into the town we grew up in.Linking into the other thread about high school standards, we have a year before we have to make a decision for our eldest. After this morning, we’ve decided enough is enough. Our kids wellbeing and education is simply far more important than some misguided loyalty to the town we’re from.
We’ve invested a great deal into setting our lives up here but it’s been thrown back at us. Time to move on..
Wrexview: “When a couple of small tents were erected on the Groves earlier in the summer they were quickly moved on. Why the change of policy by the Council now ?”
Simply because the Exec board made a deliberate decision not to fund adequate security on the site in July. Mark Pritchard quote from the Leader 26th July:
“The difficulty that we have now is that we as a council have had a political discussion and taken the view that we will not be putting 24-hour security on site.”
This entire farce began as a two-fingered salute by the Exec Board to the local residents who fought, successfully, to prevent the demolition of the Groves. It’s now entirely out of hand. The logic of course is entirely flawed as security for the site is needed whether the building stands or not (they’re not camping there to admire the mock Jacobean architecture) and you could argue that significant security would be required if there were to be primary schools built on the site.
Further quotes from the same Leader article:
“We have been aware for many years of the anti-social behaviour and the damage that has been done to the building.
“It will continue and that is why we wanted a demolition of the current building.
“It was listed outside our control and we have been left with a white elephant.”
“I sympathise with the residents that live in the area but if our plan had come to fruition, we would be submitting applications for funding for new schools on that site now.”
An Exec Board that pursues personal, petty feuds at the expense of further national ridicule is far more concerning than the campsite itself.
[quote quote=107310]
Time for standing orders to be re written Councillor X ? I am sure the public would expect their local Councillor to speak at any meeting they choose to attend , shocking that a number were denied that opportunity yesterday. The flaw in the present system is all the power in in the hands of the Excectuive Board, making the other forty odd Councillors totally powerless!
Completely agree with you there, very few had their chance to put forward the views of their constituents!
Noted that Ian Lucas’ petition for “the House to urge WCBC to not to demolish Groves School” didn’t achieve its purpose.
At 10,000 signatures the government will respond
At 100,000 the petition will be considered for debate in parliament …..
Ian managed 112 … Not 112,000 just 112!Perhaps there wasn’t that much demand to save the building after all!
[/quote]
I’ve no doubt it was a sincere oversight not to mention the 2000+ online and paper signatories…
Although I’m a little surprised by your dismissal of 112 as insignificant.. surely WCBC would consider this figure as a successful public consultation?
Perhaps you could remind the audience once again, what was the figure of public respondents deemed sufficient for you to forge ahead with a £1,5m capital investment, followed by a 10 year £900k deficit, in the Peoples Market Arts Hub..? Did you break through the magic 112 figure?
You know, I initially had you down as a common or garden forum troll but little splashes of illiteracy interlaced with nuggets of miscalculated smugness can only point towards you being a member of the executive board..
Ah yes, unless of course it is a decision taken by the executive board, in this case your opinion is not required.
Have a look at the council’s complaints manager’s reply on the Save Grove Park Facebook page :
“Thank you for your email. Unfortunately this matter is a policy decision approved at the Council’s Executive Board and therefore does not fall within the remit of the Complaints Procedure.”
