Later that day I went to assist David Ruffley MP with his surgery at the Borough Offices in Angel Hill. Imagine how disturbed I was to see the carpet of the entrance hall:
And this was taken after the cleaner (Dot) had done her best. It would appear that someone with a considerable amount of coal-dust, black paint or oil on their left shoe has marched in past reception. It looks like being a professional job to clean these marks.
This morning I held my monthly surgery (1st Saturday 10-noon) in the library entrance hall. Here is another dear lady, this time from Out Westgate, who comes along regularly for a chat about her local issues.
21 comments:
Paul - I think your elector has a valid concern. This is a difficult crossing point and I prefer not to use it. Crown Street is fairly narrow near the Dog & Duck so I nip across there.
My solution would be to remove the plant (and the Gates).
Did you follow the footprints in either direction to find the culprit?
David - you may be wise to cross there, but the gates also provide a stepping stone.
PM - the Mayor and her Consort dropped by (not to see the MP but to collect a chain), and he did a "Poirot" by retracing the footsteps. We assume since there is only one path that it came from outside.
I wonder if the Chief Executive will mount an investigation?
Paul - I'm in favour of the island but the Crown Streets Gates hinder the view for pedestrians, especially if pushing a baby carrier.
Nice to know, though, that you are supporting a Nowak/Zwandahl trendy-lefty initiative from the last century.
Not another chain?! How many do they need!
David - good that you have returned as a regular commentator on this site (I think). But look at my comment: wasn't my "support" for the same aspect as yours?
PM - the Mayor has a more modest chain which she takes to events where she is not accompanied by staff.
Paul - I'm intrigued by the idea of a modest chain. Is this in case the Mayor is mugged with no bodyguard in site?
Since I returned to work on 18 September, there is less time for blogging generally, so don't expect to hear from me as often as during my 3 months absence.
I find it patronizing that you refer to the women in your ward 'dear'.
Anon - I make no apologies. These particular ladies are indeed "dear" to me, as are a number of similarly elderly men, to whom I have yet had reason to refer to on these pages.
Get a life!
Maybe I should get a life and stop wasting it reading your blog? Or then again, maybe you should get a life and stop wasting it taking pictures of your feet?
Maybe you're right anon?
David
Leave the gates alone. they serve a purpose and are now part of our fabric. the question should be where are the other 4 ( or 3 dependant on your view) yet another sign of a weak council trying to save money.
any one else up for a bring back the town gates campaign. you never know they may slow the average traffic speed down.
BB - No doubt David will respond, knowing more than I do about the gates. It's a bit unfair to blame the council for saving the money that would have been the cost of putting up what no one has ever really suggested - ie more "gates"!
Hey anon, As much as I didn't like the feet, they have a right to be here. Mr F can be a person as well as a councillor.
Lighten up.
Thanks PM! No more feet - and that's a promise.
I'd blog the feet again, just to annoy anon!
Back in the time of the orginal gates and re laying of angel hill and and honey hill, there were plans for and expenditure allocated for gates at each of the town enterances. Such a shame they were not built.
apart from adding to the historic town centre, they slow traffic down.
I beleive at one time the idea was for a totally traffic free zone. that got killed off too ?
I would build a set at the bottom of southgate street. ( just where the river crosses under the road forming the bountry of the old town).
BuryBoy - it is my recollection too that there were originally planned to be gates at each of the "town gates" into the HCZ / town area.
I do think though that it got killed off as some Cllrs got cold feet. (Not an allusion to you Paul, don't get excited dear. And no, we don't want a picture proving that you do, in fact, have warm feet.)
Traffic speeds in Crown Street were calmed in 1999 by the laying of a road surface that was noisier than the conventional macadam topped with bitumen.
The 'Gates' was an attempt at combining public art with traffic signs. No attempt has been made to extend this concept to other 'gateways' to the town centre.
There are 2 issues with the Crown Street Gates:
1. They have a front and a back, so as a work of art they are a flawed design.
2. There are a couple of traffic 'blind' spots. Motorists leaving Crown Street for Honey Hill can't momentarily see cars turning from the other direction, and, pedestrians with pushchairs have an impaired view of the traffic when crossing from the St Mary's side to the Dog & Duck side when they get to the middle of the road.
David - your assumption that anything with a back and front cannot be a work of art is deliciously philistine!
Paul - the Philistines were a cultured tribe who were submerged by the Israelites, who then slagged them off on their blog.
A sculpture needs form and nobody, as yet, has photographed the Crown Street Gates from the rear. Although the traffic signs advising motorists that they are entering the HCZ are on the Gates, the equivalent notices telling drivers they are leaving the Zone are round the corner on Honey Hill.
So the Crown Street Gates fail as a work of art and also an effective tool of traffic management. What's left apart from stubbornness?
Post a Comment