Councillor committed to £27m Hereford road

3:42pm Monday 11th March 2013 in News

A leading cabinet member has said Hereford’s £27m link road is “going to happen” despite the extent of opposition.


Speaking to full council, Councillor Graham Powell, cabinet member for infrastructure, told critics of the scheme that the road was “vital” to the regeneration of Hereford.
 

“It’s change and I know you bloody well don’t like it but it’s going to happen,” he said, before apologising for his language.
 

Coun Powell was responding to the county’s “Meet Us Halfway” Local Transport Plan which covers the next two years.
 

The plan’s big pitches are cutting congestion in Hereford city to encourage walking and cycling and better transport access for market towns and rural communities.
 

Comments(65)

William Rudd says...
4:23pm Mon 11 Mar 13

It’s change and I know you bloody well don’t like it but it’s going to happen

You tell em Graham.

We been pi**ing around the bushes of Hereford for too long waiting for regeneration etc.

Report this post »

TwoWheelsGood says...
5:13pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Well, we know it's going to happen because the Council gave themselves planning permission despite considerable legitimate concerns raised by objectors. We now learn that the Council are setting about selling off land (Merton Meadow) to private developers to fund it, despite previous assurances that adequate funding was in place. That same land isn't designated for housing in the ESG Masterplan, so once again, it suits the Council to simply ignore adopted policies when it suits them and when they need to save face.

Report this post »

William Rudd says...
6:01pm Mon 11 Mar 13

considerable legitimate concerns raised by the likes of IOC who like to shout n moan but have never ever had any legit alternative plan.

Report this post »

Grid Knocker says...
6:13pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Sorry Graham, but you've lost the bloody plot, mate (apologies for language).

What's 'vital' about a road which has only one carriageway in each bloody direction (oops, sorry for that slip, Graham), five sets of bloody traffic lights (blast, did it again), will totally disrupt the Royal Mail's operations, and has seen the tragic demise of the city's best bloody DIY (ooops!) store?

Report this post »

megilleland says...
6:27pm Mon 11 Mar 13

On the subject of doing things correctly I notice in today's Daily Telegraph there is a story "Councillors for hire: how it works" interesting reading.

http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/news/uknews/9
921399/Councillors-f
or-hire-how-it-works
.html
The rules: what councillors must know
Guidelines from the Department for Communities and Local Government state that councillors must not participate in discussions or votes when they have financial interests in a decision.

Councillors may occasionally request a dispensation from the rules, but usually they must leave the room altogether if they have a financial interest in a decision.

They are strictly forbidden from benefiting financially from being a councillor, and must always act in the public interest.

Councillors must register their interests in a publicly available register. However, the management of these registers varies from council to council. Some put the registers online, whereas others insist that the public must check the register at the council’s offices.

Councillors used to be monitored by the Standards Board, but this has been scrapped by the Coalition.

The new standards arrangements that Parliament has put in place mean that it is largely for councils to decide their own local rules.
In certain circumstances, failing to comply with disclosure rules is a criminal offence.

Report this post »

FergOfTheFord says...
6:28pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Couldn't they spend the £27million on a decent road, in any direction, so we could all get out of this sh!th0le!?

Report this post »

Simon Brown says...
6:48pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Is this what passes for consultation? Perhaps this sort of attitude explains the lack of public participation Charles Nicholls' deplores?

Report this post »

Roger J says...
6:56pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Throwing your toys out of the bloody pram now 'eh Graham

Report this post »

Themightyboosh says...
7:29pm Mon 11 Mar 13

this road will make no improvement to traffic flow whatsoever.
if anything more junctions and lights will slow traffic
and when it backs up past the football ground as it does most days it will soon back up along this new rd and block ayelstone hill.
how will this help us william rudd.
its only purpose is to service these new houses and should be paid for by the developer not us.

Report this post »

Themightyboosh says...
7:35pm Mon 11 Mar 13

and another thing Councillor Graham Powell.
you are doing this against great opposition.
what gives you the right to dictate your will against the majority.
you are a public servant paid for by us the majority
and dont you "bloody" forget it.

Report this post »

bobby47 says...
7:52pm Mon 11 Mar 13

I wish Graham Powell well and Im pleased he's begun to use that wonderfully expressive and adaptable word 'bloody' to emphasise and add thrust and weight to his lengthy statement that says, 'You are having it'.
Well I don't want it and whilst I feel this way I'll be damned if I don't object to having to have it.
The Post from Grid Knocker seems to sum it all up. Near on thirty million quid that we ain't got for a small road that leads from one congested place to another, has two lanes, one for each direction and a bunch of traffic lights.
Not only do I not want it, I don't want to have it and I'll never understand it.
It's economic madness and no good will come of this other than a small group of people will become very wealthy as we sit back being asset stripped by this crazy belief that this development will help our City recover from its economic decline.
This is no cure for our economic decline. This is a goblet of toxic poison and there will be no recovery for us once its swallowed.
Our course is now set, the die is cast and there'll be no happy ending to this tragic story. The Ruin Of Hereford!

Report this post »

FormerStudent says...
8:17pm Mon 11 Mar 13

This link road is useless without the bigger picture of building a bypass.

It's the equivalent of taking a dump on the floor and then spreading it all out to make it look like less, although it's still the same amount just over a larger area.

The solution would be to invest in a toilet to remove the faeces so you don't have to spread it out...(the bypass would be the toilet)

Report this post »

megilleland says...
8:48pm Mon 11 Mar 13

http://councillors.h
erefordshire.gov.uk/
documents/s50011977/
Link%20Road%20Layout
%20Plan%20Appendix%2
03.pdf
Looking at the plan above, I imagine that the council, strapped for cash, will start the link road at the Edgar Street end and possibly only build the short stretch that gets them into Merton Meadow car park ie up to the first junction and maybe the second junction. The rest of the road will wait and we will end up with a cul de sac. Just my thoughts.

Report this post »

mizza21 says...
10:00pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Loving the bloody toilet analogy FormerStudent.
A bloody toilet may be closer to the truth in the end I suppose. If it goes ahead and there's no money for a bypass and it comes to pass that it is a disaster there will be blood on the carpet for sure.

Bypass Bypass Bypass Councillor Powell.
Stuff the Link Road.
27 Million for a road to service the great big new vanity project.
Herefordshire Council.. come on. I can do better than that and I'm an idiot.

Report this post »

William Rudd says...
10:14pm Mon 11 Mar 13

I'ts a shame we have people who's vision stops at the end of their nose

Report this post »

billy wizz says...
10:34pm Mon 11 Mar 13

dear william or andrew its not peoples vision that stops only the traffic !! this will not serve any purpose at all in sorting out the traffic problem

Report this post »

TwoWheelsGood says...
11:33pm Mon 11 Mar 13

megilleland calls it correctly I believe - they'll build only the first or possibly second stretches of the road from Edgar Street, using money from selling Merton Meadow for housing, so the road will be built by the Council for the developers benefit - hang on, haven't we heard all this before? I see the Council messed up the procedural application to demolish Rockfield and they've now had to start again with that. The proposed plan to turn it into another car park will start soon enough.

Report this post »

bobby47 says...
12:05am Tue 12 Mar 13

TWG & Megilleland, I think you are both right.
I actually believe that for those who are playing with this project, they must, from time to time, worry that this huge gamble will not pay off.
In their darkest moments, and they surely must have them, they must fear that they may be wrong and they have recklessly brought about our ruin.
As much as I try and see it differently and attempt to be objective and take on board the views of others, I cant for the life of me see this thing working to our advantage.
As the days go by, past promises tumble, old pledges simply drift away as though they were never made and each week that passes 'they' produce some other directive and agreement which flies in the face of something we were told six months earlier.
The only possible explanation for all of this ill thought out, chaotic decision making is that they are making this up as they go along as they lurch from one badly thought out decision to another.
If Mr Jarvis was ever caught off guard and decided to be open, honest and frank, he'd mutter, 'I wish I'd never got us into this. We should have spent the money on High Town'.

Report this post »

Ubique5740 says...
7:48am Tue 12 Mar 13

From today's Daily Telegraph . I am of course not saying that HCC planning officers are exploiting a "vulnerable" council .I have no evidence either way.

Moonlighting planning officers help builders exploit 'vulnerable’ councils
Planning officers are offering to draw up applications for developers who can take advantage of “vulnerable” councils in the wake of the relaxation of building laws, The Telegraph can disclose.

Report this post »

Grid Knocker says...
7:56am Tue 12 Mar 13

bobby47's spot on (once again).

Here's another extremely wierd thing. When Hereford Futures (HF) first unveiled the crackpot plan to build their costly Link Road to Nowhere, one objector pointed out that virtually every central area bus route would be diverted along it.

He asked HF if they'd allowed for this extra traffic and, if so, how many buses an hour would be clogging up the new road's two single carriageways. They simply didn't know!

Report this post »

Gillian1961 says...
10:28am Tue 12 Mar 13

At last someone who knows what we have to put up with, in this back to the dark ages of a town, the council have been thinking about a bypass for the last 20years + so until things are signed sealed and delivered, we could be waiting another 20years+ watch this space

Report this post »

retrexs says...
12:00pm Tue 12 Mar 13

fix the pot holes instead of building 27m roads you bufoon

Report this post »

megilleland says...
8:57pm Tue 12 Mar 13

Herefordshire Council
City Link Road
Department for Transport Local Pinch-point Fund
Application Form and Appendices
http://www.herefords
hire.gov.uk/docs/Her
efordshire_Council_L
ocal_Pinch_Point_Fun
d_Application_Form_v
1.0_200213.pdf

This document gives details of the council's bid for Department of Transport money to help fund the Link Road. The council is putting up £6,270,000 in years 2012-13 and asking the DfT for £9,397,000 in years 2013-14 and £10,812,000 in 2014-15.

Interesting read especially sections B2, B4, B5b&c, B6 (Construction costs £11,922,245 and Land aquisition £13,610,324), B12b&c

Report this post »

megilleland says...
9:12pm Tue 12 Mar 13

Also

Herefordshire Council
City Link Road
Department for Transport Local Pinch-point Fund
Supporting Evidence
http://www.herefords
hire.gov.uk/docs/Her
efordshire_Council_L
PPF_Supporting_Evide
nce_Document_v1.0_20
0213.pdf

Report this post »

Biomech says...
9:51pm Tue 12 Mar 13

So who's actually against this road? I mean the people we keep hearing about "they're against it!!!!" and why? What are the reasons? I haven't heard any.

What I have heard is people mention how it's pointless, won't make a difference, costs too much, goes in completely the wrong directions to alleviate traffic, etc etc.

Not actively trying to object to the road, just pointing out that it's, fundamentally, a complete pile of dog sh!t

Report this post »

B the B says...
9:16am Wed 13 Mar 13

This city is being left behind, crap shops, crap roads you just have to look 26 miles up the road to see what Worcester seems to be getting in investment. Is that because its a nice City,No its because its got a decent road network. I love Hereford but it needs to change other wise it will die.
Like with everything, we do it small, I would have a ring road all around the city, big free car paks and a dual carraigway to the motorway, then we would get people in. Now all I have to do is wait for slagging off.

Report this post »

littlewhitebull says...
10:32am Wed 13 Mar 13

The posts by Megilleland, with their well-referenced sources for information for further reading and research, are well worth reading. Thank you.
They have certainly explained some areas I was not at all sure about.
The council tells us that their "research" into the traffic flow within the city demonstrates that the new 'Link Road' will be well worth the money.
I can only speak as someone who uses the road network in the city on a regular basis - especially north to south - stuck on Edgar Street going south is the norm . It's my belief that this road is unlikely to help; but I hope I am wrong - as so much money spent on a wasteful project would be horrendous.
Personally, from my experience - the situation will only improve when we have another river crossing.

Report this post »

bobby47 says...
12:14pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Biomech, If we had an established ring road network, if High Town had not been left to rot and if I had any confidence in this deluded Council Leadership I wouldn't be moaning about any of this as long as we could afford it. Trouble is we can't and the purpose of this road has a pointless outcome.
The traffic will not alleviate any congestion because it takes vehicles from one congested place at Edgar Street to another congested place at Aylestone Hill. In between these points numerous jobs and businesses will be taken away and lost forever and the cost to all is to great for us to bear.
This road is less than a mile long, it's got two lanes, one each direction, a shed full of more bloody traffic lights and for near on thirty million quid it ain't worth it.
Can you remember when the Council decided to alleviate congestion years ago and we all had to drive anti clockwise through High Town and other areas in the belief that our problems would be solved?
It was a 'dog' of an idea and it failed. The exact same model for studying traffic has been used again to predict this road will help alleviate congestion and like the last attempt, this one will also fail.
We need a ring road. Once we have a ring road the Council can do these sort of things. Until we have a ring road it's like trying to empty a swimming pool with an egg cup. It's pointless!

Report this post »

Biomech says...
12:36pm Wed 13 Mar 13

I agree bobby, a ring road it's the most ludicrously simple and obvious solution, it's astounding that they won't do it.

Report this post »

Herefordian07 says...
12:51pm Wed 13 Mar 13

I agree with so many of you regarding the efficiency and affordability of this disastrous scheme and can only add that Councillor Powells attitude is typical of the undemocratic cabinet that controls our council and my message to councillor Powell is "We need a bloody bypass and you should build it" (sorry for the expletive but he started it first)

Report this post »

littlewhitebull says...
12:55pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Again, I find myself in agreement with Bobby and Biomech about a ring road/new river crossing. Without it I cannot see how this road will solve/alleviate our traffic problems.
Biomech uses a very good phrase: "it's astounding that they won't do it".
The word "won't" is the most important element. Can't is not used - because, of course, Here We CAN.

Report this post »

Biomech says...
1:15pm Wed 13 Mar 13

The thing is, it's only a new road in so much as it's new tarmac - or rather, it's a new road not a new route. Theres already a road in place there. To alleviate excessive congestion by building a road you need to build additional/alternati
ve routes, not just straighten a route thats already in place.

Report this post »

bobby47 says...
4:52pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Where is Dippy. Chained to a Lime Tree or wrestling Lucy?

Report this post »

TwoWheelsGood says...
9:27pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Ah, the notorious traffic reversal scheme - what fun the then LibDem Council had with our money on that one! It was almost like when Sweden went to LH drive - all the signs moved and turned round in the middle of the night! If I recall, it cost £250k but somehow only a claimed £80k to re-reverse! Nothing changes - politicians and their egos and their lies.

Report this post »

Herefordian07 says...
9:54am Thu 14 Mar 13

TWG you are quite correct, I went to a meeting with the council at the hallowed Town Hall together with twenty business people and a bus company director and we gave them our opinion the reversal was an error and wouldn't work, we were slapped down and councillor Rumsey actually told us that we were just self interested businessmen and he was elected by the constituants of Hereford so if we didn't like what the councillors did - don't vote for them next time, pretty arrogant stuff ! Guess we were right though but Hey Ho it's our money wasted again - just like the farce they are meddling with now.

Report this post »

dippyhippy says...
2:09pm Thu 14 Mar 13

I'm here Bobby! I thought it prudent to practise my knots,in preparation for forthcoming events, and ended up tethered to a small fruit tree in my back garden,unable to escape. It was a most un-fortunate incident - my pitiful cries for help went unheeded.Anyway,3 days on,I have lost enough weight to be able to slip through! Nice to see Graham has resorted to swearing at us - and after all those nice things you said about his coat! I am surprised!
Nothing changes does it? We have Charles urging us to attend meetings,saying we can help make a difference, then Graham comes along and says "No you bloody can't!" and it all kicks off again........

Report this post »

bobby47 says...
4:50pm Thu 14 Mar 13

This'll make you want to spit! Rockfield DIY site? It's going to become a large car park.
Did anyone else know this c'os I bloody didn't.

Report this post »

Biomech says...
6:11pm Thu 14 Mar 13

You mean you haven't heard bobby?

It was a miscommunication all along, we thought when then said "link road" that they were building a road to "link" two together. No no, what they are actually doing is renaming "Barrs Court Road" to "Link Road", the £27million is for 4 new signs; two each end.

Just a simple misunderstanding that's all.

Report this post »

dippyhippy says...
6:12pm Thu 14 Mar 13

"Brockington Towers - This is Davina! You are live on the Hereford T imes Forum,please do not swear. The public have been voting,and I can now reveal that............ Jarvis YOU have been evicted. You have 30 seconds to say your goodbyes...the public are coming to get you!"
Its the only way to end this madness. He has got to go.

Report this post »

bobby47 says...
6:41pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Dippy, Superb. Brilliant. If only we could evict him. Great!

Report this post »

littlewhitebull says...
7:24pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Dippyhippy - quite an outstanding post - if only we could make it come true!
Bobby and Biomech - the car park at Rockfield's old site - is this true? Who will use the car park?

Report this post »

Biomech says...
7:43pm Thu 14 Mar 13

No idea ask Bobby. Privately held parking for the train station maybe?

Report this post »

bobby47 says...
7:48pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Littlewhitebull, I've genuinely been told that the site will become a pay and display car park.
I've also been told that the many proprietors of business'es affected by this new route have suffered poor health because of the Council dithering, flip flopping and indecision when it comes to when they have to go and at what cost.
If the Council respond and say, 'No. Never', then it'll be because they've changed their minds again. Today, it'll be a car park. Tomorrow? Probably a bloody zoo.

Report this post »

littlewhitebull says...
8:22pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Thanks, Bobby. I know that what you say about the health of people affected by this 'link road' is true. What a caring council we have - NOT.
The whole scheme appears chaotic to me as a humble citizen. Why lose a successful, useful business like Rockfield to provide a car park - or part of a car park.
As you say, tomorrow it could be filled with monkeys. I'd pay to see it, if it were filled by councillors or executives.
Never mind losing out on Pope - King is a better option, old mate.

Report this post »

dippyhippy says...
9:51pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Bobby,litlewhitebull
, many thanks for your kind words - has anybody read The Opinion piece in this weeks HT? It makes for a very interesting read. At this rate,we will have no High Town, no Hospital no nothing.......

Report this post »

fmrbill says...
10:14pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Well councillor using ure own words 'its going to happen'as if u can see the future let me do my own bit of looking into the future. Come the next local election jarvis will be out conservatives will lose control, a lot of the councillor will stand down, saying they want to spend more time with the family, without giving us the voters tge oppurtunity to force their snouts out the trough and vote them out.

Report this post »

dippyhippy says...
2:10pm Fri 15 Mar 13

Fmrbill, at this stage of the proceedings, I don't care if they jump or are pushed - I just want them gone!!!

Report this post »

Biomech says...
2:26pm Fri 15 Mar 13

To be honest, I'd usually brush off what Bobby said as just a false rumour, I mean, logically, there's already 3 big carparks that end of town and not a lot in the way of attractions, it just makes no sense to put another carpark there.

But, given what we've seen from this councils decisions thus far, it's not so easy to ignore this claim as a just rumour.

Report this post »

bobby47 says...
3:02pm Fri 15 Mar 13

Good grief! I'll be damned if I let that thinly veiled insult from Biomech go unchallenged.
Brush me off! I'll not sit back quietly and have my good name dragged through the Rockfield mud and let this one go without a sane, measured and reasonably intelligent response.
'Get stuffed Biomech'.

Report this post »

Biomech says...
3:14pm Fri 15 Mar 13

Oh my dear Bobby, it wasn't an insult, it was a comment directed at the news you provided us with :)

Report this post »

bobby47 says...
3:16pm Fri 15 Mar 13

Biomech, Forgiven. Actually, no offence was ever taken. I just wanted to moan about something.

Report this post »

TwoWheelsGood says...
9:32am Sat 16 Mar 13

Guys, its not a rumour, Rockfield will become a £6m car park - the plans are approved, the bulldozers are on standby. It'll be a lovely bit of tarmac - what a flagship view as you enter our fine city - a car park and a KFC.

Report this post »

littlewhitebull says...
11:56am Sat 16 Mar 13

TwoWheelsGood - any idea if the plans are available on the net, please? I've had a look but can't find any references.
Strange that our beloved council announced that Rockfield would need to go to "make way for the Link Road."
Don't remember the council mentioning a car park.
Anyway, what do I know? I'm still using the Mappa Mundi as a route map.

Report this post »

dippyhippy says...
1:48pm Sat 16 Mar 13

This actually defies belief! A car park??
Have they changed the plans - I should imagine that if this wasn't(and it wasn't) on the original plan,then surely that helps to make a better case for the other businesses,including Royal Mail,who could be on the receiving end of a compulsory purchase order?? If they can change direction once,whose to say they wont again??

Report this post »

TwoWheelsGood says...
2:57pm Sat 16 Mar 13

It was originally allocated as SQ1 (never found what this stood for) and then UV19 (ie Urban Village), so clearly zoned for housing. A new drawing, just made available on Hfd Futiles site, now shows it as car parking. I've seen other documents which indicate work is about to start on demolition for this. It is notable that the majority of drawings issued over the years by the various ESG/Futiles companies (5 now?) are undated and unreferenced, making it impossible to logically compare one with another or see how things have evolved/changed. That must be deliberate.

Report this post »

dippyhippy says...
3:54pm Sat 16 Mar 13

Twowheels,yes I agree,quite deliberate. The waters just got a whole lot murkier.

Report this post »

billy wizz says...
3:41pm Sun 17 Mar 13

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=qLZ8qZxjk
fw

this about sums up the link road

Report this post »

littlewhitebull says...
5:09pm Sun 17 Mar 13

TwoWheelsGood wrote:
It was originally allocated as SQ1 (never found what this stood for) and then UV19 (ie Urban Village), so clearly zoned for housing. A new drawing, just made available on Hfd Futiles site, now shows it as car parking. I've seen other documents which indicate work is about to start on demolition for this. It is notable that the majority of drawings issued over the years by the various ESG/Futiles companies (5 now?) are undated and unreferenced, making it impossible to logically compare one with another or see how things have evolved/changed. That must be deliberate.
Thanks, TwoWheelsGood. I also noticed the undated drawings which, as you say, does prevent you from following a logical sequence.
The whole topic is rather messy.

Report this post »

bobby47 says...
5:49pm Sun 17 Mar 13

And here's another bucket of phlegm to digest. Nothing to do with the new development.
The proposed new build of the Records Office at a cost of 8 million!
This idea actually originated from a member of staff who has the ear of our ruling elite. It was offered up as a good idea and now it's going to happen.
Some fool suggested that perhaps they could put all the record information onto digital disc at a very low cost to the tax payers.
No, said the bloody Council. We've gotta build a new place at Rotherwas because we want it.
And what are they doing now?
Bloody packing up all the records and information into boxes to ready themselves for the move to Rotherwas.
How are they bloody doing that now? But for a few hours each week, they've closed the bloody place so that they can pack and they won't have to serve the needs of the public.
It's crazy!!!! Eight bloody Million for a place we don't need and are unlikely to ever visit unless you finish early on the day shift at Rotherwas and stagger in to have a look round this new design that looks similar to an egg box.
Bloody Madness!!!!

Report this post »

littlewhitebull says...
7:34pm Sun 17 Mar 13

It's so unlike Bobby to sit on the fence about a council proposal - is he for, or against the new Record Office? Sorry - couldn't resist that!
I noticed this morning that the fences around the old cattle market site have a new edition.
In amongst the posters advertising - Robert McAlpine and Stanhope is a poster stating that: "I am the beginning and the end".
Is this a prediction for the future of the city?

Report this post »

TwoWheelsGood says...
7:52pm Sun 17 Mar 13

Surely it’s a quote from the Good Lord Jarvis himself? It reinforces the Council's dubious connection with an 'alternative' church and its equally dubious indoctrination techniques, reported by the HT. Do they have consent to advertise? I don't think so. Will I be complaining to the Council? Oh yes.

Report this post »

TwoWheelsGood says...
7:57pm Sun 17 Mar 13

bobby47 - you overlooked the most ridiculous point - its in a flood plain! Don't forget the existing building will be flogged off for housing, and no doubt our Council will be stitched up like a good 'un and forced to hand over a skip full of used notes to the developer at the last minute ...

Report this post »

Biomech says...
8:24pm Sun 17 Mar 13

I don't think Jarvis cares how bad it ends up, now that he knows he could just steal money out of our bank accounts like the Cypriots

Report this post »

bobby47 says...
9:16am Mon 18 Mar 13

Well, if he knocks on my door delivering my Admag and has the bloody cheek to ask for my PIN number I'll tell him to 'get stuffed'.
TWG is right. They mean to have our money and our precious bloody trinkets to fund their Tarmacing project and he should know this, 'I ain't for handing over my savings and semi precious metals without offering up resistance.
Bloody Jarvis! I've got block bloody paving on my front drive and I'll be damned if I allow him, his team and his bloody lorry to deposit ten ton on Tarmac upon the frontage of my family dwelling.

Report this post »

dippyhippy says...
10:53pm Mon 18 Mar 13

Jarvis - you have been warned.....!

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree