There were two interesting letters last week commenting on ‘musings’ of mine from previous weeks; both, I have to say, made pertinent points but as I’ve explained before I do not have the same amount of space as letter writers.
As a result perhaps I don’t explain things in as concise a way I would like.
MD makes a valid comment about signage. I was trying to make the point that we seem to have enough signs about the town as it is; I take their point about ‘better’ signs and would suggest that perhaps these should replace the ones we have at present – job done!
I cannot agree, however, with the suggestion about a permanent covered market area. True, it might be an idea for market traders, but as for the suggestion it be used for open air entertainment: I seem to remember that this was one of our promised ‘delights’ to come when the Market Place was ‘re-refurbished’.
Don’t know about you but the ‘entertainment’ we have been provided with there so far doesn’t really strike me as being the type of ‘entertainment’ most would envisage!
Helen Shinn also makes some very valid points but, as mentioned above, space does not permit me to mention the various areas, buildings etc she mentions so fluently.
I do not dispute these are available to us, and visitors, but would suggest that the town has suffered by the removal of the original Tourist Information Centre.
No disrespect to the people who man the present centre at the Guildhall but should not a TIC be where most visitors would expect to find it and local information – in the town Market Place, as it was?
I would also suggest that her assertion the town would suffer if it had a bypass is wrong: on my various visits around the country it has been noticeable that many towns currently with bypasses certainly seem quite vibrant and not suffering.
Might I also suggest to some of our councillors that it appears people DO actually read this column; perhaps it’s only those who expect criticism who don’t want to!