andygardener

In which case complain. They likely will.

If you complain they would probably just fell the tree and send it as biomass to the power stations.

So, all going well then? Aren't our council great?

Lol so even despite the random no whores sign they have whores! Not a good look.

More chance of platting fog

Jesus H. It's al pacino meets shakin stevens with the cold dead eyes of Kaiser Soze. Plus what the hell is it with "twin power sockets" I never noticed a single power socket when I'm out because I'm eating and drinking and socialising not recharging a couple of drills. As a usp the fact that you're never more than an inch away from two power sockets is up there with offering a bar where you're never more than two feet away from a piece of litmus paper. You know, just in case. You guys say acidity/alkalinity doesn't matter on a night out, but in our bar at least if it does you're always covered! Weird place.

Is that the one with a no drugs, no soliciting notice prominently displayed in the entrance? I guess it's supposed to be American themed? but it just looks dodgy. Never seen anyone in the place.

It think planner1 himself put forward a road damage assessment that made buses massively per passenger more damaging than cars by a factor of thousands. Something to do with axel weight. So lets not pretend its cars damaging the roads when its buses.

Or we could just treat buses like what they are, big inflexible smelly taxis. So if you don't have a car then get one of these and pay the comercial price to use it. Why do they need subsidising?

I did say something perfectly reasonable but some authorised stalker deleted it. Get used to it chaps unless you're to the left of lenin.

Which is great. If we accept the city centre is now a public sector/residential /boozing zone, which it is. Ban cars from it entirely. We've t'internet and actually quite a lot more shopping areas with meadowhall, Hillsborough, C Peaks, eccy road/sharrow vale etc etc. Give the city centre over to the carless and let them enjoy it.

Are you saying reform/progressive Jews are not Jewish?

I don't think they'd set off the particle alarms, but after the M6 business and given liquids and especially liquids combined with a power source are liable to land you with red dots on your head I'd just stick to gum or something for the flight.

It's not remotely relevant. Even you claim not to have seen it and you in many other council matters claim to be "in the know". So "have you seen it" is utterly disingenuous, suggesting that those who have not seen the contract should be loath to comment on whether it was a good contract or not. It was not a good contract as it utterly failed to deliver what it was claimed to do in a timely fashion and with water tight taxpayer guarantees that we would not be out of pocket if the developer failed to honour their part of the bargain. We can all see that, it's public domain fact. The contract failed to prevent this mess, thus the contract was not up to scratch. don't need to read it to know that, I just need to look a what it achieved, or rather didn't.

We don't need to. The council did the CPO's, boarded up the shops and got everything tee'd up. Hammerson did not then build Sevenstone. So we know the contract the council drew up was inadequate to ensure that the council doing their bit would result in Hammerson doing their bit. Now the contract is null and void if it's such a fine contract that doesn't bring shame on the incompetent council fools that negotiated it maybe you can publish it so we can all bask in it's glory? But you won't do that. You'll refuse to make it public and try to criticise anyone who suggests the council got it wrong because they haven't seen the document you will refuse to publish despite the net result being plain for all to see. And you wonder why the council are loathed in this city.