Model K Hamilton Beach Mixer

CLAIMS LIBRARY: WHERE I SAID SAY ... THE PRADO

In July 2004, appears in BOP initial approval of the General Plan, including the library and destroys part of the leafy trees. As a result, in time, there are 30 allegations to the General Plan.
The first allegations were answered positively in 2005, by the technicians of Urbanism, here's one:

No. ORDER 2119
Summary of argument
Allegation homeowner in Diego de Riaño, opposing the construction of the library in the Prado, which is of reduced spaces. Sheet 12-15 and 13-15. Analysis
claim
Given the allegations against the building University Library in the Prado, as well as other alternatives that would involve the rehabilitation as a major cultural center of the Plaza buildings in Spain where he could settle this once transferred using the current administrative services choose to delete the proposal, so that the spaces Prado free surface will be depleted.
In conclusion, it is assumed the claim raised.

This meant that many residents celebrate it.

However there was a change of approach and the latest were answered negatively. Faced with this contradictory situation prompted Urban explanation and this is the answer Received:

"Reports on the contradictions identified in the responses to the allegations against the claim of the Revised General Plan of Seville, set up a university library in the Prado de San Sebastian. Indeed, there have been numerous claims which, either individually or between other content within a claim broader expressed their opposition to the location of that library.
Specifically, allegations dealing with this issue are:
n º 338, 352; 1330-1332, 2042, 2119, 2140, 2159, 2744-2758, 5716-5721. In other words, a total of 30 allegations.

As background it should be noted that due to these allegations and before making a decision, it is true that we studied the possibility of locating the Library on the Plaza of Spain, once they were transferred from the administrative offices there are currently installed. However, analyzing the difficulties this decision made it unfeasible for the uncertainty that is the final destiny of the building, next to the University itself will stay in the Prado, he finally decided to go ahead with the proposal of the Prado based on the broad justification that takes place in response to allegations No 2140, 2159, 2744-2758 and 5716-5721.

Non- excuse, but as a justification of why this error, explain the working method used to report the allegations received about 7000 (just 6931). In the final phase of the defense of claims, precisely to avoid possible errors, the responses were grouped with the same content. In this case, the allegations set up by the No. 2140, 2744-2758 and 5716-5721, contained in the summary document as a single group of claims to that contended, and there it is for this group that itself was incorporated final report, instead keeping the error in the claim No. 352, 1330-1332, 2042 and 2119: a total of 6 observations.

Rather than to regret the mistake, this letter serves to at least be able to understand the motives that have caused, and, as noted earlier, has been, therefore, at the end of the response process when they have committed these contradictions in the final report to the allegations.


By July 2005 OPS "