Wednesday, 30 October 2013
Midweek Ramble, Observer’s Books, Pleasurama again and is the blog becoming too much of a problem?
I have been pricing observer’s books this is a collectable series of books and collecting them is open to all as prices start at less than a pound with the average observer’s in its dust wrapper selling for about £2.50.
Observer’s have just about made it out of the world of collectable books and into he world of general collectables, which means in some case some unusually high prices, reproduction dust wrappers and a mythology all to themselves.
Some have a printers code, either at the front or the back of the book the last two digits of which tell you the year it was printed in, this can be before the year of publication.
There are numerous cover variations for the same book and sometimes different dust wrappers on the same edition (with the same printers code) like the bottom two 1951 British Wild Flowers in the picture.
The Pleasurama task and finish group meets tomorrow, this is the one where the council have supplied answers to the group’s questions which are different to the answers the council have given in response to foi requests.
There is also a rumour that the developer has submitted another set of proposals as to how they could still finance building the development, it is expected that these will be discussed by cabinet in a couple of weeks time.
With so many people now interested in the Pleasurama development I have taken a back burner approach to this business of the financial integrity of the developer, I stated years ago that I had reservations about the council proceeding with a developer without any proven track record. I followed this up with a foi request to the council asking if the council had any information that the developer had ever developed anything, to which the council replied no.
I guess the thing that makes it very difficult is that there is no real point of contact for the developer and no real person who seems to both support the development and be able to answer reasonable questions about the development. The most basic questions, like, why no flood risk assessment? Still have only the; because we aren’t legally obliged to have one, answer.
Blog comment here seems to have degenerated to commentators insulting each other, it has got so boring that I am finding it a struggle to even read the comments, so apologies if I haven’t removed all of the unsuitable comments.
Posted by Michael Child at 14:43