When To Stop Shaving Before A Brazilian Wax

BRANDANI ZUCCARI

Committee pro Cesanelli

and not just in the local press of 7/2/2010, is given the news that the City Council would have planned, "the opening of Via Brandani and Zuccari, roads with only one exit to the state."
The announcement was made during the meeting of 5/2/2010 held in the district, and was reported in the press without adding further details. That tract
Brandani Zuccari and is an area in which they were made the "residences of the park" and that is in a state of deterioration due to some buildings and raised very close to each other.
Faced with this tangle of houses, citizens divided: some have issued positive comments while others, such as Vice Mayor, admitted during a meeting with the Committee, who over the Zuccari is an example of how not to be carried out the building work. He
, in the assembly district, argued that the creation of the park goes as planned, because, in his view, "we have not decided anything new."
Yet something new is evident. The volumes provided in the Plan of the Park were scattered over an area of \u200b\u200b15,000 square meters upstream of that tangle of houses, with a resolution of 2009, which is allowing the City to collect more than three million euro, following the real estate development of an area acquired to create the park.
Also new: the "residences of the park" will face no more than the park, but other houses.
Again, in a recent variant, sub builders will be trained by a new method, which results in a lower final extension for the Park, compared to the previous procedure for selling.
The latest news to report, and many others are left out, is this: the opening of Via Via Fratelli Brandani and Zuccari.
Looking at the table 5 attached to the detailed plan of the park, seems to understand that the viability of the puzzle should be solved with the setback ahead of the bike path, and with a new internal road parallel to highway 16, located where the path now goes, and on which traffic will flow to and from street to street and Brandani and Zuccari, to connect them from the Piazzale Michelangelo, through an alley surrounded by new homes that will be built after the auction of 15 thousand square meters of land acquired for municipal build the park.
will be difficult to pass cars in the narrow, with trees, with more or less makeshift parking lots, fences and close together, which today is the connection between street and street Brandani Zuccari and the bike path.
The residences of the park will become residences overlooking a narrow two-lane ramp, or will be demolished and some plants provision is one way?
We should fear expropriation? We want to avert this danger, even if we imagine that for many this may be a necessary evil, especially when it is not interested in the home. Alderman
The question we ask is the environment: how to solve the puzzle of the road and street of Via F.lli Zuccari Brandani?
With one-way streets, with tree felling or maybe a helicopter landing flush side to enable everyone to get on the road?
In our opinion the best solution would be not to expropriate and the two roads open to traffic from the inside and leave in peace those who live in the area where there are the "homes the park, "so as not to devastate the situation further.
The new road parallel to highway 16 can connect to the Piazzale Michelangelo without those two markets, close together and narrow, which are Brandani Via Via and Zuccari.

Skin Cancer Worry Ear

AND ROUTE THE "PARK" OF THE OTHER OPTIONS Cesanelli Odyssey

- Pro Cesanelli by the Committee and not only
Thanks for civic engagement of those who want to understand what will be the "Park" of Cesanelli, was published in the website: www.comitatoprocesanellaenonsolo.blogspot.it an excerpt from the documentation variant of the municipal master plan of the "Park", which is on the agenda for adoption.
Many municipalities publish online the draft resolutions and updated with documents and not with proclamations on handling the most important processes that affect the community, but this kind of transparency is lacking in Senigallia, so suffers the democratic participation of those who would like to see the cards before the adoption of the resolutions, but City can not do so, and be content of the commercials and the "Plan" of the green. But we
analysis of the proposed variant. In "Park", already reduced after the recent development of a portion of a building purposes, does not appear the school campus, but its appearance may occur after the elections, with another variant, because several members of the majority have publicly expressed the 'intention to make proposals to that effect.
Perhaps this is not the time to show that removing another piece of "Park."
Another variant, which affects, is the message that the City actually addressed to himself, for not being able to acquire all the private areas, if not 28%.
Yet the Administration had promised in 2009 to start work on the "Park".
E 'an admission of liability, that because the City had the power to execute the office of the master plan and acquire the areas, with a variation providing for the execution of office, but has not done so, in these twenty years of the implementation phase of the detailed plan for the "Park". The City is
was rather fast when it came to finding space for building expansion and to make cash, with the use of land and real estate development in areas that had been acquired for the "Park".
Nationals still owners of the areas to be divested in order to achieve the Park was also given a supply more advantageous than that which you are subject to those who have already sold their land to the Municipality.
This difference in treatment between those who survived and who did not accept the initial rules is unfair and penalizes citizens and territory, and not justified by the alleged complexity of the procedures and their supposed inadequacy.
Until now the rules are these, in a nutshell: the transfer of agricultural land to the City for the "Park" means the compensation and restitution to the private 15% of its surface, such as building, in areas to the edge of the "Park", in addition to the sale the City of areas for sub-urbanization, with the option of paying the trattanerle cd. "Monetization" to the City. An assignment
little benefit to individuals, but still better than the € 1.60 for citizens who have pending disputes with Autostrade SpA.
Expropriation is a sacrifice for all, it is said spesso.Invece promises, thanks to the variant, a discipline more favorable: the calculation of areas to be allocated to the City as an urban standards, 85% to be sold to the "Park" and the building area will be greater for private and will not be paid the "monetization".
So you unlock the acquisition of the areas, or give room for other demands of an even better?
We propose that in the absence of agreement for the sale of the Common areas, the latter shall ex officio expropriation, so that the "Park" is made in reasonable time.
We want an amendment or a comment ex art.30 lr 34/92, to be precise.
Other pieces of "Park" go away, with the variant, also close to the ditch of Justice, with new and additional buildings. The future may see
sacrificing other parts of the "Park", to reduce it to an giardino.Siamo tired of promises, and if this is the variant to achieve the "Park", we will have to wait more years, then to have a garden, such as the Peace that park is not.