IT comes as no surprise to me that the blame for the delays in the completion of the market refurbishment are laid at the door of the contractors.

Over the last few months - in meetings with traders' representatives - officials of Bury MBC and their design team have continually tried to divert responsibility towards the not-entirely-blameless contractor.

In my view there are a number design errors, including roof lights which are not weatherproof; shutters on the units around the perimeter of the new hall; totally inadequate "protective" blinds which are not to be used in adverse weather conditions; bollards which are sacrificed on a daily basis; and the roof of the new units on the gable end of the hall which, under certain weather conditions, leaks. The design of the roof of the new meat and fish hall is, in my opinion, no better than that of a lean-to garage. Half the budget seems to have been spent on accommodating a few fishmongers and butchers. Why?

Why was the new meat and fish hall sited there when the original scheme was to build a new hall at the end of the market, which was the area really in need of revitalisation? Did MEPC dictate the change after the council had decided that it should be elsewhere? If so, that would beg the question: who runs Bury?

I think the entire scheme is ill-conceived, badly designed and shoddily built. If this is an example of the borough council's close supervision, then Lord help us ratepayers if they ever have to undertake a large and complex scheme on our behalf.

MARKET TRADER

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.