Gardening to a reasonable, reliable standard depends on people who know what they are doing and can commit to it. They will probably have invested a fair bit of their time in learning what to do, and getting proper qualifications. So, whether it's your own garden you care about, or the making the space outside your shop front attract customers, please consider paying people to do it well.
Tim Lund wrote:Wooster and Stock did indeed come out earlier with (IMHO) a hideous proposal for redeveloping their current offices - 109 -11 Kirkdale - which was also a massive overdevelopment. OTOH, their proposals for replacing an existing outbuilding and garage with a residential unit within The Woodman site, are within London Plan limits. The proposal has been refused as being an "overbearing and unneighbourly form of development ", but it is not clear that it is any more so than the Greeyhoud development. The refusal has been appealed, and as Dorian wrote, the grounds for refusal seem very weak.
marymck wrote:1. The plans for 109-111 Kirkdale have been resubmitted. See thread: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7738 and are now under consideration by the Council. In my opinion (as a local resident) they are still out of scale and still trying to cram a quart into a pint pot.
Tim Lund wrote:I couldn't find the application DC/12/79489/X that you referred to on the Lewisham Planning web site - only the orignal application DC/09/72209/X with the final line "This case has no appeals against it". What am I missing?
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 10 guests