Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
That's just "overlooking" - you can't have windows right on the boundary of your neighbour's property.
Canterbury Arms, Brixton to be turned into flats - planning application
- Thread starter colacubes
- Start date
Rushy
basically a scrotum
I thought that on the boundary you could install windows as long as they were obscure and fixed below 1.7m (but you have no right to light so your neighbour can still build a fence or another building over it so presumably cannot count as main windows for planning).
BC limits the opening to 1sqm every 4m of wall on or within 1m of boundary (unless the two windows are fire isolated from eachother internally).
I've been looking into this a bit recently for an old workshop with no ground floor windows but it is a little confusing*.
*ETA Or more accurately, I am finding it a little confusing.
cuppa tee
Well-Known Member
By strange coincidence the conversation I was talking about took place in Clapham, the gentleman in question was out canvassing for the May council elections, he said he was out early because they were worried about whch way Clapham Old Town was going.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
That wasn't really very long. Your lamentable attention span puts you a good few years younger than me!tl;dr
Rushy
basically a scrotum
I was a bit surprised to read this article last year. I assumed that the youth vote was quite left wing on the whole:
Young people are supposed to be left-leaning idealists, but polls tell us that today's under-34s don't believe in handouts and high taxes – and they're voting for David Cameron
Incidentally, where has the quotes button gone?
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
I play the newborn baby sleep deprivation cardThat wasn't really very long. Your lamentable attention span puts you a good few years younger than me!
"Reply" quotes just the one post.
"+Quote" adds the post to a list of quotes that pops up when you go to "Insert Quotes" under the reply box.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
I play the newborn baby sleep deprivation card
"Reply" quotes just the one post.
"+Quote" adds the post to a list of quotes that pops up when you go to "Insert Quotes" under the reply box.
I mean the one in the top bar so you can wrap quotes around things. It looked like a speech bubble.
Nanker Phelge
Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.
We can at least have a big party.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
The button to the right of Smiley, Image, Media, is now a drop-down that lets you add a Quote, Spoiler, Code or a Strikethrough format
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Cheers. Boffin.
leanderman
Street Party: July 2
Also surprised by the number of right-wing young people I meet.
Maybe their cynicism comes in part from university fees, the prospect of a life of high rent, zero-hours contracts etc
happyshopper
Well-Known Member
This might say more about the people you meet than it does about the political opinions of young people. Opinion polls show consistently that younger age groups are more inclined to vote Labour - see for example the results of yesterday's YouGov poll here
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
It's possible the young people you meet are right wing because they have the resources to live in Brixton.
leanderman
Street Party: July 2
I'm not saying it's a lot - I am surprised it is any.
If you are not left-ish when young, there is something wrong with you
If you're not left wing when you are older there is something wrong with you.
There is nothing left wing about Labour, they never were a socialist party. Tony Benn will tell you that.
technical
stripey
Part of the problem is that the current huge demand for housing is skewing land values so that many other uses offer small returns in comparison - seems like the Canterbury is a viable business but turning it into residential units wins hands down, particularly when current planning policy is biased towards housing.
I admire Tufty's efforts - but as the Canterbury isn't actually a listed building in planning policy terms it can't be regarded as a heritage asset unfortunately.
Another one bites the dust.
I admire Tufty's efforts - but as the Canterbury isn't actually a listed building in planning policy terms it can't be regarded as a heritage asset unfortunately.
Another one bites the dust.
leanderman
Street Party: July 2
technical
stripey
I feel for the staff at Lambeth council (and to an extent the councillors). They may feel genuinely that the Canterbury shouldn't go, but in many ways their hands are tied.
Similarly, with the plans for Cressingham Gardens (which I'm very much against) the Council is in a cleft stick - their funding from Government has gone south, they desperately need money to invest in their housing - and at the same time the value of the land presents them with a potential opportunity to be able to do it. I don't know what they should do - just hope they can find a solution that keeps the residents in their homes while protecting what is an outstanding piece of social housing architecture.
Similarly, with the plans for Cressingham Gardens (which I'm very much against) the Council is in a cleft stick - their funding from Government has gone south, they desperately need money to invest in their housing - and at the same time the value of the land presents them with a potential opportunity to be able to do it. I don't know what they should do - just hope they can find a solution that keeps the residents in their homes while protecting what is an outstanding piece of social housing architecture.
FYI A lot of the estate is in nowhere near as bad a state of repair as the council has made out. Only this fortnight, I've been informed on two separate occasions by an official that the leaseholder of this flat (which can only mean my husband or me, and that's inaccurate in itself, because we're tenants, not leaseholders) had written that the pointing has gone and is causing damp problems.
Lies - we've had no such form and said no such thing - because of where this flat is, neither of us can see the pointing all the way around the flat, still less in the bit where damp was a problem (caused by a unsealed wall joined onto a sloping roof - now sealed from the inside by us).
A lot of the repairs and maintenance issues are minor and could be sorted out far more readily than temporarily decanting (FFS where on earth to?) people off the estate or forcing us to live on the edge of a building site.
editor
hiraethified
So the nu-Labour members of the committee - Jennifer Braithwaite, Jane Edbrooke, Mark Harrison and Diana Morris - were all for smashing the pub to smithereens, with Liberal Dem Cllr Brian Palmer the lone voice voting against. Cllr Jeremy Clyne abstaining.
That said they've so little power these days, it probably doesn't matter what they vote for but they could at least have been seen to put up a fight.
That said they've so little power these days, it probably doesn't matter what they vote for but they could at least have been seen to put up a fight.
leanderman
Street Party: July 2
Globalism - as in the free movement of people and money - is eating this city up.
It's really just the free movement of capital, people are being contained, chained in economic ghettos. When they do move it's because they are pushed, shunted into a siding, unseen.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
To be fair - they have a responsibility to not waste money. They will have seen countless applications turned down at committee and overturned at appeal. A planner friend of mine told me it costs around £15K every time a basic appeal is lost. So if the advice from planning is "we'd love to keep it but we have absolutely no argument in law to protect it" it is nothing but political posturing at the tax payers expense to object. I'm not a labour fan - but the Lib Dems have nothing to lose by objecting and plenty to gain by being seen to do so.
editor
hiraethified
I think they could have got a point across without all four of them saying yes to demolition. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't recall any of them expressing any interest in saving the pub at any point.
leanderman
Street Party: July 2
Not sure that is the the case with, for example, the half million Poles who have settled here since 2001.
editor
hiraethified
Why do you think they moved here in the first place?
Rushy
basically a scrotum
I thought Tufty mentioned them all saying it was regrettable? If all four had objected it would have gone to appeal and cost a load of cash, despite having been strongly advised by experts that in planning terms it is a no hoper. Taking a stance would be fun for an expensive moment or two.
There has been pretty limited "outrage" from the public, IMO.
Tufty were many members of the public there for that particular item?
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Because some of their chains were removed?
leanderman
Street Party: July 2
Better life I guess. And good luck to them.
Similar threads
