"Peter" <peter@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:4Djh6+BhBAZHFwI4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Planners sometimes recommend sensibly - see:
>
>
http://waverweb.waverley.gov.uk/live/wbc/newcomdb.nsf/828998c245e6cdb0802
> 5735300310117/80256d2600382038802573ae0058a231/$FILE/Appendix%20A.pdf
>
> Broadly - smallish Surrey town maybe not the best place for nine-storey
> block of flats, etc, etc. Planning committee meeting next Tuesday.
Control
> of council has changed since scheme was started, BTW.
>
> <waves to GBG/L/V before dozing off over Lapsang soochong>
> Peter
..
Hmmm?
This is the first post I have seen for days. Have I missed some, or has it
been quiet?
Reason for asking - bugger-up.
And the link don;t work. 8((
Oh, Hold on... Ahhh. NOW I have it!
..
Snik! Snick Love! the photostatted photos. That one, view from Flambard
Way - looking NE - looks as if something really interesting/terrifying has
just happened at the end of the road.
Oh! The all do! Boooom!
..
Oh, I say, 'Goldalming is a small town of intimate character.. How nice...
I see the Highways department is moaning - they always do.. Ask The Man;
always moaning, he was; usually about seventy year old wodows who refused
to
give up the 400 year old cottage. Nasty selfish things that they are...
And
her ten cats.
..
Oh, this is good stuff. 'The tower is inelgant, and lacks confidence' - at
the top and bottom... Ooooer... Not good for a tower, I would have
thought... Oh, now that is interesting.. Same comment one could make
about
a lot of web sites. Too fussy.. a simplified pallet used in/on external
elevations.. Hmmm. Keep it simple, stupid? How true.
Wouldn;t get the Victorians to agree though.
..
Well.... skipping all the reat... You sure have a lot of interested
parties
making their comments, and that's a fact.
..
Are you involved in this?
..
GbG - fascinated.
|
