fazer71

Blimey !!!! I'm AMAZED >>>>>>> Peckham Rye road works with the (temporary) lights and NO yes NO traffic problems. It actually runs better than with the permanent lights. James Any chance they can be left there forever? Because as sure as sure can be ...... the new permanent lights WILL totally cock up everything AGAIN...

Jemmarc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi..I just wondered whether you went ahead with > double-glazing as we are in the same boat? It is > hard to get an idea of how much difference > double-glazing and restoring exising sash windows > makes compared with replacing them completely - we > are on a busy main road. I have heard that that > are some very authentic UPVC sash windows now > which I am told would be better. Any advise would > be welcomed. Thanks. If you decide to go UPVC I can recommend this brand http://quickslide.co.uk/ Cleaning from inside as they tilt in they look almost as good as original timber and they are a bargain price. Get the Victorian detail and find a local installer. You can price them up online so get a comparison supply only.

bemusED Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This morning though, three modest height mature > trees had been cut down to waist level.? I love trees as much as the next tree hugger BUT. In some streets there are too many big trees which have been neglected and these big trees are undermining foundations the council should have a plan to remove the big trees and replace them with new but I guess they don't want to spend the money. I've got two trees outside both are way too big and should be cut down and replaced. There are signs of cracking in my front wall and who takes the blame NOT Southwark? Maybe they're realising that they need to do something but it?s a little late for a lot of us. James can you please ask who ever is responsible to stop planting trees like the Sycamore from being planted they self seed and have a lot of rapid leaf and seed drop in a short time causing blocked drains they really should not be planted outside peoples houses. Who would I contact to ask to have these trees replaced?

Nothing wrong with the French it?s M&S who have problems they opened a store in Paris it's full of ?clothing? (The French REALLY need M&S clothes) no M&S food except for a couple of gift biscuit tins so if you want baked beans or bacon or some M&S sandwich or a loaf of sliced english bread forget it! M&S Clue&Less .

+ME AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 4.30 am !!!!!!!

It does look dodgy must cost us an absolute fortune. James do you know what happens to the proceeds of the sale of houses like 31 Shawbury Rd and why is it not viewed as suitable for refurbishment and continue on as council housing? It appears that more and more period houses are being sold and the council tenants are re housed on estates, is that the intention of the current Southwark management? More and more yuppies like me living in areas like East Dulwich without London experience of living side by side with council tenants and the social benefits of social integration. Is there any evidence that some councils have a plan to keep housing of a type which will continue to vote in their direction ie by making their lot pretty grim? Cynical I know ?? but it does sometimes look that way.

veryseriousgirl Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > James, it is 31 Shawbury Road, but the council > have already confirmed to me that they will be > selling the house as it requires extensive > renovations to be fit for occupation. I > understand that paperwork has been submitted and > is awaiting approval and that the house will be > auctioned at some point in the future. Do we see Southwark up to their usual expensive procedures costing the tax payer money? Why sell the house when they could refurbish it for ?30-?50k we're not talking high end granite and hardwood flooring are we then use it again for another 40 years? Once sold what happens to the money? Does it just get spent on staff and nonsense? Or does it go to some shocking poor quality housing substitute? I can't for the life of me see any benefit to the council selling that property. This looks very wrong on several levels.

If you want decent service and excellent chocolates Charbonnel et Walker old bond st For old fashioned sweets go to http://www.handycandy.co.uk/

edhistory Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just a brief thought... > > I've been wondering if those who have destroyed > their front gardens by putting in hard standing > for car parking will damage their properties in > the same way as a rogue tree. > 1bln% NO.

Toulouse Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi > > Subsidence is rife in this area- london clay soil, > hills etc. i know as we bought a ground floor flat > in the area that had been underpinned. You are > better off buying one that has been underpinned > than one that hasn't as it costs a fortune: ours > was done by the council in the 1990s for ?84k and > that was just the front of the property. > > > good luck ?84,000 !!!! Sounds like a council job! We tax payers fot the bill and end up paying a mental price..... I doubt the front of your place was 84 cubic metres. But anything is possible if the council are paying for it. My folks were quoted ?1,000 per cubic metre early 2008. A regular victorian house front is 5-6 metres so underpinning 1 metre down (which is usually all that's required) is ?6,000 even if it was 2 metres it would be a max of ?12,000. Often it's only the bay which is a problem and that's 3 metres or ?3,000.

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "Sweet spot of South London" > > Its a regular section about parts of London. > Hope and Greenwood and concrete house pictures. Took my Godson to Hope and Greenwood = quite depressing service and expensive not very good sweets avoid imho. Concrete house OMG yea fab NOT?? If that?s the best they can offer we?re fucked?

only a metter of time before this ! (I pick mine at carphone warehouse) ;)

Exatly it's an insurance scam nothing to do with it being worst that other houses it'll be better but the insurance companies use it to milk the premiums. It's Insurance company daylight robbery.

Remember this cunt http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1040980/How-suburbs-coming-siege-red-van-invasion.html parking red vans sign written with for hire they did a job for a neighbour and the damage they caused to the stained glass in her front door cost ?300 to repair which they wouldn't pay her boyfriend was army he told me over a beer thait he got his own back by sticking Stanley knife blades into the red van tyres when ever he saw one parked up. Nice. Good thing I didn't get on the wrong side of him!

I do feel for the OP. Visual pollution is depressing especially if its parked right on your front door it reduces quality of life. A pity nothing can be done.

fazer71 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > dullified Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > We have just completed a side return extension > > (Landells Road) which my boyfriend (a freelance > > architect) designed and built himself. Like > > snowboarder we didn't need planing permission > as > > it fell under permitted development (and yes > the > > rules have recently changed). > > Is it still possible to build a side extension > under permitted development ? > I spoke to an architect who said only rear > extension is possible under permitted development > a side extension needs planning permission ... In answer to my own question. I contacted the government planning portal and they sent me a pdf The answer it gives is NO What a stupid set of rules you can build a 3 metre box on the back of an ED Victorian house but you can?t build in the side alley any deeper than 3 metres. I contacted Southwark planning and their advice was they are no longer keen to give permission for side extensions because of light issues to the neighbour?s property. We really do live in a stupid planning system where ED Victorian houses with a wasted space side alley are concerned! So it looks like side extensions are now a nonsense of the planning lottery! Here is a link to the current pdf for anyone interested in looking at complete stupidity. http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/100806_PDforhouseholders_TechnicalGuidance.pdf

There's a housing association board up there now? I guess this a loss leader for them. So will the tax payer foot the final bill one way or another?

Example http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-35124844.html 3 bedroom terraced house for sale ?499,999 Nutfield Road East Dulwich needs modernising. 845 sq ft = ?589 per sq ft. at ?100 per sq ft will cost aprox ?84,500 but the smaller the house the more per sq ft to renovate. So will it be worth ?583,500 after spending the money? I think there was one fully updated sold at ?560,000? By the time you add the stamp duty and all the agro?? I'd rather buy the one at ?560,000. It's all subjective and once my GF gets involved then I'm probably going to be driven by her more than the price.

alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > this is more like 1350 so maybe a bit more? yes do the numbers it's very simple basic maths Estate agents really struggle with! 1,350 sq ft X ?425 = ?573,750 1,350 sq ft X ?525 = ?708,750 The difference of ?100 = ?135,000 which is probably how much it would cost to renovate the ?573,750 to get to the same standard as the ?708,750 house. Many don't look at it that way and they end up paying more for the ?573,750 house so ending spending more than the ?708,750 but that may be down to short term affordability. I think it's cheaper to buy a house which has been renovated at least where the electric heating plastering is concerned and just do the cheap decorating and new kitchen.

I think 120 sqft is a double bedroom. Dunstans dunstans /friern/ upland zone ?425 - ?525 sq ft looking at past prices. So an 1,100 sq ft house is ?467,500 to ?577,500 depending on condition as a guide.

edhistory Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Perhaps they know better than to use this > simplistic metric in East Dulwich? > > John K Simplistic price per sqm / sqft ? As compared to 3 bed or 4 bed vague pricing ? Sqm Sqft pricing system used in major cities all over the world including London. It's a pricing system which allows for direct comparison and saves wasted time produces realistic pricing. The number of shabby houses I've seen which are priced at the same level as extended renovated houses has been very frustrating. It wouldn't be difficult to add the price per sqft figures on the particulars they manage it in Chelsea Paris even in Malaga. In my experience the agents in ED are simple minded and very lazy.

That may be a waste of money you'll end up with an expensive report which will give no guaranteed information only state the obvious. Subsidence requires monitoring so there is no way an engineer can tell you if it's ongoing unless it's monitored over several years. What a lot of people miss is after trees, drainage is the second biggest reason for subsidence old clay pipes spring leaks and the ground goes through a wet and dry cycle depending on rain duration etc so undermining the foundations very common on victorian houses once the leaks are fixed the movement stops. It wouldn?t be uncommon to find a house has been underpinned and the cause is not fixed it takes many years for the problems to appear in the walls. This is what happened at my parents house.

The media centre village Total Media Centre and Media Centre Village estimate ?492 million actual ?1.23 billion I'm finished with this it's pointless.

Ahggg posting on this forum with an iPad is soooo annoying!

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've just had a look at the figures, and guess > what - fazer is wrong again. > > The Shard cost around ?450m for 1,200,000 square > feet. That's around ?375 per square foot. > > The Olympic Media Centre cost ?350m for 900,000 > square feet. That's around ?388 per square foot. > > There's nothing in it, the slight additional cost > is easily justified by the huge technical demands > of outfitting communications technology for 20,000 > journalists. > > The hourly rate of a lawyer is irrelevant. The > claim that fazer made is that the Olympics > infrastructure was subject to to price gouging and > over charging (and now the accusation of fraud)on > behalf of contractors. > > In fact we are discovering that the prices, > whether compared with the Shard or the Emirate > stadium, are nothing of the sort. > > What's that smell? Excellent now we're getting somewhere. I'm more than happy to be proven to be wrong thank you for that information good work, a nice comparison. The smell could be a personal thing you do appear to be getting rather angry and over reacting maybe causing you to perspire more than usual? Some deodorant or regular showering would sort it out. If not maybe it a side affect of your rudeness filthy caustic breath or worst... Flatulence ? Do calm down . The only issue I've got with those numbers is sqft for sqft the shard given it's cutting edge build could easily cost twice as much to build per sqft when compared to the olympic media centre. I wonder what will happen to the media centre once the Olympics / Paralympics are over? Little point in continuing this it's impossible to prove over or under spend but the numbers speak for themselves when compared to other projects what have we got for our money? In my book It isn't the equivalent to 17 shard towers. In your book it's the equivalent or more. What We can all see with total clarity is you are rude insulting and happy to use those traits before engaging your brain which is a pity, once your brain is engaged you achieve rather more impressive results. Although it appears to cause a smell. Cheers