In article , Sacha
writes
What is astonishing is how large they are, slap in the middle of London.

Well, that's not really astonishing, is it, since it's a royal property
and therefore immune from attempts to build on it?

You think a rash of bungalows or high rise would improve it?

No - I was just reacting to your comment that it was 'astonishing' how
large they were. Usual reason for small parcel of land in cities is the
pressure for building space, but that would hardly apply here.
Personally, I'd be astonished if the monarch's residence in London
*didn't* have huge gardens around. There's the prestige side if nothing
else.

It's a Crown
property not one owned by the Monarch, BTW.

I wondered about that. That's why I used the rather vague 'royal
property'.


--
Kay
"Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"