Search results

Against - as I said though, my post neither intended to deceive nor did - misinterpreted by some who read it as a debating point in an argument rather than an informative post which it clearly was :)

Not really - I wasn't deceiving anyone - if you look at my post it was providing information for a poster who hadn't seen the building in real life nor able to find it on Google maps. My post answered both his questions as he acknowledged :) I even gave a 'thumbs up to the poster who posted...

Admittedly far more visible in real life than on a Google map image :)

Clearly visible from Axes Lane - also on Google Maps.

It is the yard containing those "ugly farm buildings" that has been 'developed' by Robert Fidler - the farmland with the cattle on is leased on a short term basis by him, the next renewal date is December 2015 and was only for a 12 month period - his claim that he needs a residence to be on site...

I'd love it financially if planning restrictions in the green belt were lifted seeing as I own more than 5 acres of it! The thing is though that the green belt has a purpose, specifically to prevent urban sprawl. If green belt land was open for development it would immediately become the...

Exactly and this is what the Supreme Court decided - development wasn't completed until the straw bales were removed and the 'four year rule' commences from that point.

The point is though that it wasn't a loophole, never was - that's why he's being forced to demolish it.