Thread: Disgusting disregard of our heritage.
View Single Post
Old 12-08-2023, 11:40   #41
OLD BOY
Rise above the players
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wokingham
Services: 2 V6 boxes with 360 software, Now, ITVX, Amazon, Netflix, Lionsgate+, Apple+, Disney+, Paramount +,
Posts: 14,596
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
Re: Disgusting disregard of our heritage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman View Post
“Common” sense - and dare I say adhering to the law - would have told the purchaser who wanted empty land to go elsewhere rather than break planning rules to remove an existing structure they didn’t want when they purchased it.

More anecdotal evidence of nothing at all.

---------- Post added at 21:10 ---------- Previous post was at 21:07 ----------



When your points are entirely fabricated to justify a property developer breaking planning rules - as decided by the Conservative Government, implemented by local authorities - it’s unsurprising that the vast majority, using their “common” sense, decide to ignore you.
Well, these are not the points I’m arguing. Yes, clearly the law has been broken and that should carry consequences.

My point is that this obsession we have to list buildings has gone too far and the law needs to change. There will be those buildings we wish to preserve, of course, but if nobody wants to buy it and preserve it, it should be bought by the government.
__________________
Forumbox.co.uk
OLD BOY is online now   Reply With Quote