Woodland hippies Commune

DustyDog · Post by **DustyDog** » Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:05 pm

As Deeps has said, i can see both sides of the story, yes maybe there is not enough woodland to feed and supply them with all their needs and this means that they are not protecting the forest and life there as much as they would like, but i bet they are damaging the land far less than the rest of us are, with the amount of waste to landfill we produce, all the pollution we produce (including the waste needed to produce the electricity to run this site and my lappy), all the extra homes weed need, i could go on, but you get my gist, it seems very harsh, i'm sure there could be a compromise, and like deeps, as long as i still had my broadband etc, i too would be there living a dream.

defender130 · Post by **defender130** » Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:39 pm

Surely after all this time they have enough proof of use and with having temporary planning before now it should be simple enough to get a certificate of lawful use from the council, which then would surely over ride any planning refusal from the park

As I understand it if it has been in use for something for (I think) 12 years then a cert of lawful use can be applied for and must be granted if the evidence required is supplied

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

preparedsurrey · Post by **preparedsurrey** » Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:59 pm

No because they applied for planning and were granted temporary planning, any use after that date does not count. They would have had to live there for several years (with proof) during which time the council must have recieved no tip offs or complaints for them to begin enforcement action. Any occupation after the enforcement action begins does not count.
All I can think that they do is scream human rights and threaten to take the council to court at which point if they have even a slim chance of winning and being awarded costs compensation etc the council will bottle it and grant retrospective planning.
If they happens I'm not sure where they would stand as obviously the buildings haven't gone through building control and are probably unlikely to comply with any standards.

defender130 · Post by **defender130** » Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:18 pm

Perhaps what they need to do then is get a felling license, fell a clearing, level it, dig big hole for bunker underground, cover back over and replant on top

No planning needed as its underground and out of sight, depending upon which person at the council you listen to of course

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

angeuk · Post by **angeuk** » Thu Mar 10, 2016 12:18 pm

The comments are brilliant

"Burn it". Quite reasonable for the 'Mail'.

Obviously they have to comply with local council regulations. Just irks me a bit that by greasing the right palms, quite a few folk can muck up the landscape without worry.

preparedsurrey · Post by **preparedsurrey** » Thu Mar 10, 2016 6:45 pm

But when you've shook the right hands in the right way It becomes private enterprise....either that or you promise to create 1 or 2 affordable houses (which you sell to your friends) or let them to the housing association that you also run.
Oh and don't forget to employ only non uk residents as they'll work for less money and you don't need to worry about H&S and make sure that you blacklist anybody who dares complain...

Post by **pseudonym** » Thu Mar 10, 2016 7:32 pm

Please refrain from politics.

preparedsurrey · Post by **preparedsurrey** » Thu Mar 10, 2016 7:37 pm

Sorry, will go and pick the toys up I threw out of the pram.

Have edited to remove what I considered the political bit, PM me if you would rather it was all removed?

uk-preppers.co.uk