Sanglant Les Étrangers Viennent Ici ..........

[anotheoldgit]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6853433/Owner-sprawling-48m-palace-French-Riviera-told-18-months-DEMOLISH-IT.html

[naomi24]

It's a fabulous place and really I can't see the point of ordering demolition. That won't restore the protected woodland.

[Old_Geezer]

Instead of demolishing it why not compel him to move it lock, stock, & barrel to sonewhere it would be allowed, and then rejuvenate the area he's presently built on back to the plantlife he destroyed. Should be able to afford it.

[Gromit]

How will the owner cope with just one helipad ?

[hereIam]

I'm with Sour Grapes !

[ladybirder]

I should have added that no expense should be spared in doing whatever it takes to bring the protected woodland back to the best it can be, him paying of course. But as it was probably made up of ancient trees then it's a lost cause which makes what he's done, in my view, unforgivable. I don't envy or am jealous of anybody having a spectacular lavish home, good luck to them, enjoy it. Just don't destroy our precious protected woods which are there for all of us to enjoy.

[jackthehat]

Developments like this can 'set a precedent' which can make life very difficult for Planners/Local Authorities the next time someone with more money than taste and a huge sense of entitlement decides to build their own narcissistic pleasure-palace somewhere inappropriate.
M. Diter, using the theory that it is easier to ask for forgiveness than it is for permission, cannot have been unaware of the standard procedures needing to be undertaken before he embarked on building his 'chateau'.
He made the mistake of installing 134 (?) speakers in the garden of his property and annoying his neighbours who have a similar amount of money as he has and therefore will not be intimidated into backing down from their complaint.

Being forced to dismantle his 'pharaonic project, delusional, totally illegal and built illegally' serves as a warning to others to toe the line when it comes to abiding by Planning Laws....which I see as being a very good thing.

[ladybirder]

^ What she said.

[Ken4155]

As Naomi rightly says, demolition of this fabulous place will not restore the woodland. So why not let him keep his 'gaff' but donate a substantial amount to some environmental project.

[ladybirder]

Because that would send out the wrong message ken, that people with money can do what they want but the poor have to obey the law because they don't have the money to buy themselves out of trouble.