<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Must Be The Wrong Sort Of Triangles</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.yellowswordfish.com/706/must-be-the-wrong-sort-of-triangles/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.yellowswordfish.com/706/must-be-the-wrong-sort-of-triangles/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:15:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jeni</title>
		<link>http://www.yellowswordfish.com/706/must-be-the-wrong-sort-of-triangles/comment-page-1/#comment-15002</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Feb 2008 15:56:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yellowswordfish.com/706/must-be-the-wrong-sort-of-triangles/#comment-15002</guid>
		<description>Bizarre... but at least they&#039;ve turned it down.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bizarre&#8230; but at least they&#8217;ve turned it down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy @ Yellow Swordfish</title>
		<link>http://www.yellowswordfish.com/706/must-be-the-wrong-sort-of-triangles/comment-page-1/#comment-14904</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy @ Yellow Swordfish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yellowswordfish.com/706/must-be-the-wrong-sort-of-triangles/#comment-14904</guid>
		<description>But I don&#039;t disagree with the rejection. I think they are absolutely correct to allow this wonderful piece of countryside with it&#039;s scintillating views across to the, er, bypass and, in the far distance on a clear day, somewhere with hills.. well inclines - and as to the roads and traffic I totally agree with the geometry assessment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But I don&#8217;t disagree with the rejection. I think they are absolutely correct to allow this wonderful piece of countryside with it&#8217;s scintillating views across to the, er, bypass and, in the far distance on a clear day, somewhere with hills.. well inclines &#8211; and as to the roads and traffic I totally agree with the geometry assessment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Malc</title>
		<link>http://www.yellowswordfish.com/706/must-be-the-wrong-sort-of-triangles/comment-page-1/#comment-14902</link>
		<dc:creator>Malc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:39:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yellowswordfish.com/706/must-be-the-wrong-sort-of-triangles/#comment-14902</guid>
		<description>Substandard Geometry,

I think that means - too narrow a road, or too tight a corner,which I&#039;m sure they can change.

If I was in your shoes I would delete this post - as it could form part of the appeal - ie &quot; even the guy next door disagrees with the planning application rejection&quot; !!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Substandard Geometry,</p>
<p>I think that means &#8211; too narrow a road, or too tight a corner,which I&#8217;m sure they can change.</p>
<p>If I was in your shoes I would delete this post &#8211; as it could form part of the appeal &#8211; ie &quot; even the guy next door disagrees with the planning application rejection&quot; !!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
