Joanna Scott said it was too late if he had already removed the heritage parts and demolished them.
Sue Wright said: "He hasn't demolished the heritage parts - he has replaced the bastardised front the previous owner was allowed to build - it is now back to its original condition."
Eggert Holl said: "I agree. The main structure is still there. The entranceway that was demolished would not have been original."
P Bennett said "the so-called heritage part was a steel portico added to the front of the building in the 1970s. How can that be 'heritage'?
"Doesn't the council want development and new jobs in the area? The building was only a huge concrete-type barn building after all .
"The front facade is still the same as the day it was built, why waste ratepayers' money now if they agree with the renovations?"
Surely Not said it was beside the point.
"There is a process and anyone in construction knows what the process is.
"He should have followed the process just like everyone else does."
Fields said: "It's like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.
"But the council needs to enforce its own rules, otherwise it would be open slather."
Kathy Kerrison said: "It's just a building for goodness sake. Should be more worried about our environment. Should b worried about our water supply."