Undisputedtruth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Michael Palaeologus Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > Its my inability just to accept your views that > is > > the problem here. Again. > > Iceland or M&S, it makes no difference. They > are > > what they are, retail outlets in a retail unit, > > little will change apart from the branding on > the > > lorries. All else is detail which is largely > > irrelevant to the holistic picture. > > I was merely making an observation on the flaws of > your thinking. Incredible how you ignore the core > planning issues and then pitching your planning > argument as though it was a straightforward > process. Well thank you for that great favour. The planning "issues" are for the council to sort out. These are not going to stop the development if M&S and the Coumcil want it to happen. M&S just negotiate, re-submit offer a bit of planning-gain. > > > All else is detail which is largely > > irrelevant to the holistic picture. > > Wrong, people who live near to the development > have a legal right to privacy and quiet enjoyment > of their property. Yes. In the context of where their properties are. People bought houses close to a main road with retail outlets. They have always had traffic, deliveries and some noise to deal with, they alway will have. I bought a flat opposite a wine bar and a fish and chip shop. Guess what, there is some late night noise and an occasional fishy waft, thems just the breaks. We are in a big, over-crowded city - their quiet enjoyment is in the context of the emergency services driving up and down the Lane, sirens howling, police helicopters flying overhead at all hours, revellers on Lordship Lane and busy traffic. The displacement of cars from the Iceland car park is not going to make a big difference. M&S lorries rather than Iceland lorries are not going to make a big difference.