Tesco graffiti protest

Unfortunately there is little point in being disgruntled at this stage - the construction of the building is well under way and objections (including resorting to criminal damage!) should have have been made earlier in the process.

Personally, I was very surprised to hear that Tescos was coming to Alderley (this has yet to be confirmed and wouldn't we all have preferred Waitrose - so much more upmarket and why continue adding to Tescos massive market share!!). However, if this is the case it might be a positive thing. In the Parish Plan Questionnaire, people complained about the lack of small shops - fishmonger, fruit and veg, bakery, etc. Obviously a variety of good 'local' shops would be wonderful but their presence in the village is only sustainable if people use them - plain, simple economics; supply and demand.(It has to be said that Business Rates are a major factor in this and I am not sure if these could be addressed, perhaps a 'local' business rate?)

If Tescos does appear, it might be the case that local people no longer feel the need to travel to Handforth Dean and ironically, if people shop locally, more, small local shops might begin to reappear; it could happen but remember, market forces are the key and if you value your village, stop being apathetic, complaining and resorting to criminal damage. We are where we are; embrace the forthcoming idea of shopping locally and get involved in the Parish Plan - created to give you a voice and ultimately more democracy!

Just one question where is everyone going to park?

The Tesco stores in Wilmslow, Summerfields and Handforth are very handy for convenience shopping, but prices are higher than at Handforth Dean and the choice is limited. The Tesco in Alderley Edge will be an updated version of the "corner shop." Great for the locals but driving to Alderley Edge in the daytime is a nightmare. I don't think it will have much of an impact on trade at Handforth Dean. Tesco in Alderley - a welcome addition to London Road.

The issue here is not Tesco or no Tesco, it is whether our councillors and those in the Planning Authority have any regard for the rights and views of residents. In particular I would mention the poor resident of Clifton Street who is deprived of 50% of the light he has enjoyed for the past 100 years and also the now defunct Wine bar garden which was one of the most pleasant places in Cheshire now deprived of sunshine into eternity.

Any response to this atrocity mentioning past public consultations etc will sound very much like the MP's expenses scandal where the rules were apparently respected but where no one thought it appropriate to question the spirit of the rules.

It is not a waste of time to continue debate and complaints on this issue--whilst we speak there are no doubt further developments being planned where the officials consider that they know better than the public whom they are elected to serve.

This site stood derelict with shops that had roofs falling in for years before this re-development.

Tesco or anything else - it will have a significant positive impact on the village high street compared to what lay there before.

Having a Tesco Express in our village is a catastrophe. Alderley Edge is one of the few places left not only in this area, but in this country, whereby the highstreet hasn't been fouled by the same, monopolistic generic national chains. The established local shops in the village will undoubtedly suffer and quite probably, particularly in these very difficult economic times, end up in diar financial states as Tesco undercut prices. Quite ironically for what they're calling a 'corner shop', this is a disaster for the corner shop: the shops that have been there for years, the shops that are owned and run by locals and the shops that are a vital part of our community life.

I urge all local people to boycott the new Tesco Express, in a bid to save us from the hideous national chains that will gladly rob this village of every ounce of independence it has.

Oh Benjamin Butterworth, what a killjoy you are!
For your information we are now in the 21st Century.
We expect spacious, clean shops, open all hours with everything we need and I'm afraid it's the big boys like Tesco who can deliver.
"Boycott Tesco Express" he urges.
Surely he must be joking...When he's run out of milk and coffee late on a Saturday night or forgotten the ice cubes before the barbecue begins in half an hour, he'll be scurrying around the Tesco aisles fulfilling his needs - just like the rest of us!

Just revisited my comments of a month ago and the subsequent commentary.All good stuff and pleased that we are debating and NOT complaining as much! My comments about the arrival of Tesco and the potential benefit for the village in the form of smaller, local shops still stand. I genuinely believe that more businesses will be encouraged as a result and people will want to shop locally. Equally, most people like value and the competition between Somerfields and Tesco will be a good thing

On the other points: Parking can be difficult and already I have had comments from workers in the village complaining that should we manage to get a cafe opened in the park, workers would be deprived of their parking spaces -on the park car park.. Thus far, they have parked for free and this is central to the problem; people don’t want to pay. (I have to say that when I worked in central Manchester some twenty years ago, I was very prepared to pay for the luxury of travelling to work in my ‘home on wheels’) Equally, people don’t want to walk too far. There really is sufficient parking in the village it just needs juggling and decriminalisation should be seen as a positive thing; it provides movement.

I am admiring of the gentleman who has lived in Clifton Street for a 100 years(?) but I don’t think we have a right to light in our homes 'for eternity'. Also; the wine bar was great, I much preferred dining there and without knowing the real reason for its closure I shouldn’t really make any comment other than to say if people don’t patronise local business, they will close.

Additionally, if Planners and Councillors are breaching rules we do have the ability to challenge them. If you are unhappy about Tesco increasing their market share, now is the time to do something positive about it; concentrate your efforts on the Dobbie (95% Tesco owned) Garden Centre proposal - help to get it stopped by signing the petition. Planners will be challenged when 2/3rds of local people object to this monstrosity.

Parish Plans have been implemented to give people more say in what is happening locally and shortly Cheshire East Unitary Authority should be handing more powers down to the Parish. I suggest again that we embrace this and not only shop locally but work together locally!

Very nicely put lol, but yes when I run out of ice cubes I can pop to Handforth Dean, or if it's a reasonable hour - the sort of hours Tesco Express will be open - I'll pop into Somerfields.

Although on that point, and I'm no domestic god, but aren't ice cubes just frozen water? Surely I needn't leave home for that at all.

I apologise for suggesting that the existing resident of Clifton Street next door to the new carbuncle has enjoyed natural light for 100years -- it is the residence and not the resident.

Notwithstanding the above, I am amazed that Susan Holland thinks that we do not have a right to natural light in our homes -- quite apart from the human rights aspect, does she have no concerns for our carbon footprint? Are there really people in Alderley Edge who would not question the justice of having a 30 ft wall erected within a few feet of the windows of their house?

If so, I suggest they immediately decamp to Spain where there is every chance of a road being driven through their property, followed by a bill from the local authority for its construction.

Sorry Duncan - Susan Holland is correct about the right to light - one of the leading cases on the matter is Colls v Home and Colonial Stores, Limited House of Lords 2 May [1904] A.C. 179

Essentially it says that the reduction in the natural light created by a new adjacent building would have to render the house un-usable for all normal purposes to become an actionable nuisance. Their Lordships had in mind the development in the cities int he early 20th Century when they decided this case and concluded that a right to light would unacceptably limit development. This remains good law in England and Wales.

What a pity I didn't have time to respond to Duncan myself...

Unfortunately I do not understand his comments: carbon footprints and trips to Spain. The points made are unclear.

Just for clarity on my part: please refer to my initial comment; we are where we are, the planning battle on this site was clearly lost. Market forces will ultimately prevail and given this, lets all work together and prevent further Tesco development locally - Dobbies should be stopped! Sign the Petition, write to the Planners - the application will be made this month.

I know that in law one does not have the automatic right to light and that there are complicated rules which apply, but surely when the law can impact on innocent residents and may cause great distress then it is not only an ass, it is completely inhumane and uncivilised. The question is not Tesco or no Tesco, but the question of how planning laws are interpreted, especially where big money is concerned.
Yes the site was previously derelict with roofs falling in etc. And it is obvious why this was allowed to happen, in order that the landlord would be allowed to build just such a development as now blights our environment. I believe the same landlord was trying to pull off a similar coup in Manchester and the site was compulsorily purchased by Manchester City Council.

I am surprised that Marc Asquith as a councillor and barrister should support Susan Holland's assertion that residents do not have a right to light.

The Right to Light is acquired under The Prescription Act of 1832. Under this Act,a Right to Light automatically occurs once light has been enjoyed through defined apertures of a building for an uninterrupted period of 20 years. I would also refer Mr Asquith to the Rights of Light Act 1959 (c 56).

Any readers who are interested in the truth should simply Google UK "Residents Right to Light" and draw their own conclusions.

Since I live some 600 yards from the building in question, I have no selfish axe to grind in this matter;I am however deeply concerned that those whom we have put in a position of authority should so easily summarily dismiss and disregard the rights of their constituents.

If this is going to be Tesco or not I will give the Co-op my trade when Somerfields is re branded at the end of this year. The Co-op are far more concerned with doing some good with their retail operations than Tesco.

I really believe that it is important to be accurate in what one writes on a forum like this.

Duncan might like to bear in mind the following:-

"I am however deeply concerned that those whom we have put in a position of authority should so easily summarily dismiss and disregard the rights of their constituents."

1. As from 31 March I ( very sadly ) ceased to represent the constituents of AE. I only remain involved as a resident of the village myself and continue to support the residents of Clifton St, over this issue. I attend the local meetings and lobby the councillors in that capacity.

2. As a professional in this field I am aware that any rights the residents have are private law rights enforceable by them in court. They are not matters for the Council to consider, it would be wholly inappropriate for the Council to do so and would leave the Council open to legal challenge were it to do so.

3. The Right of Light Act works both ways - both allowing a developer to overcome any rights as well as allowing a "victim" to do something about an adjacent building. However the right is only that of "adequate light for the ordinary notions of mankind" A test which is considered most restrictively.

4. Rights can only be acquired either through registration via the Act or by Deed of Grant and I think that it is the legal fiction of a "lost modern grant" that the Prescription Act deals with - I am not a land lawyer and it is years since I dealt with this stuff - but if anyone can explain the doctrine of lost modern grant and its surrounding law then great :-}}

5. The final test which anyone might like to apply as to whether the right to light has any relevance here is this. If Duncan is correct then no doubt the building will be torn down in short order - if not then Tesco or whoever, will trade from it for years to come.

Now - shall we move away from tilting at windmills and get back to fixing the problems that this badly designed and wholly inappropriate development will cause.

Regards

Marc

I refer to Marc Asquith's reply and appreciate his comments. If I understand him rightly,he accepts that any resident might have a right to light, but that this can only be tested in court.

In other words an individual possibly has to risk thousands in legal fees against a mega corporation whereas the council planning authorities (whom many residents perceive to have quite draconian powers) in this case are either disinclined or incapable of taking such potential residents' rights into account at the planning application stage.

Re Para 1. Yes, and the actual "right" is very limited.
Re Para 2. More correctly, it would be unlawful for the Council to consider this when considering a planning application. Them's the rules.

I'm sure people would not be complaining if it were a Waitrose and not a Tesco. Let's be honest here, all the complaints and indignation have absolutely nothing to do with "light", or spoiling the Village (since when was a high street full of shops and bars classed as a village anyway?), but everything to do with good old fashioned snobbery. Would there have been any complaints if Selfridges had opened a food hall? I think not.