Complaint was in relation to 'visual noise'

The Daily Mail UK (Australia) reported yesterday that the complainant was upset about the 'visual noise' the bookstore presented. This is despite the fact the complainant bought his home 12 years ago when the site was occupied by a much busier video store. Perhaps he just has something against books, or just laments the demise of VHS? Anyway, the heart of the issue is the double standard demonstrated by Council. It appears Council was content to turn a blind eye for decades while a commercial business was conducted from the location 'illegally'. But after a single complaint, they're 'obliged' to investigate? And why did the tenant or owner have to prove prior use as a 'shop'? It was COMMERCIAL the entire time, regardless of whether the costume design business conducted frequent enough retail sales to qualify as a 'shop'. I wonder if our local 'business people' who deal prostitution and drugs from the same end of Robe St relatively unhindered will be asked to prove their retail status soon. Chris Ogden clearly isn't worried about that particular 'visual noise'.