RE the proposed 1,700 houses in and around Tavistock and Okehampton, I wonder if any thought has been given to the infrastructure before all these houses are built? For instance, 1,700 houses probably mean about 2,500 more cars and possibly 3,500 ? 4,000 more people, but what about the basic services, schools, doctors, transport, parking etc? There has also been talk of ?revitalising? villages by providing houses, local employment and post office shops. This is fine in theory, but many of the small villages do not have suitable roads to cope with the increase of traffic generated by multiple house building and the creation of businesses. As for the village shop, this has effectively been killed by the ease in which people can drive to a local supermarket in their car. Perhaps the answer could be a new town such as that proposed for the South Hams, this could provide affordable housing, shops, jobs and all the infrastructure needed to go with it while at the same time preserving our villages and historic market towns from over-development. Paul Mercer Ivy Cottage Peter Tavy I HAVE been following your correspondence about housing in West Devon with interest and it seems to me that the provision of additional housing is being driven by factors other than genuine need. While I sympathise with the arguments about children finding affordable homes to buy in the villages where their parents live, and the need to prevent a village from dying, surely houses should be situated near to where work is? Work provides the need for housing, not someone?s desire to live in a village. A similar argument should be applied to new housing in Tavistock and Okehampton. While these places can provide some additional work, many of the inhabitants of the several hundred new homes planned will be travelling to Plymouth or Exeter for work. If so, shouldn?t that be where the new houses are built? R Crispin Glenard Midella Road Yelverton I AM mystified about what points Cllr Roger Mathew, long-time chair of borough planning, was answering last week (Letters, August 3) but the awkward questions about the borough?s draft Local Development Framework (LDF) and its feeble consultation still need answering: Cllrs Garton and Mathew foresee a need for 550 more houses in Tavistock. Why so many? And where are these going to be built? (plus 800 in Okehampton). In the other 440-or-so square miles of West Devon, where two-thirds of the population live, these two leading councillors plan for only 400 more houses to be built. Don?t our villages need more revitalising than this? Guidelines say that developers? contributions are supposed to be spent in the localities where the developments are being built, to take account of infrastructure pressures. So, why should money being raised in Tavistock, for example, be spent across the whole of West Devon, rather than in Tavistock where it will be needed? Cllrs Garton and Mathew preside over a system that is delivering only half the Government?s present modest affordable housing targets, leaving a growing backlog. How do they see themselves delivering the new targets, almost half as high again as the ones they can?t meet now? The recent borough consultation on the draft LDF was a nominal daytime affair. Now we can see why. Information management avoids serious public scrutiny and challenge. What other consultations are being ?managed? away from us taxpayers? Alex Wood 4 Kilworthy Hill Tavistock
