THE assertion made by Cllr Mathew in his reply (Letters, January 19) to our complaint over his handling of the planning application concerning Pentillie Road (?there was a broad consensus of public opinion?) fails to state where that alleged consensus was found. It can only have been among some councillors and officers of the planning department, and by unsubstantiated claims of support from the parish council. It is abundantly clear from meetings and polls taken over several years that the majority of residents do not want further large scale development in the village. The existing flow of infill and rebuild development is as much as is needed, or indeed possible to absorb within present infrastructure and environmental constraints. If the view expressed by Mr Mathew and the officers that because the land has been allocated in the county plan they therefore have no option but to approve the application is correct, then why bother to hold this charade of a meeting at all? Another waste of taxpayers? money. Cllr Mathew accuses us of being ?Nimbys? (Not in My Back Yardists?). This is absolutely contrary to the policy of the Bere Alston Action Group, whose campaign is based on the poor access and environmental infrastructure from which the whole peninsula suffers. In particular, the specific access to the Pentillie site via The Down is already hazardous to pedestrians, horseriders and drivers. It has no paths, no kerb, is tortuous and of varying width. To accuse those who are concerned to achieve at least a degree of public safety prior to the proposed development as being Nimbyists is frankly ridiculous, and is an example of the way in which planners and politicians label those who dare oppose them when logic and right is on the side of the objectors. Geoffrey M Stowell Mike Benson Bere Alston Action Group
