YET another planning application has been lodged for the development of a major leisure complex at the old Wilminstone Quarry by the same developer.
A large number of planning issues will be involved, and the development will drastically affect the lives of local residents and the local environment.
This is the second application that involves all the issues of the first, but which previously, were not considered 'exceptional circumstances' by the chairman of the planning committee at an earlier meeting.
As the spokesman 'appointed' (by the chairman) at the last planning committee meeting (so reminiscent of a feudal court presided over by the manorial lord) on the original application I feel that for such a major issue any affected party should be given the opportunity to speak. To solicit the views of local people is a noble gesture, but is a futile and meaningless one when only one person is allowed to voice an opinion.
Councillor Mathew is on record as saying that his reason for limiting numbers is to keep costs to a minimum but is this really valid when the well-being of so many people is involved.
He states that when a number of people apply to speak at a planning meeting, then they should be encouraged to appoint a spokesman. How can one person, in three minutes, cover so many points? Does this represent a fair discussion?
If costs are such a major issue with Councillor Mathew then perhaps he should look to the present committee and select new members who have a greater understanding and knowledge of the current local plan.
He should also look at those members whose function seems to be to merely attend a meeting but contribute nothing. This would save considerable committee time and the council money.
David Woods
Sunnybank
Old Exeter Road
Tavistock