A RALLYING call to oppose plans for a six-acre service station in Liverton has been answered by more than 150 villagers who have pledged to oppose the scheme.

They packed into Blackpool School hall at a parish meeting on Tuesday to air views about the 24-hour service station proposal by developer Abbey Manor Ltd.

Included in the plans are a restaurant, shop, petrol station, picnic area and parking for cars and HGVs on the trunk road off Drumbridges roundabout.

The main concerns involve traffic generation and the environment with additional sewage, noise and light pollution.

Ilsington resident Michael Page said: 'If anything is going to damage the environment, it is this scheme.

'We should make a community effort to say how much damage this will do to the environment of you and your neighbours.'

The meeting, organised by the Liverton Community Action Group, was chaired by Ilsington parish council chairman Cllr Philip Gibson.

Cllr Gibson said: 'The site will not be able to contain the amount of traffic wanting to access it.

'The slip road is not long enough to take traffic and they will need very much larger parking spaces. The whole plan is flawed.'

County and district councillor Stuart Barker said that the structure plan identified a need for a service station between Marley Head and Chudleigh.

Cllr Barker said he would press for accurate statistics on traffic and speed counts.

'I shall be opposing this application on traffic grounds, which is clearly the main issue of this scheme,' he said.

Resident Peter Wilson argued that further development at Heathfield had not been taken into consideration, while John White questioned the acceptability of an s-bend and argued that Plymouth-bound traffic was likely to go past Blackpool school and through Bickington.

The development's impact on the post office and shop would be detrimental, argued action group organiser Dr Don Moody.

'For those of us who are pensioners, not having a local post office would be a serious loss indeed,' he said.

The action group has distributed leaflets to 1,500 homes outlining grounds for objections, and handed out car stickers.

A similar scheme was withdrawn in 2002 in the face of huge opposition.

At the time, a 1,500- signature petition was collected by the group, which argued that the scheme was flawed, unnecessary and would have a detrimental effect on sensitive wildlife areas.