NICK?MAWBY, of Bishopsteignton Road, Teignmouth, writes:

I would like the opportunity to voice my comments in response to an article printed in your paper on September 10 regarding my application for outline planning. The article referred to it as a 'sliver of land'.

Seldom has there been such effort in forming objections to a private planning application for building one dwelling.

An application for a multi roomed hotel with 24 separate apartments to be built opposite my application is passed with cries of 'what a bonus it will be to the community'.  A supermarket with access planned on a blind bend not more than 100 metres from my application has not received any objections or negative comments either from the public or the press, despite the fact that both of these developments will create intensive daily traffic flow of hundreds of cars in and out of Broadmeadow industrial estate.

It is clear that contribution by multi national companies contributing to the public purse has more influence than a private individual.

I would also like to pose the question as to why neighbours would object to my proposal stating that the building is to be built on a 'sliver of land' when, in fact, the footprint of the build on our land is comparable to their plots of land. Indeed one plot in particular, Cornerstones, which belongs to Mr Maurice Channing, who I believe is the chief objector, has recently built an extension on his plot which has a footprint area of dwelling to site ratio of 32 per cent. Our footprint area is a mere 22 per cent, which is in keeping with all of the properties in this locality. This would indicate that the reason for the unacceptable objection is in reality 'loss of view'.

All reasonable objections raised can be resolved, such as an impact on railways, highways etc. This proposed dwelling would be built on a site with an existing access by a gate which is currently in use daily and has been for the last 22 years as previously approved without reservation by highways.

I would also like to understand why a temporary tree preservation order has suddenly been enforced, especially as other applications have been submitted in previous years adjacent to the tree and this has never been an issue.

I would also ask why Cllr Cox is so active and vociferous against this application when the members of the local ward appear more unbiased and supportive of this application being processed fairly.

Finally, an application for a dwelling 60 metres to the west of ours on the same side of the road on a smaller plot with a larger footprint was awarded on appeal, therefore incurring significant cost to the public purse.

I would therefore just ask that all involved in the decision making process treat this application with an unbiased and fair approach as is the foundation of the democratic policies and processes that this country was built on.THIS AND OTHER LETTERS IN OUR DIGITAL EDITION