PLANNING: Disregard for our wellbeing

No Caption ABCDE
No Caption ABCDE

I read with interest the letters that appeared in the Sept ember 11 dition of the Spalding Guardian – particularly welcoming were those from

Jane Ansell, Brian Collins- McDougall and Colin Blundell. I share the sentiments expressed and having attended

the recent planning meeting, I also support the fact that Nina Wells was prevented from addressing the meeting.

Despite the extreme concerns contained, together with a detailed document supporting a call for a public enquiry,

the planning application was allowed to go through, the voting being six for and seven against. Those voting against a public enquiry have shown once again, that they have total disregard for the future wellbeing of Sutton Bridge community.

They responded once again on the “frightener” expressedd by the Leader, that having passed the original application,

they would have to explain why they now take a different view.

I do not see how , in the light of the documentation

submitted, that this would have caused much of a problem.

Councillor Booth stated that the people of Sutton Bridge were losing faith in the South Holland District Council planning committee – I suggest this is agross underst atement. I consider their actions to be dismissive of all the concerns expressed, and should all projected plans come to fruition, Sutton Bridge will be a small community on the edge of a major industrial site.

One other letter appeared on the subject, calling for an air quality station. While this is a laudible sentiment , I feel it a pity his concern does not go as far as to join the protest. I would further add that as the matters are ongoing any suggestion of dismissal of the efforts of the opposition is akin to carrying out a post-mortem on a live matter, not very nice.

Ben Smith

Sutton Bridge