Tony Brown, of St Marychurch Road, Torquay, writes:

As a former chairman of various large chambers of commerce I examined many supermarket applications, so perhaps can throw some light on your four correspondents (Advertiser, March 23) who, sadly, believe their obvious common sense trumps planning considerations, in this case concerning Asda and Aldi.

Firstly, whether something is actually needed or not is not necessarily a planning criteria. Secondly the words ‘common sense’, ‘planning’ and ‘independent local democracy’ do not fit readily into the same sentence, as amply demonstrated by the excellent letter last week by Cllr David Howe, who illustrates that councillors have far less power than might be thought and that what Teignbridge Council wants, might not be the same as what the town or parish council wants.

Thirdly, supermarket applications are invariably highly professional and backed up by copious legal documents proving the application complies with the planning laws. In turn, councillors often seem to suspend their common sense and apparently become convinced that a new supermarket would usher in say 200 new, well paid jobs, that there would be no resultant traffic congestion, noise, smell or litter problems and it would have no effect on the vitality of the town centre. Sadly, those living in the real world are only too well aware of the possible consequences of a large new supermarket landing in their vicinity, or one wanting to expand, but those in power – either convinced of its merits or nervous of possible legal consequences if refused – generally meekly approve them, strongly ‘guided’ by the planners.

Asda does have the virtue of being a town centre, rather than being an out-of-town facility, and as such, assuming good pedestrian links and reasonably priced and plentiful parking, would be expected to benefit Newton Abbot overall.

However, its current 416 parking spaces is not large. To reduce this by 55 to 361 seems perverse, especially when its town centre role as a store AND car park was a major part of its initial successful application. To ensure there is no queuing at entrances, congestion within the site or spillage onto adjacent roads, it is reasonable to expect that at most times there would be 10 per cent under utilisation of its 416 spaces. As a rare visitor I have never observed this 10 per cent ‘buffer’ and to take away an additional 55 spaces considered to be surplus, would suggest there is currently considered to be an overall excess of up to 25 per cent i.e. that there are around 100 ‘spare’ spaces. Even the most casual user would know this is completely nonsensical.

I suspect the senior planning officer at Teignbridge who has recommended approval, obtained details of car parking use from Asda. If it averaged out a very quiet time, as well as a busy time, then this 25 per cent shortfall might be conceivable. If an average, however, was taken of all the more representative busy periods, then I suspect this surfeit would disappear to nothing. In other words, there are no surplus places at times most people want to shop and to remove 55 would cause considerable problems at those times. I suspect the shortfall in capacity will eventually translate into higher prices for parking, especially as presumably Asda believe the new garage will bring more car borne shoppers to the store, thereby putting even more pressure onto remaining spaces.

As a separate consideration, to set up a major new petrol and jet wash station in the middle of a town centre is surely unwise and un-neighbourly. Its downsides seem considerable and benefits limited, when the very close proximity of three existing facilities are taken into account.

With regards to Aldi, not only is it sad that an iconic building is being lost, but as anyone who ever uses the access road will know, gaining entry or exit to this location is often highly problematic. Aldi will only add to the serious traffic problems in that area and again, bearing in mind the number of supermarkets close by, it is difficult to understand the planning thinking behind allowing yet another supermarket in an out of town location with such highly problematic access. Having queried a similar out-of-town supermarket near Teignmouth I suspect the traffic problems will be dismissed by the planners, as it is expected a large percentage of shoppers will walk to the facility. Yes, really.

So the ‘system’ mitigates against common sense decisions made locally. Mind you, these two are merely the latest in a long line of bizarre Teignbridge planning rulings.