opment control meeting on August 16 when the current proposals by Tingdene Ltd to convert outline planning permission to full planning permission to develop Upton marina were discussed and came away thinking it is a tragedy for Ripple and Upton people that the original planning meeting to discuss the outline application was held on April 3 just before district council elections.

To judge from the scrutiny of detail afforded last week from this new crop of councillors to these highly questionable current proposals compared with the crass misjudgement which accompanied the decision-making on April 3, this major application would at least have had the opportunity to be more carefully considered in detail and the current crop been prepared to exercise their own independent judgement.

As it is Ripple and Upton people will struggle with the legacy of excessive scale left by councillor's misjudgement to approve the application in its entirety as it stood against officer recommendation.

Tingdene's surprising decision to attempt to alter some important terms of the outline permission in significant and potentially damaging ways rather than comply with the terms agreed has done it no service. Everyone concerned will now scrutinise the details much more closely.

The attempt to double the size of the footprint of the so-called chalets from 2,000 sq ft to 4,200 sq ft was justification alone for refusal, let alone deferral, of the decision and council members wished the developers to be in no doubt that if deferral had not been proposed, refusal would have been. It was also a common theme that this is the opportunity for damage-limitation.

WENDY HANDS, Church Walk, Upton-upon-Severn