FOLLOWING numerous comments from local residents I must clarify that the recent Community Newsletter distributed by Bloor Homes and Churston Golf Club to give their perspective on the proposed golf club development is nothing whatsoever to do with the Churston Galmpton & Broadsands Community Partnership, despite the title.

The Community Partnership seeks to represent the views of the local community in this matter.

Our recent questionnaire had more than 500 responses with 94 per cent of those being against all aspects of this development. We remain committed to a dialogue with all stakeholders but believe that it is vital that people understand where the information they are receiving has come from. It seems that some people were uncertain as to the origin of this particular publication. It did not come from the community partnership.

For balance I should point out that the RAGS organisation is not part of the Community Partnership although obviously we sympathise with their views.

KEN PRITCHARD, Chairman, Churston, Galmpton and Broadsands Community Partnership

I HAVE received and read the community newsletter presented by Bloor Homes and Churston Golf Club. Firstly, this is not a community newsletter.

I have also received and read the latest RAGS newsletter about this sell-out agreement by Churston Golf Club, Bloor Homes and Torbay Council.

At the first meeting held by the Community Partnership, relative to this sell-out the golf club claimed overwhelming support of members — by some 300-odd out of over 650-700 actual members, i.e. less than half.

The latest presentation — the so-called community newsletter — feeds us, the taxpayers of Torbay, claims that all the public consultations so far have evinced overwhelming support including a fulsome statement on behalf of Torbay Civic Society, and a claim by Bloor Homes that they "fully recognise" the importance of protection of areas of outstanding natural beauty and that the development will bring "a huge boost to the economy". What nonsense.

Yes, Bloor Homes will profit handsomely as will Churston Golf Club, not to overlook the council at large. Yes, schools may or may not benefit by way of coaching for young people — how many golfers do we need and at what cost? There are many other things on which to spend money for the benefit of young people.

The club itself has, I believe, engineered support from associated organisations, though equally clearly none from the organisations protecting the local environment who are all opposed. So too, it is emerging, that the 'support' latterly evinced by our Deputy Mayor and local councillors has changed.

It is also of interest to note Mayor Bye's current stance of 'conflict and interest', which seemingly only surfaced after the council developed a preferred option of transferring the Lease, with some 992 years still to run, to Bloor Homes. Well, well. How long before the club goes further into decline and Bloor Homes steps in with the offer of more money to be allowed to develop a bit more housing?

Finally — traffic density. Currently the Brixham/Paignton Road is regularly congested especially during the tourist season and the daily school run.

Now add the inevitable impact of vehicle movements on to and off the area of 'high-quality family homes' — Bloor's claim, not mine — at 30 dwellings per hectare, some 100-plus occupancies or another way at least, minimally 300 traffic movements per day. Do we really deserve another Kingskerswell here?

To sum up, I believe we in the Bay are faced with a deplorable plan to bail out a small organisation, benefiting but a small membership, to allow a massive development of housing in an already densely-housed area for the sake of a huge profit for Bloor Homes, Churston Golf Club and Torbay Council, especially as there has been no mention nor is there any apparent facility to improve the highway environment.

R J T MANNEY, Green Lane, Churston Ferrers