The meeting of Marlborough Town Council on Monday evening to consider its objections to the proposed development at St John's, Stedman left me even more convinced the project has been poorly conceived and needs much more objective consideration.

I attended the meeting to add support to those most adversely affected by the proposals. What we heard was an appalling indictment of the process so far.

The school head and his professional advisors boasted of consultation over four to five years with the town and district councils and parents. With 800 signatures of support, or about 400 households, possibly only 16 per cent of the total in the catchment, views of the remaining 84 per cent are at best not being

canvassed or potentially ignored.

The proposed access on Granham Hill is apparently a foregone conclusion. Yet no one is admitting to the

potential congestion as school traffic is focused on this point or the danger from coaches turning right out of the school down Granham Hill, without the benefit of a roundabout.

The cost of the development and the income needed was described as a commercially sensitive issue, not for discussion. This is a sure sign this is a major headache. How many houses need to be crowded onto the Savernake site to fund this leviathan?

Costs tabled were admitted at in excess of £20 million and with an expected life of between 40 and 60 years, the depreciation is between £500,000 and £333,000 a year. Add to this the contingency against overspend, which no doubt lies within the designation of land at Stedman for future development. So the school crowds

itself on to one site, loses a major land asset forever and holds back further land asset for future sale. What we end up with is an expensive architectural marvel of a smaller school, with fewer playing fields for more students and other community members and town gridlock. It sounds crackers.

It was also appalling to witness the mayor, Coun Francis, with the aid of a note from the absent planning

committee chairman, manoeuvre the Town Council into accepting a watered down set of objections on the proposals to be sent to Kennet. No wonder Kennet takes a dim view of town council opinions. This is inevitable when there is an absence of technical support.

D Norman

Marlborough