Ive been a resident in cardigan town for many years and believe it would be a disgrace for us to destroy cardigan towns centre with the plans for developing the bath house. they have already spoilt itwith shops for riff raff like aldis. iam an up and coming producer on wild west records, and am looking to spend my inheritance in cardiga. hardcore till i die. cannon crew

Whilst I agree that each development should be addressed individually on its own merits, any objections should be raised at the correct time and place, ie. the planning meeting held to discuss such matters.
If the relevant permissions are given, retrospective objections from poor losers should not be considered, unless it is throught the correct appeal procedures, otherwise the system leaves itself open potentially to objections being raised years after permission has been given purely to satisfy some personal vendeta by someone with a grudge.

Also with narrow minded snobs such as "lil owz" (too embarrassed to use own name perhaps?) adding their comments to the debate, it is not doing the reputation of the objecting parties any good at all.

Why should there be a specific time and place for objections to something that could have a detrimental effect on Cardigan for years to come? Maybe if someone was systematically minded I could see why he may wrongly assume that everything has to be by the book, but this isn't just some development that could be an eyesore etc. this is a development that may dislocate the shopping centre and severly worsen an already pathetically inadequate traffic system, and what is a town if it isn't about trade and transport. I for one was only aware of the planning meeting ex-date, so does that mean that I have inherently lost all rights to oppose, or even to have an opinion? Also retrospective is the wrong word, this majority opinion isn't retrospective, it's an opinion that has existed from initial understanding of what was involved. Also, would you really want a system closed to any objections after a certain date? Seems a bit anti-democratic to me.. One objection can and would never halt this, therefore I think that your system is potentially quite safe.
By the way, I think the first comment may have been taking the p*ss ;)