The decision on whether or not Henry Talbot should be granted retroactive Planning permission for work done at Gilbert?s Bay could shortly be in the hands of Environment Minister Neletha Butterfield.

Mr. Talbot has launched an appeal to the Minister after his request for retroactive permission was denied by the Development Applications Board (DAB). The Planning Department has previously recommended that the Minister institute immediate enforcement action.

Controversy first erupted around the Somerset property owner?s activities at Gilbert?s Bay when neighbouring land owners who also have access to Gilbert?s Bay Beach complained Mr. Talbot had destroyed natural rock formations and long tail nests in his construction work on the beach. Mr. Talbot had begun the work without Planning permission, and when he applied for retroactive permission the DAB accused him of complete disregard for the environment. The land on which he was working was zoned at woodland reserve and green space, and the DAB stated that the controversial development did not protect undeveloped land and could damage the coastline and natural beauty of the setting.

On April 13, 2005 the Ministry of the Environment received Mr. Talbot?s appeal against the DAB. In it architects Entasis wrote: ?Unfortunately this application has become the subject of wide media attention based in no small part by misleading and exaggerated information submitted by neighbouring objectors?.

Arguing the DAB?s report fails to provide details for why Mr. Talbot?s application was considered unacceptable, Entasis director Michael Emery argues the report is ?little more than commentary on the planning application process ... with no professional planning assessment of the merits and failings of the proposal?.

?At first blush,? he added later, ?the Board?s decision may look impressive but on closer examination it is no more than a series of imprecise statements replete with environmental platitudes and clich?s.? Yesterday Planning director Rudolph Hollis said his Department had to respond to the appeal, and forward that response along with any third party comments to an inspector. The inspectors would then send their recommendation to the Minister ? leaving her to agree or disagree. It could be some time still before the matter is in the Minister?s hands, he said.