i think due process is that all interested parties have a right to speak.
Depends on the council standing orders, and the committee chairman. It is likely that a number of oral representations will be allowed, but time is limited and these will need to be arranged before the meeting.
I've been mainly posting on ARRSE. I am slightly hopeful at the draft recommendation as it leaves wriggle room for council members to approve despite a recommendation to refuse (I've been party to writing reports and objections for planning committees) although planning committees have an occasional habit of ignoring the officer's recommendations anyway! Objectors (third parties) are not allowed to appeal against a planning decision but they could apply for judicial review. The pressure should be kept up anyway!
A couple of snippets from the ARRSE thread:
1. Many of the objectors do not live on the Headley Court to Grays Lane route that would be used by a minibus or private car. ARRSErs have carried out traffic counts and a recce of Grays Lane and it is hardly a car-free single-track road.
2. The neighbourhood is not protected by any local plan policies. Claims that it is somehow uniquely worthy of restrictions on development are wide of the mark, at least in planning terms.
3. One of the objectors cc'd his letter to the Ashtead Park Management Company, indicating some co-ordination of effort.
4. This is a low-density neighbourhood. I reckon most of the objectors are beyond the 20m neighbour notification distance that applies to notification of planning application. It would be interesting to see how dispersed they actually are.
5. A leafleting campaign is planned with a very effective leaflet showing the grievously wounded Capt Norton RLC GC and his wife Sue.
The Planning Inspectorate states that 30% of appeals are upheld. Even if planning committee refuse the application, there is a good chance that a high-profile appeal will succeed.