See report at: Futures Forum: Development for Sustainability: Futures Forum meeting
Feedback from FF meeting 24th Sept 2013
FORMS COMPLETED BY ATTENDEES
Q1 What do we understand as ‘development for sustainability’ and
how can the authorities and NGOs promote/provide for this?
It is plainly necessary to provide affordable accommodation for care workers in Sidmouth.
There is a difficulty as I see it, in providing security for the long term, so that when a care worker retires or has to change employment, he/she will not lose their home
More local energy generation, local purchasing
Unaccountable autocratic (elected) power cuts out ordinary Councillors, officers and residents
New clearer maps to show where flood risks are, where solar farms are proposed, where wind turbines are possible.
Living with our & the globe’s means, long term!
Development for the community with the community. Sustainable planning needs to be responsive to local community needs and wishes.
Development needs to be appropriate to its location and environmental protection should not be over ridden by social and economic development. It is vital that a balance is struck through a careful examination of all available alternatives through the Sustainability Appraisal.
The authorities need to work with the local community to identify appropriate development in the right locations.
Renewable energy projects
> Financial, social & environmental sense and long-term sense.
Energy efficiency and local energy generation
Sufficient change. Beginning of the afternoon [meeting] mentioned 3 Earths needed if whole world lives like those in South West. Significant lifestyle change required.
Energy efficient projects in transport and housing
> cycling routes
> charging power
> waste management of garden & cardboard waste
Mixed development: not an industrial zone (5 hectares) on Sidford AONB fields.
Brownfield mixed development at Port Royal Eastern Town.
Sidmouth already has a good live-work mix – simply improve access at the Alexander Estate
2) Higher environmental standards can drive down running costs
3) Local supply
4) Planning for resilience
5) Eco construction
6) Lower demand for energy
Not stealing from future generations
SVEAG energy proposal
Rollout of broadband to rural communities will enable people to start businesses from home and reduce commuting.
Q2 What aspects of life in Sidmouth/East Devon are likely to prove unsustainable
and how can we mitigate such trends?
Residents unable to afford to keep warm in cold weather? Perhaps Ed Miliband can help?
Development in Sidford must be looked at very carefully, in relation to risk of flooding. Otherwise, there’ll be great suffering. This would be exacerbated if the problem of sewerage is not satisfactorily addressed.
Age imbalance and house prices
More council houses (good example in Mill Street/York Road)
Encourage in-migration – positive welcome to young workers
Apprenticeships & training for small and medium businesses
Consultants on employment land are ignored, despite expertise and cost
EDDC must be held accountable
Empty homes in the private sector need to become available for sale or rent by local workers.
Expensive transport vs the need to travel further for work
Traffic and inappropriate development changing the character of the area.
Provision of safe and secure pathways & cycle-ways, moving traffic away from sensitive residential areas, particularly around schools and conservation areas.
> Alternative energy fuel infrastructure
> Electric charging network.
Anti-investment and anti-climate change in Sidmouth
* A change in what form of developments are considered acceptable
* If a better development to eg increase jobs, can’t be found, it should go ahead as the best option.
Running out – lights going out!
Too much waste – not effectively disposed of.
What funds are available to support local groups?
Too many houses, and too much employment land
12,000 houses and 120 hectares of employment land as per Atkins Report
Evidence/Numbers: how you measure sustainability?
Concerned about why 1 hectare for Sidmouth (as recommended by Atkins) in favour of 5 hectares. Why was Atkins dropped?
High dependencies upon fuel, food sourced from afar, resources that are provided for desire rather than need
Lack of opportunities for young
Destruction of towns by domination/invasion of more supermarkets
Use of waste:
> incineration (Norway, Vienna)
> plastic into hard-core for roads
Local energy production
> sense of control
An unsustainable local plan which has proved highly contentious proves the Council needs to actually CONSULT and not hold highly secretive meetings behind closed doors and without minutes.
The maps produced by EDDC MUST be updated. These are OUT OF DATE. The Environment Agency sends updates EVERY THREE MONTHS! F236 – Sidford, not F22.
The current sewerage system is already unable to cope with current demand and needs upgrading URGENTLY before more houses are built.
Vision Group for Sidmouth - Feedback from Futures Forum meeting 24th Sept