Sidmouth and Ottery breaking news and sport - Sidmouth Herald
There are several rejoinders:
> In 2013, when the Local Plan was being put together, the owners of the Alexandria Estate showed frustration at not having adequate access:
“Mr Mike Ford (ID: 499312) , Ford Property Ltd; and
“Mr Tim Ford (ID: 499310) , Fords of Sidmouth
“I write with reference to the above report in relation to Sidmouth and specifically the Alexandria Industrial Estate.
The main Alexandria Road Industrial Site is considered to have bad access and there are conflicts with nearby housing.
I would like to make the point that firstly, we are here at the moment and whilst the access may well be substandard, we are prevented from improving it by the ransom strip; otherwise a satisfactory solution could be reached.”
http://eastdevon‐consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/pref_app?pointId=1275473463022&do=view
> The developer at the proposed industrial estate at Sidford says "Sidmouth needs new employment space as areas such as the Alexandria Estate were full." The Town Council doesn't agree: “The proposed development could adversely affect the economic viability of Sidmouth's town centre and the need for the development had not been proven with the existing employment site at Alexandria Road still having capacity.”
Unanimous town council objection against new Sidford business park plan - Devon Live
> A study from five years ago made the point very clearly and very comprehensively - and is still as relevant to the current application:
Futures Forum: Sidford Business Park > "the need for the development has not been proven, with the existing employment site at Alexandria Road still having capacity."
> Again and again, it has in fact been proven that there is no 'need' for further employment land on this scale:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >>> “Sidmouth’s outstanding natural environment is a key asset - and conservation, enhancement and sensitive management of the landscape, heritage and wildlife of the area is critical.”
Futures Forum: VGS comment on Fords planning application 18/1094/MOUT >>> "there is no proven need for this particular business park"
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >>> "One of the many reasons why we do not need a new site in Sidford is that many of our employment sites are dormant - because East Devon’s current Local Plan is based upon an anticipated annual UK economic growth rate of 3% from 2007, which has turned out to be just over 1%."
.
.
.
http://eastdevon‐consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/pref_app?pointId=1275473463022&do=view
> The developer at the proposed industrial estate at Sidford says "Sidmouth needs new employment space as areas such as the Alexandria Estate were full." The Town Council doesn't agree: “The proposed development could adversely affect the economic viability of Sidmouth's town centre and the need for the development had not been proven with the existing employment site at Alexandria Road still having capacity.”
Unanimous town council objection against new Sidford business park plan - Devon Live
> A study from five years ago made the point very clearly and very comprehensively - and is still as relevant to the current application:
Futures Forum: Sidford Business Park > "the need for the development has not been proven, with the existing employment site at Alexandria Road still having capacity."
> Again and again, it has in fact been proven that there is no 'need' for further employment land on this scale:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >>> “Sidmouth’s outstanding natural environment is a key asset - and conservation, enhancement and sensitive management of the landscape, heritage and wildlife of the area is critical.”
Futures Forum: VGS comment on Fords planning application 18/1094/MOUT >>> "there is no proven need for this particular business park"
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >>> "One of the many reasons why we do not need a new site in Sidford is that many of our employment sites are dormant - because East Devon’s current Local Plan is based upon an anticipated annual UK economic growth rate of 3% from 2007, which has turned out to be just over 1%."
.
.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment