Sidford business park >> A PUBLIC Inquiry to be held >> further details

A week ago, we learnt that the appeal over the rejected plans for an industrial estate at Sidford will be heard as a public inquiry:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >> A PUBLIC Inquiry to be held >> "The appeal will now proceed by means of an Inquiry and not a Hearing"

The campaign against the industrial estate provided more information:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > Inquiry to start 16th July

And now Devon Live has more:

Date set for controversial Sidford business park planning inquiry

East Devon District Council planners in October rejected plans to build industrial, storage and non-residential institutions on agricultural land to the east of Two Bridges Road in Sidford.

Daniel Clark

Local Democracy Reporter
14:33, 20 APR 2019

.

CLICK TO PLAY

SIDFORD BUSINESS PARK PLANNED SITE

A date has been set for a planning inquiry into controversial plans to build a new business park on the edge of Sidford.

East Devon District Council planners in October rejected plans to build industrial, storage and non-residential institutions on agricultural land to the east of Two Bridges Road in Sidford.

The scheme, which could create up for 250 full-time jobs, was refused on the grounds of harm to highway safety, relating to increased heavy goods vehicle usage of the area’s narrow roads

Applicants Fords of Sidmouth have appealed the decision, and it has been confirmed that a planning inquiry in front of an inspector will be held to determine the decision.

It will begin on Tuesday, July 16, at 10am, at East Devon District Council’s HQ at Blackdown House in Honiton and is scheduled to last for three days.

Luke Fleming has been appointed as the inspector and anyone wishing to submit comments or evidence, either for or against the proposals, must do so by May 17.

The outline application is for a change of use of land from agricultural use to employment use. It aims to provide 8,445 sqm of new floorspace, new highway access, cycle and foot paths, improvements to flood attenuation, building layout and road layout, new hedgerow planting and associated infrastructure.

The plans have proven controversial in the village with over 250 submitted letters of objection, 1,400 residents signing the Say NO To Sidford Business Park Campaign petition objecting to the proposed Business Park, and signs and placards against the development all over the village, although not everyone was against the scheme

The site is allocated in the Local Plan, but primarily for light industrial uses. When refusing the plans, and East Devon District Council spokesman had said: “The applicants included a significant amount of warehouse space in their application, which would be reliant on HGVs to deliver goods to the site and then distribute them from there. Devon County Council, as Highway Authority, objected to the application based on the number of HGVs likely to be generated by the proposal, which significantly exceeds the figure envisaged when the site was allocated.

“East Devon District Council has agreed that the numbers of HGVs combined with the narrow roads, both in the vicinity of the site and through Sidbury, would lead to conflict between vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians to the detriment of highway safety, and it was on this basis that the application was turned down.”

When plans were submitted, the applicants said that 250 new jobs would be created as part of the scheme and that the site’s development will secure a cycleway to the employment site.

It was the second time the application had been refused – a similar, but larger, scheme was rejected in 2016 as the application failed to demonstrate how the developers would achieve the high standards of design and landscaping.

Date set for controversial Sidford business park planning inquiry - Devon Live
.
.
.

Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > Inquiry to start 16th July

The campaign against the proposed development at Sidford has sent out a reminder that further points can be made to the Inspector:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > additional comments can be sent to the appeal Inspector by 22nd April

Meanwhile, we have learnt that there will be a public enquiry on the appeal over the planning permission for an industrial estate at Sidford:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >> A PUBLIC Inquiry to be held >> "The appeal will now proceed by means of an Inquiry and not a Hearing"

And the campaign has issued a further posting on the issue:

Campaign Update 27

We have now been advised by the District Council that the Planning Inspector has determined that instead of holding a Hearing into the planning appeal as we previously had been told, the Inspector has now decided to hold an Inquiry which could last up to three days. The first of these days is due to start on 16 July.  We are assuming that the Inspector will therefore have penciled in the Inquiry to be held on 16, 17 and 18 July. The Inquiry will be held in public and will be held locally. If you have any interest in attending then put these dates in your diary now!

In our last Update we asked you to consider submitting additional evidence to the Planning Inspector and we know that a number have done so, and thank you to those who have.

The District Council's latest communication advises that the Inspector has put back the date by which additional submissions can be made. The new deadline by which any additional comments have to be received by the Inspector is now 17 May. 

We again would encourage as many of you as possible who wish to, to submit comments even at this late stage. As the District Council refused planning permission solely on grounds related to highways matters you should only submit highways related comments. In doing so you might want to address matters that include - 

• Evidence or statements regarding the effect of noise, vibration, damage and pollution on your properties (and vehicles) due to HGV or other traffic
• Effect on the health of residents attributable to air quality 
• Effect of pollution on children walking to school and in the playground of the primary school
• Road safety issues - lack of pavements or narrow pavements, plus no lollipop lady, crossing nor traffic lights to help you cross safely with your children 
• Traffic delays due to congestion at the various pinch points on the A375 in both Sidford and Sidbury
• Evidence of vehicles mounting and/or diving on pavements

Where possible your comments should be supported by photographic evidence. We believe that it is important for as many photographs and/or videos are submitted to the Planning Inspector showing images of traffic congestion/difficulties along the A375 at any point between Sidford and Cotford in Sidbury. 

Attached, once again, is a brief guide as to how to present any submission that you make.

Best wishes

Campaign Team

NOSidfordBusinessPark@yahoo.com
SayNOtoSidfordBusinessPark (@say_oto) on Twitter
Say NO to Sidford Business Park - Home | Facebook
.
.
.

Sidford business park >> A PUBLIC Inquiry to be held >> "The appeal will now proceed by means of an Inquiry and not a Hearing"

The Planning Inspector will be hearing an appeal over planning permission for an industrial estate north of Sidford:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > BREAKING NEWS: Applicants submit appeal against decision to reject planning application

A correspondent has notified this blog that the Inspector will be conducting a public inquiry, rather than a hearing. 

There are concerns that the letter sent out by the District Council is rather 'vague': and yet it is clear that this will be a PUBLIC Inquiry, similar to that held for the Knowle appeal sessions:
Futures Forum: Knowle relocation project: BREAKING NEWS >>> PegasusLife appeal allowed > further reports 

As the correspondent notes: "Local folk need to be made aware of this, especially with local elections approaching".

Here is the letter sent out by the District Council:

18/1094/MOUT | Outline application accompanied by an Environmental Statement (with scale and appearance reserved) for the change of use of agricultural land to employment land (B1, B8 and D1 uses) to provide 8,445 sqm of new floorspace, new highway access, cycle and footway, improvements to flood attenuation, building layout and road layout, new hedgerow planting and associated infrastructure. | Land East Of Two Bridges Two Bridges Road Sidford
.
.
.

Proposals for sheltered housing for the elderly in Sidford > Inspector tells developers to pay full affordable housing contribution

At the beginning of the year, a controversial planning application was approved:
Futures Forum: Proposals for sheltered housing for the elderly in Sidford > third planning application approved, despite development 'potentially' generating increase in traffic

Now the Inspector has made clear what contributions the developer must make: 

Developers must pay full affordable housing contribution as demolition of former care home begins

An inspector rejected plans to reduce the off-site contribution

Daniel ClarkLocal Democracy Reporter
18:14, 8 APR 2019

.

CLICK TO PLAY

FORMER GREEN CLOSE CARE HOME

Demolition work has begun on converting a former care home into retirement apartments – but their bid to reduce the affordable housing contribution has been rejected.

Churchill Retirement Living’s plans to revamp the closed 23-bed former Green Close care home in Drakes Avenue in Sidford were finally given the go-ahead by East Devon District Council planners in December last year, after twice rejecting similar schemes.

The sheltered apartment plans would see the care home demolished and replaced with 40 apartments, with a guest suite, owners’ lounge, lift, office also be included, as would be 24 car parking spaces.

A financial contribution of £677,434 to the council towards the provision of affordable housing within the district is a condition of the application, which Churchill have agreed is acceptable.

The developers had appealed against a previous refusal by planners in May for a 39 one and two-bedroom apartments scheme as those plans only included an off-site contribution of £423,576, but no provision for on-site affordable housing. Councillors had voted by seven votes to five that this affordable housing offer was not policy compliant.

Planning inspector Rory Cridland has since upheld that decision, meaning that the council will receive the full affordable housing contribution of £677,434, which councillors at Tuesday’s development management committee meeting said was good news, when planning appeal statistics were discussed.

Mr Cridland’s report said: “The main issue is whether or not the proposed development would make adequate provision for affordable housing. The parties agree on the percentage of affordable housing required, that onsite provision is not appropriate and that a financial contribution towards off site provision is justified. They do not, however, agree on the amount or the means by which it should be calculated.”

The applicants had used a capitalisation rate at four per cent, considerably lower than the six per cent applied by the council.

He added: “The council’s six per cent figure is reasonably robust, and it is unlikely to be significantly out of kilter with prevailing market rates. In contrast, the evidence provided by the appellant to justify the four per cent rate is limited. Consequently, I favour the council’s evidence and conclude that the proposed contribution of £430,678 is insufficient to provide an off-site affordable housing contribution of equivalent value to on-site provision. As such, it would fail to make adequate provision for affordable housing and would, therefore, conflict with the requirements of the Local Plan.”

He dismissed the appeal, meaning the full £677,434 to the council towards the provision of affordable housing must be paid.

The Green Close care home was built in 1971 but closed in 2014 after Devon County Council cutbacks.

Developers must pay full affordable housing contribution as demolition of former care home begins - Devon Live
.
.
.

Sidford traffic jam >16th March 2018

Some of you will remember this a year ago:




Sidford traffic jam 2 16mar18 - YouTube

This blog has just received a comment:

Nasty, what's it like this spring? 

We shall have to see, but at the time this was posted:

We've got a problem with our roads in Sidford: http://futuresforumvgs.blogspot.de/20... 

The clear implication being that if you plonk a large industrial estate just around the corner from these narrow Medieval streets, you're going to get a few more blockages. 

And now the applicants are appealing - but the Inspector is accepting new comments. But they have to be about traffic issues:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > additional comments can be sent to the appeal Inspector by 22nd April
.
.
.

Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > additional comments can be sent to the appeal Inspector by 22nd April

The applicants who failed to get planning permission for an industrial estate north of Sidford have appealed - and the campaign against this have swung into action:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > BREAKING NEWS: Applicants submit appeal against decision to reject planning application

The campaign is giving advice on how to submit further comments to the Inspector: 

Campaign Update 26

Apologies for the delay in providing an update but over recent weeks we have been trying to clarify what is required in the lead up to, and at, a planning appeal hearing. We now believe that we are much clearer in how we need to progress.

As those of you who had submitted objections to the planning proposal will now be aware from the District Council that the process associated with the planning appeal has commenced.

Before we address that a belated thank you to all who took part in our fundraiser Ceilidh which made a profit of £530. This brings our funds to just under £1,500.

We had been anticipating having to put a plea out to raise significantly more funds in order to fund legal representation at the appeal hearing. At this stage however we do not think this is necessary as we believe we have sufficient funds to support the work that is required over the next few crucial weeks. Thank you however to those who have in recent weeks made offers of further donations, but at this stage we think it would not be right just to take money from you without having a clear idea of what we would spend it on. 

We have discussed how to approach the appeal with several people, including a solicitor, all of whom have planning experience. It is now our considered opinion that we can between us manage the next set of activities and fund these out of our existing funds. We may however possibly need to consider raising additional funds in a few months time should we decide to seek a professional representative to take the lead on our behalf at the appeal hearing.

As the recent letter from the District Council, a copy of which we attach, makes clear there is now a further opportunity for anyone to make comments about the planning proposal which can be submitted to the Planning Inspector. As you will see there is a short deadline by which any additional comments have to be received by the Inspector - by no later than 22 April.

We would encourage as many of you as possible who wish to, to submit comments even at this late stage. As the District Council refused planning permission solely on grounds related to highways matters you should only submit highways related comments. In doing so you might want to address matters that include - 

• Evidence or statements regarding the effect of noise, vibration, damage and pollution on your properties (and vehicles) due to HGV or other traffic
• Effect on the health of residents attributable to air quality 
• Effect of pollution on children walking to school and in the playground of the primary school
• Road safety issues - lack of pavements or narrow pavements, plus no lollipop lady, crossing nor traffic lights to help you cross safely with your children 
• Traffic delays due to congestion at the various pinch points on the A375 in both Sidford and Sidbury
• Evidence of vehicles mounting and/or diving on pavements

Where possible your comments should be supported by photographic evidence. We believe that it is important for as many photographs and/or videos are submitted to the Planning Inspector showing images of traffic congestion/difficulties along the A375 at any point between Sidford and Cotford in Sidbury. 

Attached is a brief guide as to how to present any submission that you make.

In the meantime we are working with a number of residents in order to obtain evidence from them about how the traffic detrimentally affects them and their properties so that this too can be submitted to the Planning Inspector.

Best wishes 

Campaign Team

NO Sidford Business Park Campaign

Guidance on submitting additional evidence to the Planning Inspector

All comments and evidence must –

• be received by the Planning Inspector by no later than 22 April 2019. Anything received after this date will not be considered by the Inspector.
• quote the planning appeal reference for in order for it to be considered by the Inspector. The reference is – APP/U1105/W/19/3221978.
• quote the address of the appeal site i.e. the Business Park. The address to be quoted is – Land East of Two Bridges, Two Bridges Road, Sidford.
• your name and address
• state “I am against the appeal proposals” and explain whether it is for the same reasons as given by the District Council or, if not, explain your own reasons

The reasons given by the District Council in refusing the planning application were –

"1. The proposed development, by virtue of the proposed B8 uses, would result in an increase of HGV traffic on the surrounding road network, both in the vicinity of the site and through Sidbury which both suffer from inadequate road widths and a lack of footways. As such increased HGV movements within this area will result in conflicts between vehicles, and between vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians, to the detriment of highway safety. The proposed development is therefore considered contrary to paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Strategies 26 (Development at Sidmouth), and Policies TC7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) of the adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013 - 2031."

The Planning Inspector asks that any additional submissions are –

• in a font such as Arial or Verdana in a size of 11 point or larger
• use A4 paper wherever possible
• number the pages of the documents
• make sure photocopied and scanned documents are clear and legible
• use black and white for documents unless colour is essential
• put any photographs (both originals and photocopies should be in colour), maps, plans, etc, in a separate appendix and cross reference them within the main body of the document
• print documents on both sides of a page. You should use paper of good enough quality that something printed on one side of the page does not show through to the other side
• do not send original documents
• if possible, send 3 copies

You should send your written submission and/or photographs/videos –

By post to: The Planning Inspectorate, Room 3/C Eagle Wing, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Bristol BS1 6PN

By email to: west2@pins.gsi.gov.uk

Planning Portal: https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk

Remember all evidence must be received by the Planning Inspector by no later than 22 April 2019

NOSidfordBusinessPark@yahoo.com
SayNOtoSidfordBusinessPark (@say_oto) on Twitter
Say NO to Sidford Business Park - Home | Facebook
.
.
.

Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > BREAKING NEWS: Applicants submit appeal against decision to reject planning application

A reminder was sent out yesterday about the upcoming fundraising event for the campaign against the proposed industrial estate on the border of Sidford:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > ceilidh fundraiser reminder > Saturday 23rd February

Funds will clearly be needed now: 

Campaign Update 25 - Applicants lodge planning appeal

We have today received the news that most people living locally didn't want to hear. Namely, that the applicants who submitted a planning application to build a business park on agricultural land in an AONB, have now submitted an appeal against the decision taken last October by the District Council to oppose their application.

This clearly is very disappointing and speaks volumes about the attitude of the applicants to the wishes of those who live locally. After all, the Town Council, the District Council and 1,400 local residents who signed our petition all oppose the proposed business park.

We are determined to immediately take steps to raise funds to allow the Campaign to represent the views of local residents at the planning appeal hearing that will now have to be held. Our next email will set out how we intend to raise the funds to do this.

However, in the meantime we would again remind you of our timely ceilidh fundraising event which is being held on Saturday 23 February in Sidford Social Hall, Byes Lane, Sidford, starting at 7.30 pm. Tickets cost £5.00 and can be obtained by emailing us or from the Rising Sun in Sidford, the Red Lion in Sidbury or Paragon Books in Sidmouth.

It's more imperative than ever to support us!

This is what we have today issued as a press release -

The Campaign is disappointed but determined to fight on!

The news that the applicants have lodged an appeal, whilst not unexpected, is nonetheless a massive disappointment, particularly for local residents who have overwhelmingly made their views known about this unwanted and unnecessary business park.

The fact that the applicants are going to an appeal when the District and Town Councils and so many local residents have all said that they are against the proposed business park shows how little the applicants care about the local area and its people.

The Say NO Campaign is absolutely determined to support the District Council and its rejection of the planning application at the appeal. But to do this we need to engage professional representatives to forcefully make our case against the business park development. This will take a significant sum of money that we must raise from our supporters. We will now be publicising how people can donate directly into our recently opened bank account, as well as continuing to accept cash donations.

Sadly, our fundraising ceilidh on the evening of 23 February at Sidford Social Hall cannot be timelier. If anyone wants to support the Campaign financially, or in any other way, we would invite them to contact us at nosidfordbusinesspark@yahoo.com.

Best wishes

Campaign Team

NOSidfordBusinessPark@yahoo.com

Say NO to Sidford Business Park - Home | Facebook

SayNOtoSidfordBusinessPark (@say_oto) | Twitter
.
.
.

Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > ceilidh fundraiser reminder > Saturday 23rd February

The last information from the campaign against an industrial estate on the outskirts of Sidford gave the news about a fundraising event:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > ceilidh fundraiser!

The latest is a reminder: 

Campaign Update 24 - Ceilidh Fundraiser

Don't forget to come and join us for a fun evening on 23 February in support of the Campaign's fundraising!

We are holding a Ceilidh with local band Mischief and Mayhem who are a ceilidh

band based here in East Devon. They perform with a caller who will lead you gently through the dances and when the dancers need a rest they enjoy playing tunes and singing songs to entertain you. Don't worry if you are a novice to the niceties of a ceilidh; many of us are too!

The Ceilidh starts at 7.30 pm on Saturday 23 February and is being held at Sidford Social Hall, Byes Lane, Sidford. You are most welcome to bring your own food and drink as we don't have a licence.

Tickets, which are at the very reasonable price of £5.00 each, are available by emailing us or from a number of local businesses - Rising Sun, Sidford; Red Lion, Sidbury and Paragon Books, Sidmouth.

Don't forget to bring your purses and wallets as we will be holding a raffle with a wide array of prizes!

Attached is a flyer advertising the Ceilidh which it would be great if you could display. Below is a photograph of the band Mischief and Mayhem and you can follow this link for more about them Mischief and Mayhem. 

We look forward to seeing you on 23 February!

Best wishes

Campaign Team

NOSidfordBusinessPark@yahoo.com

Say NO to Sidford Business Park - Home | Facebook

SayNOtoSidfordBusinessPark (@say_oto) on Twitter

.
.
.

Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > ceilidh fundraiser!

As promised in the last update from the campaigners against the proposed industrial estate north of Sidford:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park >> campaign group's latest update > approaching any potential planning appeal

With the poster of the fundraising event:

And with more details just out: 

Campaign Update 23 - Ceilidh Fundraiser

As you will recall we are holding a fundraiser on Saturday 23 February at the Sidford Social Hall starting at 7.30 pm.

This fundraiser will take the form of a ceilidh, with music being provided by local band "Mischief & Mayhem" and the Caller is Olly Davey.

We don't have an alcohol licence but you are able to bring your own drink and if you wish,food as well to help sustain you through the evening!

As this is a fundraising event we will be holding a raffle and inviting donations. If you would be willing to donate a prize (or two) for the raffle please let us know. The more prizes that we have, hopefully the more inviting the raffle will be!

Tickets are only £5.00 per person and they can be purchased from -

• The Rising Sun,Sidford
• The Red Lion, Sidbury
• Paragon Books, Sidmouth

In addition, if you email us, we are very happy to reserve tickets for you.

We recommend the early purchase of your tickets to avoid the disappointment of having to stand outside the Hall without being able to gain entry!

At the event we will be unavailing the Campaign's next steps in its fundraising. As you will recall we are having to make an assumption that at some point over the next few months the applicants, who had their planning application to build a business park at Sidford turned down, will lodge an appeal. In such circumstances the Campaign is determined to be professionally represented at any appeal and this will require us raising a significant amount of funds. Our next announcement will explain how we will do this. 

Attached is a flyer advertising the ceilidh which we would encourage you to display prominently.

In the meantime, please come along to the ceilidh, have a great evening and help us add to our funds.

NOSidfordBusinessPark@yahoo.com
Say NO to Sidford Business Park - Home | Facebook
SayNOtoSidfordBusinessPark (@say_oto) on Twitter
.
.
.

East Devon is taking a disproportionate share of development >>> “Because we have the land and we are good at it”

There are plenty of vacant employment sites in the District - and in the Sid Valley:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park > Other sites are available

But the Local Plan was not really concerned with such mundane matters:
Futures Forum: Sidford business park > "The Local Plan is a deeply flawed document."

There was a lot of politiking and lobbying going on at the time - which then gave us the proposed employment site at Sidford, as summarised in this piece earlier from the East Devon Watch blog: 

SIDFORD BUSINESS PARK – A GRUBBY HISTORY

18 JUNE 2019

Tim Ford, once a much-respected plumbing and electrical contactor in Sidmouth, is renewing his controversial application to build a business park in the AONB at Sidford. (18/1094/MOUT)

Incredulous locals wonder how it was possible for a council to allocate an ‘employment site’ in its local development plan that is on a flood plain, is a rich wildlife habitat, and whose main access would be a narrow street where two lorries can’t pass without mounting the pavement!

For the dominant Tory group on East Devon District Council it was easy!

First, they let landowners and developers decide where to build. In 2007 they asked East Devon Business Forum how much employment land the district would need over the next 25 years. EDBF was a lobby group which included the Carters of Greendale, the Stuarts of Hill Barton and Tim Ford of Sidmouth. Their answer was predictable: lots and lots!

Second, they put Chair of EDBF, Cllr Graham (‘I ain’t doin’ it for peanuts!’) Brown:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/12/17/the-disgraced-ex-eddc-tory-councillor-graham-brown-if-i-cant-get-planning-nobody-will-scandal-refuses-to-die/

in charge of quietly asking landowners where they would like to build. Apparently, the proposal for a Sidford business park was first mooted at one of these confidential meetings in July 2010.

Third, in 2011 they elected Paul Diviani, founder member of EDBF, as leader. Under him the District Council became what many saw as a ‘Development Corporation’, the planning system became less about protecting the environment and more about encouraging building.

Fourth, they didn’t listen to the public or community groups whom they ignored or misrepresented. Sidmouth Chamber of commerce said the business park would be catastrophic for local businesses, Council minutes recorded the Chamber as supporting it!

Fifth, they whipped their large political majority to vote through the Sidford allocation. When hostile public reaction worried them just before the 2015 council elections they voted to ‘remove it’ from the Local Plan. Universal Rejoicing! But in 2016 the Inspector kept it in the Plan. Why? Because East Devon’s chief planning officer had not been instructed to give the Inspector reasons for the council’s change of mind!

Former EDDC Leader Diviani is now EDDC’s representative on the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan. In its confidential meetings he is helping to oversee a gigantic overspill project along the A3052 in the west end of the District where hundreds of acres of land are being earmarked for a massive expansion of business parks and thousands of new houses.

Sidford Business Park – a grubby history | East Devon Watch

The mantra is always 'regeneration', 'job-creation' and 'building much-needed homes':
Futures Forum: "Regeneration and economic development" in East Devon >>> looking beyond the conventional, the ideological and the heavyhanded

Otherwise known as 'crony capitalism':
Futures Forum: Crony capitalism and lemon socialism in East Devon........ The costs of "substantial growth and expanding business"

Brought about by a lot of lobbying:
Futures Forum: A history of the East Devon Business Forum, part seven ..... "The local mafia": Conflicts of interest in East Devon

An excellent comment posted on the EDW blog this week asks a few more pertinent questions: 

SIDFORD BUSINESS PARK – DISPROPORTIONATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT?

20 JAN 2019

Recently posted comment:

“At the full EDDC Council meeting at the end of October 2018, independent Councillors Ben Ingham and Roger Giles, supported by 11 other councillors, tabled a motion to discuss the over provision of housing needs in our Local Plan and called for an independent assessment. In answer to a question as to why East Devon is taking a disproportionate share of development [58% more than Exeter, 53% more than Teignbridge and nearly three times that of Mid Devon according to independent analysis conducted by CPRE] Councillor Paul Diviani said:

“Because we have the land and we are good at it”!

[Perhaps he should be reminded that two thirds of East Devon lies in an AONB, or perhaps he doesn’t care].

This is not the argument that was put to Inspector Thickett at the public examination of the EDDC local plan in 2015 by Ed Freeman. Then, the argument for pitching the EDDC target at a minimum of 950 houses/year [about 30% more than could be supported by the evidence] was that we had jobs coming down the line. Specifically he mentioned 1,000 full time equivalent jobs a year.

Thankfully, we are effectively at full employment. Office for National Statistic population projections shows the South West population as a whole growing over the local plan period at around 0.8% per annum, including expected migration. However, we have an ageing population and the annual increase of those classified as of working age is only going to be 0.16% (16 to 64 for all genders). To satisfy this annual demand to find new jobs in East Devon [population 142,300] would only require around a couple of hundred a year, nowhere near the 1,000 that are being planned for.

The creation of jobs is generally a good thing but pursuing jobs as a primary objective is, I suggest, not what we need in Devon. What we need are better quality jobs to lift earnings and I am pleased to see that that is what ratepayers’ investment of £1.1M in the Exeter Science Park is aimed at achieving. But it only creates a one-off 158 jobs against the 1,000 a year needed to justify the development plan.

Can anyone provide an evidence based explanation of where these housing and job targets come from? Anyone believe that this is what they were voting for when they elected their councillors? And who are the “we’s” in Councillor Paul Diviani’s explanation?”

Sidford Business Park – disproportionate industrial development? | East Devon Watch
.
.
.

Keeping the speed down in East Devon villages

Speeding is a problem in Sidbury:
Futures Forum: Campaign for safer roads in Sidbury > "the official data demonstrates the vast volume of traffic that goes through Sidbury - and the fact that the vast majority of drivers actually break the limit" > public meeting Weds 21st Nov

There has been a bit of activity on the Nextdoor social network of late - on the issue of speeding...

This thread is on getting people to drive more slowly (names have been removed, other than Councillors): 

Poll: Should we have a 20 miles an hour speed limit on our rural villages

North Sidmouth 12h ago

There is little point in imposing rules if they cannot be enforced and our police force, although excellent, has too much to do at the moment without adding to the burden.

Sidbury 12h ago

We have a 20mph zone in Sidbury that a Devon County Council vehicle speed sensor showed that in a complete week last year 88% of drivers drove in excess of the speed limit. And Sidbury Traffic Action Group, which is supported by Sidbury WI, are battling to get DCC to take this matter seriously and put up flashing speed signs. But as no one has yet been killed we aren’t taken seriously.

Sidbury 11h ago

Some drivers take notice of speed limits but unfortunately it's the same as parking restrictions - if there's no enforcement then many people just don't give a .......

Beer 10h ago

Car brakes are many times more effective than when the 30 limit was set, but as usual the weak link is the nut behind the wheel.

Branscombe

6h ago

I know when your walking along and some nutter come flying along it's very scary. Let alone dangerous. Why people feel the need to drive so fast on our small roads.!

Beer 3h ago

Certainly 30 is too fast in Beer Fore Street in summer with so many people on the narrow sections of pavement. The short distance of visability between the bends does not give some pedestrians time to cross safely.

Martin Shaw

Seaton 41m ago

I'm your County Councillor and I'm on a working party which is looking at the situations in which 20 limits could be introduced in town and village settings. If you want to propose a 20 limit for a specific area or roads in Branscombe, Beer or elsewhere, the best thing to do is to discuss it first with your parish or town council who will need to be involved in putting it forward, and let me know (cllrmartinshaw@gmail.com).

North Sidmouth 17m ago

I think each road should be discussed on its merits. As I understand it from Sgt. Andy Squires the 20 limit is an advisory limit only. As Chris suggests, pedestrian safety is a key issue but perhaps only in certain areas. In Sidmouth town centre it can be hard to get up to 20 mph and the narrow streets and thronging pedestrians make a low speed essential anyway. That said, not long ago there was a nasty accident where someone was knocked down, which might belatedly make the case for a 20 mph limit in the town centre.

Sidbury 11m ago

In Sidbury we have had to investigate this suggestion that our 20mph is not enforceable. As the limit has been adopted/agreed by DCC it is enforceable and the police have accepted that point. So anyone of the 88% who drive through Sidbury in excess of 20 mph is liable for prosecution. It’s been designed as a 20 mph zone for a reason. As the police resources to enforce this are stretched Sidbury Traffic Action Group has submitted names of residents to the police who will form a local speed watch group. The intention is for them to “police” the speeding vehicles in liaison with the police.

Martin Shaw

Seaton·5m ago

I think the confusion may be caused by the fact that a 20 'zone' is not enforceable but a 20 'limit' such as exists in Sidford (and presumably Sidbury) is enforceable.

Nextdoor

And this was reblogged on Nextdoor from a news piece earlier from Devon & Cornwall Police:

No need for speed

Police target excessive speed – one of the Fatal Five

Excessive speed is one of the Fatal Five top contributory factors to deaths and serious injuries on UK roads, because collisions where speed is a factor have a disproportionately high rate of fatalities associated with them.

For two weeks from 14 – 27 January Devon and Cornwall Police and partner agencies will be targeting drivers who selfishly endanger other road users not to mention themselves by speeding, as will police forces across the UK in support of a campaign led by the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC).

There is no excuse for excessive speed when driving, either breaking the speed limit or traveling too fast for the road conditions, but that doesn’t stop drivers who are pulled over from offering them.

The highlights from the Alliance Roads Policing team’s activity in the first week of 2019 alone (see photo montage) supplied the following gems:

• “Keeping up with the flow of traffic” when having just overtaken an unmarked police car and everything else (92mph)
• “My cat is sick” (91mph, with children in the car)
• “In a rush to get to my girlfriends house” (101mph)
• “Didn’t realise I was going that fast” (100mph)
• “Chatting and distracted” (94mph)

Far from just handing out “speeding tickets”, dependent on the severity of each offence drivers may receive penalty points on their licence and a fine, or they may have the option of attending a speed awareness course in which case those penalties will not apply.

In extreme cases of excessive speed, they may face a day in court which could result in a driving ban.

Operations will be carried out across Devon and Cornwall on arterial routes and A roads, and in areas where concerns have been raised about speeding through towns and communities.

Devon and Cornwall Police will deploy the No Excuse team and the Alliance and Alliance Specials Roads Policing teams, working with the Peninsula Road Safety Partnership (PRSP) which operates static and mobile speed safety cameras.

In a separate announcement, the PRSP have warned drivers that speed enforcement warning signs are not a legal requirement to validate the results of an operation.

Marcus Laine, Operations Manager for the Peninsula Road Safety Partnership: “In future we may operate for short periods without using camera warning signs at sites which have been assessed locally as needing an intervention, and require us to deploy in the short term.

“If the site continues to be used the partnership will consider adding camera warning signs to further improve compliance.”

A fuller statement about this will be available on the PRSP website next week.

Alison Hernandez, the Police and Crime Commissioner for Devon and Cornwall, is the national lead for road safety for the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners.

A survey run by her office last month showed that the public overwhelming supported tougher penalties for drivers who flout the law.

She said: “The new No Excuse roads policing team, coupled with the partnership’s work, means speeding drivers are less likely to be able to get away with endangering their lives and the lives of others.

“In 2017, the last year for which there are figures, there were 1,616 reported accidents in Devon and Cornwall and 63 deaths on our roads, this is simply unacceptable.

“I think it’s absolutely right that the mobile speed cameras can appear without warning anywhere on our roads – whether they be major routes or smaller rural locations where we know a disproportionate number of serious collisions occur.

“The simple message to drivers is that if you don’t want to be penalised for speeding, stay within the limits.”

The Fatal Five are the five main causes of serious injuries and deaths on the region’s roads.

1. Inappropriate or excessive speed 
2. Not wearing a seat belt 
3. Driver distractions including using mobile devices such as phones, 'sat navs' and tablets 
4. Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs 
5. Careless and inconsiderate driving 

More information about how we can all help to make our roads safer can be found in the Devon & Cornwall Police and Dorset Police Alliance booklet “A Guide to Safer Roads” which can be found online here:

www.devon-cornwall.police.uk/advice/on-the-road 

On the road | Devon and Cornwall Police
News article | Devon and Cornwall Police
.
.
.