Save Our Sidmouth


Leave a comment

Date for Inspector’s ruling on EDDC’s new Local Plan for Sidmouth

A reminder that the Inspector will indicate by the end of March, the date when his decision on the Local Plan will be made available. (It was mentioned at this week’s special meeting (25th March) of the Development Management Committee, that Anthony Thickett’s report is expected sometime in the summer, 2014).
For a summary of the Examination in Public, particularly those sessions most relevant for Sidmouth, go to : http://futuresforumvgs.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/public-examination-of-new-east-devon_14.html


1 Comment

Access to Alexandria Road Industrial Estate

Following the first Sidmouth hearing, an important point was raised by Graham Cooper with the Local Plan Inspector, regarding the potential for fuller use of the existing employment land at the Alexandria Road Estate.

Here’s an aerial view of the site AlexRoadStudy

A suggested solution to improve the access (from Bulverton Road) is set out in this letter in the Sidmouth Herald (21st March):

‘Dear Editor

In respect to the Sidmouth section of the Local Plan there is a clear need for a new entrance to the Alexandria Industrial Estate. It is the potential deal with a major supermarket to purchase the Alexandria site which is underwriting the proposed industrial development in the Sidford AONB and is the generator of the EDDC’s redistribution of employment land in its ambition to relocate. Should this be allowed to proceed it will have a considerable impact on the economic vitality of the town centre and the rain run-off will contribute to flooding downstream at Port Royal. The Bulverton Road access to the industrial estate is therefore the lynchpin to the whole employment land solution in the resort.

The Alexandria estate has operated under capacity for many years, but with some modest reconfiguring such as an improved access it is capable of accommodating much more employment space. During the Local Plan discussions we were informed by the Ford’s agent that the access road was problematic because it would cost £1m to install and that the ransom strip was owned by 13 different parties. It appears however that it wasn’t a problem for Morrison’s who included just such an entrance location in their plans for their store and filling station. Can we rely on an agent’s representations or do we need an independent assessment?

Local professionals without a vested interest estimate the cost for a simple T junction to be more like £300K and this could be financed by building a series of business units along the strip. The number of owners is irrelevant as we are only interested in one particular section of the ransom strip. According to local knowledge nearly all this section of land belongs to a director and former co-director of the adjacent construction company. It is clearly a case of where there is a will to talk there is a way!

Consequently a cost benefit analysis of whether the access is viable would have to be compared with the cost to Sidmouth of further large scale out-of-town retail and commercial development. Currently Sidmouth has a well distributed and sustainable live-work balance but the proposed single zone of five hectares lacks evidence and has poor transport connectivity. On the other hand the more sensible calculations by consultants Roger Tyms of one hectare of employment land is achievable by refiguring the Alexandria estate and introducing mixed developments in Eastern Town and on brown field sites elsewhere.

Sincerely,
Graham Cooper

For more background, including a diagram of a new simple access, go to the Futures Forum blogspot.


Leave a comment

‘Risk of flooding’ cited , as a Sidford Planning Application is refused

A summary from a report in today’s Sidmouth Herald ( p.11) is given below:

Planners reject homes scheme (re 1 Laundry Lane, Sidford)

“Plans to build five houses on the northern edge of Sidford have been rejected.”

The application had been recommended for refusal by officers who said the loss of an employment site and the risk of flooding were the main issues.
Part of the development would replace an ‘established employment building’ and private storage units and workshops, said the officer.
The remainder would have been on an undeveloped garden.

Save Our Sidmouth followers may well ask, “Now if we were to apply the same logic to the proposed development the other side of the fence at Sidford or to development of the Knowle…?”