Save Our Sidmouth

Category Archives: SOS


by Leave a comment

Letter to Phil Twiss, majority party Chief Whip at East Devon District Council

Chair of Save Our Sidmouth has been obliged to remind the Chief Whip that there has been no reply to his previous letter. Here is Richard Thurlow’s e-mail, dated 27th October, 2013.

‘Dear Cllr Twiss,

In late September the Sidmouth Herald published a letter of mine, commenting on EDDC’s intentions for the Knowle. (Letter to Herald 1-10-2013 )

You replied to this in your letter published in the same newspaper on the 27th September, casting doubts on our assertions, and I replied to your letter in the Herald on the 4th October, challenging you on several points and asking you to clarify certain issues.

I have awaited your reply since that time. Unfortunately there has been none; I can only assume that you have never seen my letter.

Accordingly I attach it for your attention and would be extremely grateful if you could reply .

The main questions which SOS have are summarised below:

You state that-
“remaining in Knowle is not an option”
“the move is necessary”
“the Knowle buildings are not Fit For Purpose”
None of these statements is supported by any facts; they represent an EDDC predetermined view, to which any evidence is then related.

We challenge you to define” Fitness For Purpose” and then provide real measured evidence as to how the Knowle fails this definition.

You acknowledge that there will be significant job losses in Sidmouth, (90). The 20 jobs he sees as being created were in fact estimated to be created by the provision of a Care Home on the Knowle; which has now been abandoned by EDDC.
In the light of this, perhaps you can tell us where and what these new jobs will be; in any event they will hardly be an adequate replacement for high quality jobs in EDDC offices.

EDDC’s own figures state that local spend by EDDC employees is nearly £1m pa, and that £3.5 m pa accrues to the Sidmouth economy through competitive tendering. Sidmouth will certainly lose the former, and may well lose much of the later, because it will be geographically more remote and therefore costs will be higher.
Please will let us know how these economic losses to Sidmouth will be replaced?

Our detailed calculations, (by a professional) show that the existing “modern” offices, (built by EDDC in 1970 onwards), are nearly sufficient in area to satisfy their need. You dispute our figures.
Please provide the detailed calculation which supports your rejection of our figures.

We know that a 20% Design and Construction contingency has been incorporated, but the existence of Build and Occupation risks has been omitted from the Risk Table.
Perhaps you will say why EDDC are not considering publicly and proactively managing these risks through such a Table|?

Please will let us know why EDDC propose to relocate from the Knowle when their proposals are in direct contravention of Policy E3 in their new Local Plan, which states that “Permission will not be granted for the change of use of current or allocated employment land and premises where it would harm business and employment opportunities in the area”.

Regards

Richard Thurlow, Chair SOS’


by Leave a comment

Confidential briefing for Councillors regarding Knowle relocation

The briefing is scheduled for 4pm, this Wednesday, 30th October, at Knowle. It will not, of course, be open to the public. EDDC insists, however, that it is open and transparent about the Knowle relocation plans.

The SIN blog has more on this subject, at http://sidmouthindependentnews.wordpress.com Councillor collective amnesia (3 posts on 25th Oct )


by Leave a comment

Questions put to last night’s Full Council, by members of the public

The question from SOS Chair, referred to in our earlier post today, is published here in full, for your information:

“Chairman, thank you for allowing me to ask a question. I am the Chair of “Save Our Sidmouth” and also of the Sid Vale Conservation and Planning Committee.

About two weeks ago I received a copy of an email sent, in early October, by Cllr Diviani to about 100 people. The email was about budget cuts. In that email he said that

“The Ottery Councillor and her allies in the political opposition groups EDA / SOS are running campaigns which simply do not deal in the facts, invariably giving half a misinformed, (sic), story and making no useful or positive contribution to the debate”

I, on behalf of SOS, wrote to Cllr Diviani.

I explained that SOS is a totally non-political umbrella grouping of organisations in Sidmouth, including the Sid Vale Association, the Sidmouth Chamber of Commerce, the Sidmouth Hospitality Association, and other non political bodies. We have not and do not comment on political issues, nor on any possible budget cuts. All these issues are beyond our remit.

I explained that SOS do oppose certain proposals contained in the Local Plan and those which would desecrate the Knowle, but any comments and objections SOS makes are to the Council as the originating authority for these proposals. All SOS comments and objections, none of them “political”, are based on facts, not on “half a misinformed story”.

In view of this, and the fact that the email had been sent to a number of people, I asked for the withdrawal of his comments and allegations, that we are political in nature, do not deal in the facts, and that we are allies of Councillors.

Cllr Diviani in an email from EDDC, using his full Council credentials, (and many more!), refused to apologise, saying that he stood by his comments, and was entitled to his opinion.

Of course he is entitled to his opinions, and if he keeps them private to himself, then we have no objection. But it is a different matter when these are offensive in their implications and inappropriate from a man in his position and also not kept to himself but sent to over 100 other people.

Since Cllr Diviani has rejected our complaint, we have to pursue the issue more widely.

Consequently my questions to you, the Chairman are;-

• Do you approve of Cllr Diviani’s words and views as regards SOS?
• Do they represent the views of the EDDC?

If not, will you put the record straight?”