What people said about the Local Plan review 2017
David Pugsley (Independent Candidate standing for Devon County Council) -
'I am a NIMBY. I do not want a garden village in my back yard. It is a silly idea to dump a whole new village on a greenfield site many miles from any work the new residents can find. So much for the principle.
I am also opposed on practical grounds. I have no confidence that those who took so many bad decisions about the roads in and around Cullompton in the last four years will take better decisions in future. In particular I have no confidence that enough infrastructure will follow further development. It has not followed the extensive development on the west side of Cullompton. The County council is short of money, and is unlikely to have more in the foreseeable future.
I have never had a vote on this development, but if I had I would have spoken and voted against; and if I have the opportunity in future I shall speak and vote against.'
The traffic is a nightmare already and the hills run with water when it rains and pours down the hill. No thanks to more housing. Let's work on the centre of the town and the schools first rather than line the pockets of building companies.
The area already struggles and suffers from high flooding, building 2000 odd houses on a flood plain just does not make sense. Over the past few years the flooding in the area has gotten worse. I have also been made aware that the study and justification regarding this has been made based on data from 2008 rather than the more recent and surely relevant data from 2012. How can this plan not make things even worse than they are already getting?
Schools are already at bursting point as are health facilities. Whilst the above may not be the direct responsibility of the Council it IS the responsibility of the Council to ensure these issues are resolved BEFORE any building begins.
My main concern is the fact that this plan will literarily double the size of Cullompton, putting inevitable and unavoidable strain on already limited facilities, stretched services and insufficient infrastructure.
At the moment Cullompton has at least two major problems: traffic and flooding. The traffic problem is exacerbated by the closure of Tiverton Road next to the Manor House, but it was bad enough before, with congestion in Fore Street and tailbacks to Station Road and the motorway. It shows the vulnerability of the present road network to a single blockage. For more than 30 years Cullompton has called for an eastern relief road and/or another motorway access point, perhaps at Little Copse. No money has been forthcoming for the former, and we have been told repeatedly that the latter is unacceptable on grounds of road safety.
Not long ago there was a serious flood in the houses in the Duke Street area of Cullompton, historically and more appropriately known as Duck Street, next to Frogpool Meadows. This has always been wet land. The flood was a striking example of the fallibility of modern flood risk assessments. Those houses now have the benefit of a flood protection scheme. But that scheme does not reduce the quantity of flood water; it merely directs it elsewhere, causing problems for other people.
It is clear that Cullompton is already suffering from an infrastructure deficit.