This session was a busy period, with lots of people making valuable comments. We tried our best to note who said what, but apologise if your contribution was not properly recorded or attributed. Send any corrections to the SOS Web Master, David Mitchell,
John Walker: the whole essence of previous 1996 plan was agreed upon and voted through. This included the park, the view across to the park and hills from the centre, symmetrical layout of gardens from the Civic Hall outwards into the site, the rest of development around landscaped. The 1996 plan was first class. This current plan is botched.
Michael Rose: this plan is against basic environmental principles of design, light and space. Few of the houses have a south orientation (so solar gain is minimal, which has energy implications). Is there a reason why Savills are not present? (SOS said not invited) Why were local architects not consulted instead? How much did Savills' consultancy cost? (Stephen Munday said he didn't know)
Questions about funding - Millennium funding raised- what options do we have now?
Peter Sutton (Local Architect): I've been impressed with the openness of SHDC lately, but I think that this time they got thinks badly wrong. I think that SHDC asked wrong questions to start with- Savills were given the wrong remit. The major focus was on how to make the most money from scheme and as a result went for more and more houses. What are the requirements of the proposal? If the council wants affordable housing the way to do it is through housing associations and CABE (Council for Architecture and the Built Environment). If we (Harrison Sutton Partnership) submitted a plan with so many flaws, SHDC would insist we withdraw it rather than try to patch it up. That's what SHDC should do - withdraw the application and produce a better one.
Why no public consultation? Why don’t we buy it ourselves and make what we want?
Why not park and ride instead of congestion in town centre? We should encourage green transport. Plan as it is will bring in more traffic flow, more CO2- all around the Grove School.
Christopher Titmuss: Careful, because SHDC can override town council. SOS will need to keep momentum going. I suggests that SHDC goes to the Leechwell for some healing!
Mr Slatter (Totnes Town Councillor): I'm a Totnes man born and bred! The old plan was perfect, this new plan is cash driven. At present we can look out over the countryside from town, all that will be lost. People power is the way to stop the plan!
Where is the infrastructure for this plan coming from. At the moment there isn't even enough schools, hospitals and burial grounds to cope.
Lady from Heath Court: I am a local person living at Heath Court. Already the carbon monoxide at Heath Court is terrible in summer. This will increase with more traffic and a multi-storey car park. If the school is moved this will involve more car journeys to take children to the new school.
The need for green and open space cannot be ignored. We need to open up the space around the Civic Hall. The Bungalow garden would make a wonderful World Peace Garden. That space needs to be sacred.
The bypass was intended to take traffic away for High Street and Fore Street. This plan will make it worse.
I used to live in Glastonbury. They would never sell the abbey grounds for building, this is a similar sacrilege
I want to know what is the real need for housing in this area? (Housing Officer AF said: 66% of housing will be affordable (including Heath Court. 75% people on the housing list are from the local area. Enormous need for affordable housing).
What are the Government figures for numbers of houses needed in this area? (AF: declined to answer)
Noni: why are there more houses in the 2003 plan than in the 2002 Local Plan? (no reply)
Resident of 20 years: Every nook and cranny in Totnes is being taken for housing. Why can't people be housed at Dartington where they have gardens?
What about tackling second home ownership? Most of my neighbours in Leechwell Lane only use their houses for a few weeks a year.
What about housing for people in public services (so people not in area can be attracted here?)
Lib Dem Candidate: I would hate to see an opportunity missed. Why can't such an important decision be taken by Totnes, not South Hams District Council. People power will make this happen.
There is NO mention in these plans of low impact and sustainable housing. Let's be a leading light in these areas.
Local Architect: Grove school is moving to the KEVICS site. I had a meeting with a planning officer who said that this plan is cash-driven. Once they get the outline application through then they will get a housing association plus one developer in to do it. At least 2 million pounds of the total spent on the development would go outside the area (in the form of profits etc) and it won't come back to Totnes.
The only way to get anywhere is to take control back, and not let it go to a sole developer.
First we need to formally object to the plan. Secondly we could do it (design and build) it ourselves. There are lots of local architects.
DO NOT LET THE PLANNERS DO IT TO US!
Paul: We need to influence the planning committee. We will put their names on the SOS web-site (see here). I suggest that as SHDC supports Park-and-Ride schemes that we should build housing at Follaton House and the council can walk to work.
Can we be given a guarantee that social housing cannot be sold on?
Someone spoke to Alan Robinson (chief planner) who said - 'the only way that this plan can go ahead is if we sell to one developer. A great chunk of Totnes will be sold to a developer and the developer will decide what Totnes will get as a detailed plan'
This will achieve what THEY - SHDC - want not what WE want.
What other town has no public park? In Totnes the only place children can play ball is in churchyard and the Market Square
Pruw Boswell: The public needs to target the officers and the councillors at SHDC, not just those on the Development Control Committee.