I CONTINUE to object to the proposals for development at the Pedlarspool site (Creedy Bridge) in the parish of Sandford because the objections raised by myself and many others, have not been satisfactorily addressed.

1. Housing numbers. The number 257 down from 326 still exceeds the number, 200, stated in the Local Plan Review. I realise this number has been achieved by lengthy negotiation between Gleeson’s and MDDC and this suggests to me that housing development, along with all the other requirements (rugby club, school, travellers site plus all S106 requests) on this site, is not financially viable. The LPR number is well considered. It sets boundaries to be observed and not breached. The land promoters, the landowners and the house builders all want to profit from this and cannot do so unless more houses can be built and sold on. It is a worry that such a tight fit will mean the cutting of corners at a later stage in terms of quality of design and materials to be used here. Three storey houses all packed in together are inappropriate to this location.

2. Road access to the Western end of Crediton (including Queen Elizabeth Academy) will be poor and unsafe. Pounds Hill and Stonewall Lane are single track roads, the former has a very steep gradient. There is not the space to widen these lanes to put in pavements or cycle-tracks to separate the “eco-friendly” users from the motorists. Passing bays will be wholly inadequate for the volume of two-way traffic in the immediate vicinity of the site.

3. Pedlarspool Lane closure will mean local through traffic including delivery vehicles and farm machinery such as muck spreaders, going through the new residential estate to access the Tiverton Road and beyond. This will be a nuisance for users and unpleasant and unsafe for the new residents.

4. Crediton Rugby Football Club. The club may well solve its capacity problems regarding the club-house and parking, but this will be no comfort when numbers of young players fall because their practice pitches are waterlogged during the playing season. It is of concern that even Sport England oppose this relocation because pitches are within Flood Zone 3.

5. Siting of the primary school. I thought any future school would do well to be next to the CRFC to make it possible to share car parking and some facilities. There seems no good reason to move it to the south of the site.

6. Gypsy and Traveller pitches. East Devon District Council has a Supplementary Planning Document about the site and layout of such pitches. Each one must have space for two trailers plus parking and amenity buildings. It would be interesting to know more detail of MDDC’s plans and how many people will be accommodated. Will this be a permanent or transit site?

7. The level of consultation that has taken place has been very poor. Although it is gratifying that documents relating to the application have been posted on the MDDC site, material concerns raised in the many cogent letters of objection are not being responded to. There is a total lack of dialogue. It is mystifying that MDDC and statutory consultees have made so little objection to such a major development on such an unsuitable site. The pressure to build houses has caused everyone to ignore considerations that would once have been vital.

Finally, this is not just “any old piece of land”. It is truly beautiful and a glorious part of Mid Devon and a massive enhancement to the setting of Crediton, and our listed parks. Development will cause inevitable and irreparable harm.

When our elected members and officers of the Council will not protect our countryside, it is left to residents, who are then always vulnerable to cheap accusations of “nimbyism”.

Name and address supplied