C B HAMPSON, of Greenhill Road, Kingskerswell, writes:

Adrian Sanders MP criticises Gordon Hook's view of development in the future. Perhaps before the term 'cosying up' is completely dismissed we should look at the July meeting of the Torbay Business Forum with representatives from Devon County Council, Cavanna Homes, Herald Express and the rest of the good and the great whom collectively support the SDLR and the business case for massive development in the region....very cosy indeed!

Devon's final bid to the DfT for funding, inextricably linked the requirement to develop, develop, develop, in conjunction with the building of the SDLR.

For Mr Saunders to argue: "whether it leads to housing developments nearby is entirely up to local democratically elected councillors, whose right indeed duty would be to listen to the public" is laughable, as they virtually all support the road, they also support Devon's bid to build, build, build locally to pay for the road. Those in opposition to the bypass have not been listened to so far, why will this change now? Devon's final submission for funding overrides any possible debate as they have told the Government that development will take place.

I can't help but think our MPs operate in their own bubble, completely detached from the real world. Despite Mr Sanders referring to the security of the National Planning Policy Framework giving local communities more, not less power, lets take a look at reality.

The SDLR is promoted by Devon and Torbay Councils but actually its route falls mostly in Teignbridge District Council area, Local people were told before and at the public inquiry that the road was unconnected with new housing, development or infill, but in fact this was not true. Adrian Sanders needs to read the bid alongside the public inquiry notes to understand why the community is so angry. The Inspector at the inquiry was also misled by Devon's statements.

In the draft Community plan for Kingskerswell, Teignbridge planning dept and the Parish Council confidently claim that the infrastructure levy and the homes bonus will be returned to the village community to fund local projects for the community. This is contrary to claims by DCC who say that revenue will in fact pay for their contribution to the road. The SDLR is now totally linked with land and development beyond the footprint of the road, it is destined to eat up scarce developer and Housing Bonus contributions, but as I write this there is currently no LDF in Teignbridge. The SDLR Exhibition contained a number of inaccuracies which were referred back to Devon. They have failed to respond. They insisted that the exhibition was not 'consultation' but used 'feedback' to claim massive support, which is questionable, but still avoided a number of important facts about the impact of the scheme. It did not give people the full picture especially regarding cost to the taxpayer, development, or provision of on cost and environmental impacts.

These SDLR Exhibitions contained much misleading text, and were not frank on the subjects of traffic induction and growth. It failed completely to explain where local money would come from in terms of how many houses would need to be constructed to finance the road, where, and whether the infrastructure delivery for other necessary transport and community needs in the area would be compromised.

Development plans should ensure that development is pursued in an integrated manner, in line with the principles for sustainable development.'

And that 'Community involvement is an essential element in delivering sustainable

development and creating sustainable and safe communities. In developing the

vision for their areas, planning authorities should ensure that communities are

able to contribute to ideas about how that vision can be achieved, have the

opportunity to participate in the process of drawing up the vision, strategy and

specific plan policies, and to be involved in development proposals'.

There has been no participation, in the development bid, by either the community or opposition groups. The above guidance is not being followed because of the enormous and overriding influence of the SDLR.

As a large project that now is to be funded in part by local development/building well beyond the requirement normally expected for a village or corridor of this size. This process has ensured public opinion has to be excluded from the decision making group especially on the overall size of investment in terms of property. Commercial inward investment in this region will never match the proposed numbers of homes envisaged.

No Infrastructure Delivery Plan has been prepared in partnership with the local

communities, and certainly the question of whether large sums should go to road construction has not been put before these communities whom have been told to accept enormous cuts in services by DCC.

The strengths of Torbay are indeed its beauty and its coastal location. The countryside would be completely altered by the dual carriageway. The environmental impact of the road is far greater than the proven benefits of its construction.

When and if the congestion is relieved, then, 10 years (or more) of traffic growth will suddenly appear in this corridor.  This massive traffic induction cannot mean that there is a net carbon benefit from the scheme, as claimed, but quite the reverse.   That needs to be explained (Devon have not done this). A perceived faster road will surely encourage out-commuting to Exeter, with no assurance of inward investment.

This scheme is very likely to be orientated on high carbon modes of transport. The road has been demonstrated to increase traffic widely in the area on many key routes when these local roads are already over burdened. Congestion will simply build up elsewhere, ie; it be displaced to other junctions and roundabouts. This has not been adequately dealt with by DCC.

Serious concern exists over the very serious effects on these urban routes into Newton Abbot and Torbay. DCC fails to seriously address this issue of:-

1 Increased congestion in Newton Abbot central area

2 Increased congestion on A380 through Paignton including Hamelin Way

3 Increased congestion on A3022 through Churston and on towards Brixham

4 Increased congestion on A3022 running into Torquay – Riviera Way and the Newton Road, also the Totnes and Torbay Roads, Moles Lane where it comes into Hamelin Way, the B3199 running through Torquay (Babbacombe Road)

Many of these roads are already experiencing standing traffic at peak times with substantial queues as Illustrated in Google Maps screen-shots. The idea of inducing traffic onto an already congested road network seems very counterproductive in every way.

The Exhibitions did not make any of this clear or that other roads would also accrue so much more traffic away from the bypass and the village.

It is very difficult to see how a scheme predicated on rapid traffic growth can deliver improvements in the quality of life, attractiveness and sustainability of this area. The 70+ mature, established trees and large stretches of hedgerows which will be destroyed have been completely overlooked. Many properties will be affected by the proximity of the road, the increase in noise, vibration and the detrimental change in their air quality. The focus has only been on some properties on the existing route benefiting by shifting the traffic flow elsewhere. DCC have relied strongly on support from that element of the community. They have been dismissive of the concerns expressed by those affected by the new scheme, despite alarming figures showing detriment.

In Kingskerwell, perhaps as many as 350 houses, currently with below 50

decibels of background noise – essentially, tranquillity – will experience over 10 Db

more noise which means double the power (the decibel scale is logarithmic). The

imposition of 60-65 decibels would mean that continuous noise of traffic to the point

that you would be aware of it much of the time both outside and indoors. The visual intrusion is one thing, but the noise – a roar of traffic day and night – is quite another.

This is not trivial!

Devon County and their consultants make a number of claims about the value of the

scheme in bringing jobs to the Torbay area. However there is little or no substantive

evidence to say that a small section of new road will really bring the jobs. Experience points to the contrary. Businesses leaving the South West (eg: Okehampton) often leave to relocate because of the geographical issues (distance) from suppliers, customers, raw materials and skilled labour market. These companies have no quarrel with the road infrastructure. They also frequently outgrow their current location. (Not an unusual feature of marketing success.) Excessive business rates can be a contributory factor (a common problem in the South West) DCC speaks about the 'potential' benefits emanating from the construction of a bypass: there is no indication/figures or commercial confirmation of actual growth, therefore it is not a secure enough justification to spend £138m+ of public money, and place the local community in debt for years to come.

This scheme is effectively unaffordable by the Three Councils (yes that now includes Teignbridge DC now contributing £500k (and again no public consultation) The likely over run in terms of cost seems to be estimated between 7%~15%. DCC refuse to answer questions about their assessment of meeting that further cost. Surely this is not acceptable behaviour.....demonstrating a cavalier attitude? They have told the government; 'The councils will underwrite the balance of the third party contributions' This is virtually impossible to estimate let alone guarantee, most likely leading to borrowing in future years and increased council tax for local residents to find. If the scheme is funded by the Transport Secretary it will inevitably lead to borrowing by the promoters. This seems very wrong given the Coalition's view on reducing debt, the current financial climate, and the lack of consultation.

There has been no attempt to resolve traffic issues at Penn Inn or on the existing route. Many suggestions have been brought forward from road users to attempt to alleviate congestion with local traffic management measures. Why is there a reluctance to tackle the A380 through Kingskerswell with local traffic management? Why is there no reference to the large sums spent on the Halcrow Fox report, commissioned by DCC but completely ignored? (It suggested some traffic management changes but these too were not followed up) We are all aware that any improvements to the existing A380 would negate the argument for a bypass and subsequently not release so much land for development or building on.

The 2009 public inquiry sought to resolve issues linked to the CPO's required to deliver this project. More questions emerged than answers, but an overriding anxiety by the community was that of future development given the locality, the area of outstanding natural countryside and the special regional factors connected to Devon. It was assumed that this was resolved by a resounding 'no development' from the scheme's promoter in their rebuttal at that Inquiry. (Mr Saunders have you read the public inquiry notes? Have indeed the local councillors?)

A return to an inquiry is a key factor that needs addressing urgently, however that aside, it is the view of many local people that there are not enough 'green lights' within this bid to value its case alongside other major transport bids from UK cities. Some commuters in various parts of the UK would be astounded to see this bid even given consideration based on the current (limited) road congestion on the A380 which is slow only at peak times, and then delays reach approx five~11minutess.

Perhaps the funds currently outlined by DCC to contribute to the bypass should be spent on improvements to the public transport infrastructure and improved integrated methods of local transport in the wider region. Kingskerswell Rail station/link should be reopened. (It's not even in the LTP at present) Rural public transport is a major issue in Devon, they seem to have ignored the public need and clearly got their priorities wrong, recently they cut rural bus services, school transport and many other local provisions......all to be able to 'save' money in the budget, only to then announce their increased spending plans for the bypass. Not by any measure good economics. Is Devon saving more or spending more? Anyone like to explain?

Devon County Council should urgently focus on local traffic management issues, on the existing route. This would require monitoring. There are still many issues remain. ~ So more transparency please, but don't insult the intelligence of the community by suggesting that our councillors might decide against development on an such a monumental scale! The decision has been made!: