Ev o lu tio n o f the Plan All the parties who collaborated at the DSP

Most of the key participants agreed that policy and design principles should drive forward
a solution rather than considerations of land
ownership.
TPF promoted ‘walkable neighbourhoods’
as fundamental to the creation of sustainable
communities, where the majority of daily needs
are available within an approximate 400metre
walkable distance of every home. See Figure 2.
Evolution of the Plan
All the parties who collaborated at the DSP
EiP stage made presentations to the EbD. From
these the following key themes emerged:
• Sherford should constitute an exemplar
sustainable community
• Sherford should function as a gateway into
Plymouth
• Sherford should be seen as an urban extension, not a stand-alone development and
should be able to accommodate growth beyond 2016
• urban form should respect the natural topography of the site
• the development should accommodate a
sizeable element of communal open space
that would also serve a role in structurally
defining an absolute eastern growth boundary for Plymouth
• Sherford should deliver a quality public
transport system, improving both local
connectivity and also routes to and from
Plymouth, all aimed at maximising non-car
use
• in association, early construction of a road
link from Deep Lane to the A379 was required
• Sherford should provide new and accessible
employment opportunities for existing and
future residents
• Sherford should deliver a range of affordable housing opportunities
• facilities and opportunities at Sherford
should enhance, where possible, and certainly not undermine existing communities
• Sherford should deliver appropriate community facilities, including schools, shopping, leisure, cultural and health services.
These should be well integrated within the
development and delivered as early as possible
This theme was strongly endorsed by the EbD
participants.
Figure 2
Walkable Neighbourhood
(ODPM)
The consensus opinion was that the new community at Sherford should embody the following:
• accessibility to most daily needs within 5
minutes (400 metres) walking distance of
each home
• a compact pedestrian-friendly urban form
and street network, with its own ‘heart’, providing a focus for community life
• a variety of dwelling types, prices and tenures to accommodate a traditional mixed
community
• properly mixed-use, including commercial
and employment uses that may be clustered
towards neighbourhood hearts but may not
be zoned in single-use car dependent locations
• interconnected public streets, squares,
greens and parks providing continuous and
varied public realm, overlooked by buildings providing natural surveillance from
those living and working inside
• clear distinction between public and private
spaces, particularly within residential areas,
in order to facilitate the essential balance
between community and need for privacy
109
•
•
•
public transport that links neighbourhood
centres thereby maximising accessibility
streets designed to suppress excessive vehicle speeds and which are environments
where pedestrians and cyclists have equal
status
a variety of open spaces distributed within
and between neighbourhoods at a scale in
keeping with the essentially urban character of the development
TPF tabled a Pattern Book illustrating the rich
and diverse patterns and styles of development
local to Sherford, to help establish what is really
meant by local character or vernacular.
The Pattern Book can be viewed online at
www.redtreellp.com.
The July EbD 3-day event divided the assembled gathering of 70 plus into six groups. Each
group was challenged to determine how Sherford could be laid out. Each group came up with
slightly varied solutions; however common to
each proposition was a compact urban form
immediately south of A38.
Figures 3 and 4 show examples of the groups’
output, illustrating an urban form, based very
clearly on the walkable neighbourhood diagram. Initial outcomes also contemplated development on the ‘Elburton edge’ and possible
expansion to the north-west beyond 2016.
Figures 3 and 4
Examples of the Groups’
Output at the End of
Day 2.
110
Evolution of the Plan
This drafting exercise drew attention to the need
to resolve one very important issue. A good part
of Sherford north of Sherford Road and east of
Brixton Road was defined as a ‘Mineral Reserve
Area’ where the DSP deemed it necessary to
conserve the underlying minerals.
Negotiations involving the mineral company,
Aggregate Industries (AI), Devon, Plymouth
and South Hams Councils concluded that the
‘mineral resource’, as defined by the DSP, compromised the ability of Sherford to achieve the
ideal orientation and compact urban form, together with necessary community, transport
and physical connectivity with the existing urban areas of Elburton and Plymstock.
A solution was agreed with all parties that
meant that in the long term no mineral potential was lost. Instead of progressing with two
long-term quarry sites east and west of Vinery
Lane, the mineral company agreed to the alternative of a larger and more efficient extension
to Hazeldene Quarry.
At the end of Day 3, 9th July, TPF presented the
emerging vision for Sherford at a public meeting held at the Plymouth Guildhall.
The plan was based on three neighbourhoods in
a ‘tri-bell’ structure, aligned between Deep Lane
Junction and Elburton, with the valley bottom
as the natural eastern boundary to urban development and with land on the eastern side of the
valley serving as a Community Park. In strate-
This information was presented and reviewed
at a one day workshop on 13th September and
provided important inputs into the further,
more refined, design exercise scheduled for 4-6
October.
The EbD Briefing Report can be viewed online
at www.redtreellp.com.
By the end of day two of the October session,
TPF and the local planning authorities of South
Hams and Plymouth agreed that a baseline position had very clearly emerged for the shape
and form of Sherford and importantly that the
masterplan would not include any development
at Chittleburn, fronting the A379 between Brixton and Elburton.
Most of the area promoted by the Plymouth and
South West Co-operative Society lay in a separate valley configuration and well to the south
and east of the urban/rural edge that had been
agreed as a key fix. The solution offered by the
Co-Op lacked support beyond the immediate
The EbD process was now able to focus on the
tri-bell concept defined in July. Progress on the
technical and design issues consolidated confidence in the robustness of the plan and led to
the explicit agreement of the key fixes which
survive into the masterplan at the heart of this
application.
Since 2004 the scheme has been fine tuned. Detailed responses have been secured in response
to technical testing and continuing open discussion with the EbD participants. The essential
shape and form, eastern edge and the underlying principles of walkability and mixed-use, a
Main Street to accommodate the heart of the
development in retail, community and education terms, together with the public transport
corridor remain undiluted.
Evolution of the Plan
Before the EbD process reconvened in October
2004, all participants agreed there was need to
assemble detailed technical information which
would inform the continuing evolution of the
design. This included information related to:
• public utilities and services, including diversions
• mineral related constraints and opportunities
• community facilities, including education,
youth, sport and recreation requirements,
together with initial information on triggers
• potential transport links between the A38
to the A379
• greenspace and open space requirements;
• outline drainage strategy/surface water
drainage issues
• commercial and retail dynamics
• affordable housing options
land interests that it served and varied considerably from the consensus position adopted by
all the public authorities and EbD participants.
gic terms the local planning authorities agreed
that this was a coherent and workable solution,
particularly when examined in parallel with existing urban areas to the north and south, the
wider context of Plymouth and the desire lines
towards Plymouth City Centre.
At the end of the October 2004 session several
important issues remained to be settled:
• Firstly, the options for the ‘A379 link’. Should
the Main Street from Sherford to A379 pass
to the north or south of Elburton? Alan
Baxter Associates working alongside TPF
strongly advised on fundamental strategic
grounds that a route north of Elburton was
preferred
• Secondly, land assembly. The EbD had not
been influenced by land ownership interests. By the end of 2004 Red Tree now had
the responsibility to assemble the increments of land that had been drawn in by
design. This included the land owned by
Aggregate Industries
The EbD, now complete, had delivered consensus between the two local planning authorities,
South Hams and Plymouth and had received
the endorsement of Devon County Council as
strategic planning authority, highway and mineral planning authority.
SHDC also reached an important milestone in
its own planning vision for Sherford. No longer
did it consider a solution involving four separate villages, as expressed in the First Deposit
Draft Local Plan Review of January 2002, ap-
111
Figure 5
Sherford Masterplan
as a Result of the EbD,
October 2004.
112
propriate or tenable. SHDC embraced the TPF
proposition that concentrated urban development based on inter-locking walkable neighbourhoods that would deliver wide-ranging
community and design benefits. Furthermore
SHDC resolved that the EbD outcome, whilst
it needed further testing, should only be materially changed if it were shown to require such
changes on technical grounds.
either north or south of Elburton to make the
connection to A379. Development would be
phased south west on the Main Street alignment and ‘backfill’ towards the north-west corner, where it was agreed that long-term growth
north of a Greater Hazeldene Quarry may extend the development beyond the plan period
post 2016. See Figure 6 for the initial phasing
plan.
The October 2004 proposition for Sherford (see
Figure 5) profiled an urban footprint with the
potential to yield approximately 4,500 to 5,000
dwellings, with development commencing in
the northeast, close to Deep Lane. A Main Street
delivering public transport and a retail heart in
the north east neighbourhood would extend
This had the joint benefit of protecting long
term mineral resource and of identifying the
direction of any future expansion. At this stage
the outline masterplan anticipated that some
mineral activity, longer term, would extend up
to 400 meters east of Vinery Lane.
Evolution of the Plan
Evolution of the Plan
Figure 6
Initial Phasing Plan,
October 2004
Testing
Over the period 2005/6, the EbD outline masterplan has been subject to testing and refinement. A number of factors emerged which adjusted the initial EbD proposition:
• Aggregate Industries (AI) reached the conclusion that Greater Hazeldene entirely west
of Vinery Lane could deliver, long term, the
amount of mineral anticipated by the preSherford reserves. As a consequence AI
was prepared to release all of its land east of
Vinery Lane
• Sherford Quarry could not be redeveloped
as initially anticipated. Evidence of bats and
the desire to maximise the opportunity of
this extraordinary feature led to agreement
to retain and enhance its existing form
• More detailed engineering and topographical analysis of the Main Street route
concluded that it would ideally be shifted
northwards in order, more sympathetically,
to respond to the landscape and avoid aggressive engineering solutions (cut and fill)
• This solution corresponded with the need
to avoid the Quarry and engaged more ef-
•
•
•
•
fectively with the opportunity made available by the addition of the AI land
A more northerly route also had the benefit
of providing a spine centred through the
development, enabling parallel distribution
of traffic on secondary routes and localised
permeability
This more northerly alignment also improved the ‘desire-line’ from Deep Lane towards the city and also to the need to reserve
a longer-term access route to the northwest
expansion land
This triggered debate resulting in agreement
that the ‘town centre’ should shift from the
north east neighbourhood close to Deep
Lane towards the central neighbourhood.
This single adjustment had significant implications for the overall phasing assumptions.
The South Hams and West Devon Primary
Care NHS Trust (PCT) signalled their desire to include within Sherford a new local
Health and Social Care Centre. As this facility was required to serve Sherford and the
western South Hams, the PCT was originally pre-disposed towards a location close to
113
Deep Lane. However negotiations with the
PCT concluded that the facility would be
better located in a more central location.
Technical Appraisal
A follow-up three-day technical workshop was
held at Kitley House on 25-27 April 2005. TPF
continued to facilitate discussions involving officials representing the public authorities, local
community representatives and a wide body of
experts instructed by Red Tree.
This workshop continued to embrace the principles of EbD. Issues were identified and consensus was achieved through discussion, technical examination and drawn proposition.
Support was wide-ranging for South Hams District Council’s determination that the following
were absolute principles which could not be
compromised:
• the principles of walkability
• the valley bottom definition of the eastern
margin
Site Visit to Sherford
Quarry
Accommodating the opportunities and constraints identified since the 2004 EbD sessions,
the need to create Sustainable Urban Drainage
Solutions (SUDS) across the site, overlaid by the
need for better integration of green spaces and
opportunities for wildlife to move freely within
the development, led to an updated ‘open space’
solution. As issues demanded, multiple site visits were made, with wide participation from all
those who took an interest in the subject field.
Further examination of the Main Street focussed
on how to keep it functioning as a vital artery for
public transport and cars whilst retaining its role
as public space for pedestrians and cyclists.
The issue of the ‘power corridor’, along which the
132kv overhead lines and the strategic gas main
run, was also resolved in more detail. Its new
route was confirmed around the northern edge
of development. The visual and perceived benefit
of removing the pylons and the release of development land were considered to more than offset
the cost burden of diversion.
Over the next day more detailed discussions on
the urban edge treatment, including the quarry
boundary and the location of key facilities such
as schools and playing fields took place. This involved detailed specification and phasing discussions with service providers, again informed by
site visits.
The output from the April workshop represented,
not a new solution, but an organic masterplan evolution. The scheme footprint now included the
extra AI land, increasing the yield to an estimated 5,500 dwellings; the Main Street was located
in an alignment north of Sherford Quarry; the
town centre and revised phasing were emerging
at the heart of the town; urban development better integrated with open space and a ‘deformed
grid’ of permeable streets provided the opportunity for future residents to access their daily
needs within walkable neighbourhoods.
The Consolidation Plan, dated 27th April 2005
is the output of this evolution of the scheme and
was published by SHDC as part of the Sherford
AAP Preferred Options Stage in June 2005. See
Figure 7.
114
Evolution of the Plan
Evolution of the Plan
Working in Consensus
Red Tree is very pleased to have participated
from the outset in a very open, consensual dialogue with the key public authorities and local
community representatives.
The endorsement of Sherford by the DSP EiP
Panel and its acceptance by the DSP authorities,
led to the establishment of the Sherford Strategic Steering Group (SSSG) in 2003 and other
specialist working groups (for example Movement, Housing, Design and Masterplanning,
Information Communication and Technology,
Sustainability, Sports and Recreation), all aimed
at determining a deliverable and sustainable solution for Sherford. See Figure 8.
Since then the SSSG has met on a monthly basis
(as have most specialist sub-groups) with officers representing the three local planning authorities and the Highways Agency. The broad
objective is to deliver the development at Sherford within planning policy and timeline. This
would be done by creating not only the joint
structure to lead and co-ordinate the management of the process but also the forum to resolve issues.
Figure 7
Sherford Masterplan,
April 2005.
Under the umbrella of SSSG, local planning
authority officers and Red Tree have invested
considerable time and effort in holding detailed
workshops aimed at investigating opportunities
and determining solutions relating to:
• open space and landscape
• movement issues (including the detailed
specification and character of the main
street)
• sustainability (including movement, energy,
water and waste)
• affordable housing
• education and health provision
• sports and recreation
• youth matters
• community governance
• information technology requirements
• masterplan design and design coding (including review sessions with CABE)
• Elburton Edge
• general Town Plan design updates
115
Most unusually Red Tree has also participated
jointly with Devon County, South Hams and
Plymouth Councils in meeting service providers in order to openly debate the profile of
community and infrastructural demands and
to review associated delivery matters such as
phasing, capital funding, management and
how these would be handled under the mechanism of a Section 106 Agreement. At the outset
it was accepted that it may not be possible to
accommodate the entire ‘wish-list’, but all parties, applicant and local planning authorities,
subscribed to the same ambition: to engage in
full, early and transparent discussions weighing
the relative priority of demands on the development.
SHDC has submitted its AAP. This constitutes
a very detailed description and specification for
Sherford.
The success of the proposals within the AAP
and those in this subsequent planning application will rely on confidence also in their deliverability. Cooperation and collaboration, past,
present and ongoing underwrites that confidence.
Figure 8
Sherford Coordination
Structure
116
Evolution of the Plan
Community Participation
Arising from the first EbD session in July 2004
it became apparent to Red Tree that considerable opportunity existed in creating a formal
connection with local community groups and
associations.
Red Tree understands that development, in itself, is not sustainable; it is the future residents’
sense of place, of community and their involvement in it and the relations with the neighbouring communities that ensures the enduring
nature of development. Equally, consultation is
not just about ticking a planning box for future
development, but is a meaningful engagement
with the people who live in the surrounding
areas. It is not just because they are the ones
who may be most affected by the outcomes; it
is also because they are the communities that
will inter-relate with future residents. They
are therefore most likely to best know how to
prepare, from inception, the management and
social structures of that community. They may
also become residents of the new community
themselves.
This belief led to the establishment of the Sherford Community Steering Group (CSG), not
only as the appropriate forum for discussion,
but also as likely key representation on the proposed ‘Community Trust’. Figure 8 shows the
Sherford coordination structure.
By the time of the next meeting, on 28th January 2005, participation had been extended to
include three groups representing the communities north of the A38:
• Plympton St Maurice Civic Association
• Plympton Community Council
• Chaddlewood Farm Community Association
Not all of the representatives agreed with all of
the proposals; indeed many were diametrically
opposed to development. Nonetheless the involvement of this group has led to local communities being better informed on the design
process and the reasons for the evolution of the
proposals.
The group has sensitised Red Tree to local issues, has reciprocally acted as a sounding board
for emerging proposals and has driven many
key changes and considerations into the designs. Gary Streeter, as Chairman, has played
an important part in stimulating wide-ranging,
penetrating and robust debate.
In a public forum on the 18th November 2005,
Gary Streeter acknowledged that he originally
did not favour the proposal but had become
convinced that a new community, in the hands
of Red Tree, could become a valuable and
worthwhile example of urban development and
community building.
In this regard it is also important to note that
both Brixton Parish Council and SHARD’s positions have also changed dramatically.
Similarly SHARD was set up, as the name
makes clear, explicitly to resist new community
propositions in the western South Hams. Its
initial focus was Lee Mill but when that prospect waned, following the Structure Plan EiP in
2003, it increasingly focussed upon defeating
the Sherford initiative.
SHARD’s Chairman, Steve Melia, has engaged
vigorously with Sherford through the extended
EbD process, the CSG and directly with Red
Tree. From an original position where he was
aggressively opposed to any development he
and his group now understand Sherford and the
philosophy promoted by Red Tree. Steve Melia,
also provides a valuable contribution particularly with regards to sustainable transport and
cycling. In ‘Planning’ magazine, 7 July 2006, in
an article describing the importance of community involvement in the planning process across
the UK, Steve Melia expressed how he had been
surprised to be invited into the design and planning process, normally perceived to take place
“behind closed doors in smoke filled rooms” and
in “the corridors of power”. The article states:
Evolution of the Plan
Gary Streeter, MP accepted the invitation to
become Chairman and South Hams and Plymouth Councils were invited to participate. The
inaugural meeting took place on 5th November
2004 at the beautiful Georgian house on Elliot
Terrace in Plymouth gifted to PCC by Lady Astor.
In July 2006, the Parish Council, informed the
South Hams Core Strategy Examination that it
originally objected strongly to Sherford. It now
appreciates that it will take place. Moreover,
rather than merely resigning itself to the inevitability of development, the Council, through
its engagement in the design process, at EbD
and the CSG has, for the most part, become an
enthusiastic supporter of the project.
Initial CSG members were:
• Brixton Parish Council
• South Hams Against Rural Destruction
(SHARD)
• Elburton Residents Association
• Plymstock Forum
“Melia admits that the original SHDC proposals
for 4 villages did not respond to all the concerns
raised by the community, but many people recognise that improvements have been made. Most
importantly, the local population knows that it
has a voice in the ongoing process.”
As importantly, it has been recognised that Red
Tree’s motivation is not merely tokenism and
that the process has had efficacy; voices have
been heard and meaningful improvement have
been made to Red Tree’s proposals as a result.
Steve Melia admits that a more appropriate solution emerged and that “Sherford is being designed as a sustainable urban settlement with
local centres and services”.
117
Sadly the community representatives north of
A38 withdrew from CSG in July 2006, citing the
view that their preference has always been for
Sherford to be located further to the south. It is
their view that the urban form is too close to the
A38 and the existing communities. The three
groups wished to object to the SHDC AAP and
therefore felt unable to continue with the membership of CSG.
Public Consultation
On Red Tree’s behalf, TPF organised an all-day
public exhibition in Plymstock on November
18th 2005. This was followed by a public meeting held in the evening at Plymstock School.
The exhibition was held to expressly engage
with and inform the local community of emerging plans for Sherford and to hear and track responses. The exhibition was publicised through
local radio and other media, by CSG members
and through reply card mail-drops. Issues raised
before and afterwards were registered through
the reply cards, e-mail, letter and web-site.
For details of the responses please refer to:
www.redtreellp.com
The exhibition explained the following:
• background context; the structure plan and
need for housing
• long-term growth and need for eastern
boundary
• principle of working together
• sustainability and what it means
• walkable neighbourhoods; access to daily
needs
• the role of a town centre
• how green spaces will work at Sherford
• the role of the community park
• traffic and transportation in and around
Sherford
• the Elburton edge
• how Sherford will be phased and grow
• creating local character and identity
• what Sherford will provide
To view the exhibition boards go to:
www.redtreellp.com
118
Evolution of the Plan
The exhibition and public meeting were very
well attended. Over 500 people visited the exhibition held in the Staddiscombe Community
Centre and over 300 people attended the public
meeting in the evening. Gary Streeter MP, acted
as chairman.
Keen interest was expressed in the overall design and sustainable philosophy and considerable support was shown for the type of development anticipated. The principal concerns
expressed were:
• the need for the development
• traffic impact on local roads
• foul water treatment
• the amount of affordable housing required
• impact on King George V playing fields
The response to these issues is expressed in detail within the appropriate strategies.
Young People’s Planning Day
This is another example of the effectiveness
of the joint workings of planning authorities,
developer and local community and interest
groups. This was an initiative stimulated by
Devon County, adopted and hosted by Red
Tree, led by Youth Work in Devon, promoted
by CSG members and fully supported by SHDC
and PCC.
The ambitions, event, outputs and future plans
are recorded in the paper ‘The Sherford Young
People’s Planning Day – 19th April 2006’
This can be viewed at www.redtreellp.com.
In summary the initiative was aimed at gaining
“young people’s ideas on how Sherford should be
developed, the facilities and services it should provide and how they should be tailored to meet the
needs of the young people and how young people
would wish to be involved in its planning, design,
governance, management and delivery”
One attendee said:
“Interesting in finding out about Sherford as I
didn’t know much before and I thought it was
great that there were adults there who took all
our ideas into account on how we could influence
the development of the town. The road trip was
cool too!”
Photographs of the Young
People’s Planning Day
Evolution of the Plan
A teenager from Modbury, near Ivybridge, who
is studying for A-levels at Ivybridge Community College, said:
“Where I live there is nothing for teenagers to do
and part of the problem is that when Modbury
was designed it was not something which was
even considered.
It is important to get involved with the proposals
for Sherford at this stage because we hope that
by doing so we can have an impact on the new
town.
Sherford has the potential to offer lots of opportunities not just for the people living there but also
for others around it to share in the facilities.”
The quotes are as reported in the Western
Morning News on 21st April 2006
King George V Playing Fields
The North Plymstock AAP proposal for the
‘A379 route’ crossing King George V playing fields has attracted considerable objection
from local residents. Indeed, it has become the
one single issue that has most exercised local
opinion, such that the Sherford CSG requested
whether any alternative could be examined and
promoted.
Enlisting the help and cooperation of AI, the
Red Tree team has found an alternative, workable alignment north of King George V playing fields on land wholly owned by AI. This
solution avoids all the land within the playing
fields demise; satisfies highway and traffic parameters and avoids compromising the mineral
company’s plans and operational objectives for
Hazeldene Quarry. It is therefore a solution that
Red Tree believes should attend to and allay
public concerns.
This solution departs from the route identified
in the North Plymstock AAP, nevertheless it re-
sponds to the overriding expression of public
opinion.
Analysis
Without doubt, the process of long-standing
and continued engagement between Red Tree,
the local authorities, the local community and
wider interest groups, facilitated considerably
over the past 2 years by TPF, has led to the preparation of a better informed and more achievable solution and one of which neighbouring
communities, local authorities and other interested groups together can have a proper sense
of ownership.
Red Tree is proud of the achievement to date.
The journey, however, has only just started. The
planning application needs to be determined,
the development implemented and the opportunity given for a new community of people
to establish itself and thrive. The strategies for
delivery, described in the following chapters,
demonstrate how this can be managed and
achieved.
119
Table 1: Schedule of Attendees
Enquiry by Design 2004
Invitees
120
Representing
Mr
Giles
Chichester
Landowner
Messrs
N G W and P G
Curtis
Landowner
Mr
JR
Ellis
Landowner
Mr & Mrs
J
Haimes
Landowner
Mrs
P
Hannaford
Landowner
Mrs
M
MacBean
Landowner
Mr
RH
Pugh
Landowner
Mr & Mrs
JF
Rogers
Landowner
Mr & Mrs
P
Short
Landowner
Messrs
G&V
Staddon
Landowner
Mr
Gerry
Willis
Landowner
Mrs
Helen
Willis
Landowner
Mr
Colin
Yelland
Aggregate Industries UK Ltd
Mr
Andrew
Cameron
Alan Baxter & Associates
Mr
Mark
Hughes
Alan Baxter & Associates
Mr
PG
Cox
Billacombe Residents Association
Ms
Rita
Rowe
British Red Cross
Cllr
Derek
Curtis
Brixton Parish Council
Mr
Peter
Morgan Evans
Brixton Parish Council
Mr
Mark
Pearson
CABE
Mr
Keith
Clarke
Carlton Power
Mr
Alan
Street
Chaddlewood Farm Community Association
Rev
David
Arnott
Churches Together in Devon
Mr
Ed
Moffatt
Churches Together in Devon
Mr
Roger
Gage
CPRE
Mr
J
Woollcombe CBE
CPRE
Mr
David
Tucker
David Tucker Associates
Mr
Rob
Finch
Devon & Cornwall Housing Association
Mr
David
Andrew
Devon County Council
Mr
Malcolm
Baker
Devon County council
Ms
Caroline
Cozens
Devon County Council
Cllr Sir
Simon
Day
Devon County Council
Mr
Vic
Ebdon
Devon County Council
Mr
John
Halliday
Devon County Council
Cllr
John
Hart
Devon County Council
Mr
Mike
Jones
Devon County Council
Evolution of the Plan