It’s a ‘danger’ - it’s a....notice board

Notice board on the side of Pure Indulgence branded by the town council as 'dangerous'. Picture by A

Notice board on the side of Pure Indulgence branded by the town council as 'dangerous'. Picture by Alex Walton. Ref shs 2298-20-13AW - Credit: Archant

Sidmouth sign gets town in a stir

Steven Kendall-Torry

Steven Kendall-Torry - Credit: Archant

IT has been branded a ‘danger’ – which is not something you hear said every day about a wooden noticeboard.

But the Old Fore Street sign – which is adorned with posters promoting community events and information from a campaign group – has caused a stir in Sidmouth, writes Stefan Gordon.

Town councillors have objected, also labelling the item ‘unsightly’, and the man who put the board up now fears he will be told to remove it.

Pure Indulgence owner Steven Kendall-Torry has applied for retrospective planning permission – but was this week less hopeful of being granted it.

You may also want to watch:

He told the Herald: “I stuck it up there for information and I find it amazing how well received it has been.

“I’ve lived here all my life and I never realised how much went on until that sign went up.

Most Read

“There are no businesses on there. It’s purely bring and buy, charity and flower shows.

“Save Our Sidmouth have a bit, but it’s not exclusive to them. It is an information panel.

“It did look untidy for a short period because people wanted to put up more information than there was space for.”

Asked what he made of the board being branded a ‘danger’, Mr Kendall-Torry said: “The public have had a lot of fun over that. We’ve had lots of people come into the shop and make all sorts of whimsical comments.

“From my point of view, I put it there as a public benefit. I know a lot of charities and organisations that have benefited from it – especially the Manor Pavilion.

“I was disappointed the town council did not support it.”

The Herald reported last week that town councillors felt unable to support plans for the board. Planning committee members ruled the design was ‘unsightly and detrimental to the street scene’ and ‘unsuitable’ in a conservation area.

It was also considered to be ‘a danger to pedestrians’ due to it location being on a public footway and highway.

Members added that the privately owned board could be used for commercial advertising.

The district council, which will rule on the application, received two letters of support for the board before the deadline for public comments ended last week.

Become a Supporter

This newspaper has been a central part of community life for many years. Our industry faces testing times, which is why we're asking for your support. Every contribution will help us continue to produce local journalism that makes a measurable difference to our community.

Become a Supporter