Readers will recall that in September 2013 the planning application by Clinton Devon Estates for 40 houses in King Alfred’s Way, Newton Poppleford was recommended for approval by EDDC Planning Officers and subsequently approved by the DMC

In October 2013 a planning application for the adjacent site Badgers Close was, however, recommended for refusal by EDDC Planning Officers. It was refused by the DMC and the subsequent appeal, by the applicant, to Her Majesty’s Planning Inspectorate also failed. (In each case EDDC Planning Officers argued very differently

An application on the same site has been resubmitted, rebranded as “Little Orchard” see application 14/2174.
With regard to the previous Badger Close application EDDC planning officers noted that Newton Poppleford lacks employment opportunities, giving rise to the necessity to commute to work. They considered that the village should only accommodate a limited scale of development, as defined by its built-up area boundary.

The Planning Inspector also concluded that the Badger Close appeal site did not represent a sustainable location for the proposed development. The decisive argument turned on access to the village centre. The Inspector noted that the poor quality of the pedestrian linkages between the appeal site and the village’s main services and facilities represented a serious failing. Those who know Newton Poppleford will know that there is no simple “Section 106” agreement solution to this

The site is also only 300m outside the 400m building exclusion zone that surrounds the Pebblebed Heaths. As we have mentioned before on this blog, the Heaths are not only an SSSI and within the AONB but have European designations under which EDDC has a legal duty to protect from any increased recreational use as a result of nearby development. On this subject the Inspector deferred to the view of Natural England. So it is interesting to see the Natural England consultee comment on this new application 14/2174.

These seem to have profound consequences for all developments within 10Km of the Heaths and indicate that EDDC has been in breach of its legal duties which appear to be much tougher for a European designation than for an AONB or even the protection UK gives to its World Heritage Sites

Key sections of this comment are

“The East Devon (Pebblebed) Heaths SAC / SPA are c. 700m from the application site. This is in the 10km zone within which impacts of residential development on the SPA could reasonably be expected to arise in the absence of appropriate mitigation: Evidence submitted with your “Submission Draft Local Plan” – the Habitats Regulations Assessment (Nov 2012) and the draft “South East Devon European Sites Mitigation Strategy” (June 2013) – both indicate that it would not be possible to reach a conclusion of “no likely significant effect” for housing in this location, in combination with other residential development close to the site, in the absence of appropriate mitigation. …

In the case of the European sites referred to a above, your authority cannot grant permission for this proposal in the absence of a Habitat Regulations Assessment which concludes either i) no likely significant effect due to mitigation included by the applicant or, ii) no adverse effect on integrity following an Appropriate Assessment.”
What we are supposed to get are alternative natural green space sites (SANGS).

So, EDDC, where are these or have they all been given planning permission?