More on Moirai Swindon

“The Swindon Labour Group Leader, Councillor Jim Grant, has criticised the decision of Swindon Council Leader, Councillor David Renard, for granting Moirai more time to start with the Oasis redevelopment. This decision was taken through a Cabinet Member Briefing Note, which consulted the Leaders of the Political Groups and the Councillors of Rodbourne Cheney Ward which covers the Oasis site. The Labour Group Leader had urged the Cabinet Member for Economic Development to take any decision on the Oasis to a Cabinet Meeting where a decision could be taken in an open and transparent way but this call was ignored and the Leader of the Council signed off the Briefing Note in August.

In July, it was discovered that Moirai had breached its development agreement with the Council by failing to obtain approval for a planning master plan of the development by the contractual deadline, March 13th 2014, and because of Moirai’s shell company, MW Contract Services Ltd (formerly Oasis Operations Ltd), going in to liquidation. Last month it was revealed that the shell company owed £850,000 to creditors at the time of its liquidation, including local small businesses like Storm Recruitment, based in Commercial Road, which is owed £4,721, and Carlton Services in Old Town, which is owed more than £2,000.

Following the briefing note being agreed, Moirai now have had the following targets set:

All remaining works to the Oasis Leisure Centre be completed by no later than 31st March 2015 and the works commence no later than 31st October 2014
A planning application with associated masterplan be submitted by no later than 31st May 2015
The backstop date for Moirai securing detailed planning consent for the scheme now is 31st January 2016;
The Swindon Labour Group Leader, Councillor Jim Grant, said:

“I am very disappointed with this decision, not only because I think that after Moirai failed to meet their targets in the development agreement it is time for the Council to break from the development agreement, but also because of the way the Leader of the Council has taken this decision behind closed doors.

We already know that Moirai’s shell company owed near to a million pounds to its creditors, before it went in to liquidation and with the economy growing as it has there isn’t any excuse as to why there have been so many problems other than because of Moirai’s poor management.

And, make no mistake, the land the Council is agreeing to give away to Moirai is worth millions of pounds so to give it away to a company whose record so far has been very disappointing, doesn’t make sense. What we should be doing is looking for another private provider to take over the running of this development who has a proven track record on delivering on large schemes such as this one.

This whole saga really does remind me of the council’s involvement in the Wi-Fi scheme several years ago where the Council made decisions involving large amounts of council-taxpayers money. With decisions being taken behind closed doors and the Conservative administration failing to realise when it is time for the Council to walk away from a company that has failed to deliver.”

http://southswindonlabour.co.uk/south-swindon-constituency/2014/09/jim-grant-swindons-conservative-council-gives-moirai-more-time

Exmouth: meet East Devon Alliance councillors

14 November 2015

from 11.00 – 12.30 in

All Saints Church Hall, Exeter Road, Exmouth.

This open meeting is for people to chat with EDA Councillors.

Exmouth Seafront: Moirai counters criticism

Note that in the article below, Moirai Capital actually mentions relatively small-scale REFURBISHMENT projects (of £1.7 m and £3.5m) NOT large-scale development projects. The North Shields venue was bought from liquidators and refurbished and the Oasis Centre was already owned by Swindon Council and refurbished – the rest of the site has had many delays (see links below) and Moirai only recently put in for outline planning permission for a £120m extension of the sitejust before a final deadline loomed. It was a condition of the new site that the Oasis was first refurbished.

Here is the press release:

“THE developer behind plans for the £18m redevelopment of Exmouth seafront has hit back at criticism from opponents of the scheme.

Pressure group Save Exmouth Seafront has questioned whether developer Moirai Capital Investments has the track record to be capable of delivering the scheme.

It claims several similar high-profile leisure projects the company has previously been involved with in recent years have failed to pass the planning stage.

The group warned East Devon councillors during a meeting at the Knowle that two of the developer’s previous planned projects – including one in Torquay – failed to come to fruition.

But Moirai has told the Echo that the transformation of Exmouth’s Queen’s Drive seafront site is fully on track.

And Chris Lewis, Moirai Project leader, said the firm was delighted to be involved in the project.

He said the projects that did not proceed past the planning stages elsewhere had ended on mutual terms between the company and local council.

And successful projects cited by Mr Lewis include the £3.5m refurbishment of the Oasis centre in Swindon and a £1.7m refurbishment project in North Shields, Newcastle.

Mr Lewis said: “We are delighted to be involved in this exciting regeneration of the seafront at Exmouth, and although our design has been proposed, we look forward to public consultation to further improve and tailor it to the requirements of the town and to increase the number of visitors attending.

“This proposal will complement the new water sport facility being developed.

“Separate development companies are industry practice in regeneration projects to limit risks of other projects and protect each individual project. In all regeneration cases we have worked in association with the local councils’ support, and if projects have not proceeded this has always been with mutual consent.”

He added: “We are optimistic in creating a fabulous development that the town will be proud of and that will generate new jobs and longer staying visitors. All of this will enhance the tourism offer that Exmouth can provide.”

Save Exmouth Seafront chairman Denis O’Day said: “From our research the proposed developer Moirai seems incapable of taking on a project of this size and complexity and I would urge all councillors to really examine this more objectively.”

A spokesman for East Devon District Council said it went through “an appropriate procurement and assessment process with seven interested parties” before settling on the company.

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Exmouth-seafront-developer-hits-8216-incapable/story-28073784-detail/story.html

East Devon Watch covered the group’s interests in Swindon on 25 July 2015 here:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/07/23/moirai-the-property-company-involved-in-exmouth-water-front-development-a-chequered-past/

It is also covered here:
http://www.talkswindon.org/index.php?topic=9252.30;wap2

and here, where it was criticised for missing deadlines:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-29116141

Outline planning permission has only recently been sought:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-29116141

The North Shields water park to which they refer above was NOT developed by them but bought in May 2014 from a company which went into liquidation:

http://www.thejournal.co.uk/business/business-news/wet-n-wild-sold-leisure-7151331

On 12 August 2014 (after the purchase had been finalised on 4 August 2014 and Moirai had appointed Serco to run it) the facility was closed after users reported “breathing and sickness problems” traced to faulty air conditioning equipment and re-opened the next day:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-28753449

However, as East Devon District Council has confirmed that it chose Morai from a range of 7 interested parties we can no doubt assume that the agreements in our district will be watertight and that we will get best value.

Habitat mitigation in “south-east Devon” will be a “Greater Exeter” issue and will not be scrutinised at district level

Cabinet agenda and paper are here:

Click to access 041115-combined-agenda-cabinet.pdf

Below is an interesting extract, where it notes that Habitat Regulation will no longer be dealt with at district level, instead being the responsibility of the “Greater Exeter” area (East Devon, Exeter, Teignbridge combined). Habitat Regulation will also not be scrutinised at each district but will have its own cross-district scrutiny committee and this worried officers, should districts disagree. It also says that EDDC will fully fund the committee and its Legal Department will be responsible for legal matters.

“Agenda Item 15

… Following the decision of Council on 29 July 2015 to agree to enter into joint arrangements with both Exeter City Council and Teignbridge District Council, it has been necessary to review and alter the governance arrangements to ensure clarity and consistency in terms of its operation going forward.

South East Devon Habitat Regulations Joint Committees …..

….. High Risk
It is essential to secure appropriate mitigation alongside granting of and implementation of planning permissions for development which impact upon sites of European importance. To not be able to ensure mitigation is delivered could cause problems in terms of being able to grant planning permissions and ensure delivery of development as set out in the Local Plan.

… That review has now been completed and it is considered that the Terms of Reference previously endorsed is not sufficient to enable the business of the committee to be properly conducted. There was some lack of clarity in terms of the remit for the committee, the procedures for meetings and a misunderstanding over how to deal with the powers between the Executive Committee and officers. Most crucially however, the scrutiny arrangements for the committee were left to the local level. This meant that each of the three authorities had the ability to scrutinise decisions and moreover that these would be in accordance with each authority’s own scrutiny arrangements. Aside from the difficulties imposed by having to deal with three different sets of scrutiny arrangements from a timing and administration point of view, the biggest difficulty, both operationally and politically, would be what happens if each authority’s scrutiny function resulted in different recommendations being made back to the Executive Committee. All of the above would be likely to cause problems in terms of trying to run the committee and ensure that effective habitat mitigation is delivered.”

Councillor Moulding appears already to have been confirmed as a member and three other EDDC councillors will be appointed (NOT elected).

On scrutiny, the document says:

The Councils have appointed the HMSC to scrutinize the operation and performance of the Habitats Mitigation Executive Committee and its governance arrangements.”

and

“The HMSC shall comprise three members of each of the Councils, to be appointed by the group leaders of the Councils. Each member of the HMSC shall have an equal vote.”

UK criticised for failure to defend European nature protection laws

“An alliance of nine European governments, led by Germany and including France, Spain, Italy and Poland, have written to the European commission to warn it not to dismantle nature protection laws.

But conservationists have questioned why Britain is not part of the effort to publicly defend the habitats and birds directives ahead of a review by the commission aimed at cutting red tape for business. …”

http://gu.com/p/4dy4a

Chardstock: Chair of its Parish Council raises worrying questions

Mary de Souza Chairman, Chardstock Parish Council and Neighbourhood Plan Team writes:

“I am writing in response to the article in Axminster’s Pulman’s Weekly News, dated March 31st 2015.

The article headline ” Amended Local Plan on its way to inspector” refers to the amendments to the plan that East Devon Councillors agreed to at a special meeting on Thursday 26th March, which included granting a “built-up-area Boundary ” for Chardstock, in order to facilitate sustainable development.

For the benefit of your readers, I would like to put this statement in context and point out how the agreement to include this amendment would appear to have been reached. But firstly a bit of background information.

Chardstock has always had a Built up Area Boundary ( BUAB) and the previous draft Local Plan allocated a quota of ten houses, which have subsequently been built. Since then planning permission has been granted for a further four dwellings. However, in December 2014 and February 2015, three planning applications, two of which went before the Development Management Committee ( DMC) were refused permission on the grounds that Chardstock was not considered to be sustainable.

This is the Planning Officers report : “The proposed development by reason of its location on the edge of a village in the countryside which has limited services to support growth, fails to accord with the definition of sustainable development, specifically the environmental role, found within the National Planning Policy Framework. In this case, the Local Planning Authority considers that the adverse impacts of this development in terms of unsustainable location with the occupiers of the dwellings having limited access to essential services and infrastructure (including public transport and access to it) significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of providing these dwellings to meet the shortfall of housing within the district (5 year land supply) when assessed against the policies within the Framework as a whole.”

During this period a DMC “Think-tank” along with planning officers were making a careful study of all the villages in East Devon, looking at their services and facilities as well as public transport and access to it.

Chardstock is fortunate that it has an excellent local shop and Post Office, as well as a church, pub and primary school, but access to other essential services only found in Chard or Axminster necessitate a journey by car and are not realistically accessible by public transport, as the nearest bus stop is best part of a mile down a single track lane, with no lighting or pavements from the centre of the village.

These facts therefore meant that under the latest draft of the Local Plan, Chardstock was one of the villages recommended to not have a BUAB. This recommendation was upheld by the DMC at their special meeting on Monday 23rd March.

But at the full Council meeting on 26th March, a member of the public, who isn’t actually a resident of East Devon, but happens to own a plot of land in Chardstock on which he has applied to build 5 houses, spoke and asked that Members also consider the inclusion of Chardstock in the list of sustainable villages.

Is it just coincidence, that what followed was a proposal from Cllr Andrew Moulding that Chardstock be added to the list of settlements to have a BUAB ? The minutes from this meeting also point out that,

• the village is not served by public transport,
• the views of the parish council had not been sought,
• it was more appropriate for the village to identify appropriate levels of development through a Neighbourhood Plan.

But the proposal was put to the vote and carried. This decision and the way in which it was reached also demonstrates the lack of support from the Council for the Parish Council, the local community agenda and an apparent lack of engagement with Chardstock’s emerging Neighbourhood Plan, failing to consult with the Parish Council or local community over a major policy change, rather being led by the wishes of a local developer.

The issue of sustainability is one that the Parish Council and Neighbourhood Plan Team have been looking at very closely, and is an issue that has generated a lot of interest from the residents of Chardstock, who have been consulted on this and other subjects as part of the production of our Neighbourhood Plan.

It’s not just about not having a realistic bus service in the parish – less than 12% of the population have any sort of relatively easy access to the service, and the majority are anything from 1 to 4 miles from the nearest bus stop, as well as the fact that this is also a bus service that as of 12th April will be reduced from an hourly service to a 90 minute service, making access to Chard and Axminster even more difficult. It is also about other aspects of our infrastructure, including poor roads, which with the cuts to services from Devon County Council will be receiving even less attention than they were before.

So what is it that has made the Council decide that all of a sudden we are sustainable. Are there measures that are being put in place that we are unaware of ? Or is this indeed an example of the influence that developers have over the Council ?

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/council_s_decision_on_latest_draft_of_the_ed_local_plan_1_4024159

EDDC wants extra complaints officer – but only for a year

Do they know something we don’t know?

http://www.officerecruit.com/job/information-complaints-support-officer-954498471?src=search&tmpl=dis&sctr=

Oh, and it’s a busy job:

“It is essential that you have excellent communication, organisational and time management skills. You must also have the ability to work without supervision and use your own initiative, as you will be dealing with complaints and requests for information from members of the public on a daily basis.”