Excellent analysis on the East Devon Alliance website of the current situation regarding the rural broadband situation now that EDDC has announced its intention to ” go it alone” and arrange its own coverage …
http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/district-issues/rural-broadband/
Would that our majority-party councillors were so well- informed.
Honestly, some of Exmouth’s town councillors are also majority party district councillors (including Councillor Maddie Chapman). You would think that the left hand ought to know what the right hand is doing! However, she IS on the EDDC Scrutiny Committee, so she might like to ask them to have a look at how this happened!
“Exmouth Town Council’s planning committee this week considered amended plans for 98 homes at Higher Marley Road.
But during the debate, councillors criticised a Devon County Highways statement saying that ‘Section 106’ money from the developers could be used to fund the completion of Dinan Way, between Hulham Road and the A376, and possible traffic calming works. Devon County Council later denied any wrongdoing.
During the town planning meeting, town mayor Councillor Maddy Chapman said: “I would like this council to object to the fact that a county council department is making deals with developers, behind the planning authority [East Devon District Council] and the town council’s back, by saying that Section 106 money can be used for traffic calming in Higher Marley.
“It’s not up to the county council to decide. [Section 106] is supposed to be community infrastructure, not spent on roads.”
Councillor Cherry Nicholas said: “What disturbs me is that they’ve already calculated, if they end up with 98 residential buildings, a contribution amounting to £5,000 per dwelling, ie £490,000, would be appropriate and consistent with the amounts required under a Section 106 agreement which can be applied to the Dinan Way extension.
“I just think that it is rather morally reprehensible that they’ve already jumped that far ahead.”
Town councillors voted to oppose the planning application – an outline application seeking approval for access only – with concerns also raised about overdevelopment, the loss of part of a Devon bank and a lack of community infrastructure. East Devon District Council will decide on planning permission.
A Devon County Council spokesman denied that the authority had gone behind the council’s back, and added: “Ultimately, Section 106s are a matter of negotiation between the county and district councils, because those authorities are responsible for highways and local planning, and the developer. But there’s no reason why the town council cannot suggest what it thinks the priorities for Section 106 contributions may be.”
http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/homes_opposed_amid_dinan_way_funding_dispute_1_4335249
“Japan’s imaginative initiatives for its older population show that prevention, postponement and interventions do not have to be dull or rooted in a context of care and that there is a strong link between social capital and health.”
Will innovations such as these happen in East Devon? Not a chance as older people were last week classed as “unproductive” by EDDC CEO Mark Williams and therefore, by implication, unworthy of attention or funds from East Devon District Council plc – a sub- division of Local Enterprise Partnerships Conglomerate Inc.
A correspondent in South Devon writes ( the views expressed are his or her own). The final paragraph and citation makes for particularly worrying reading for East Devon where, despite much opposition, we treasure our environment.
South Devonians have grave concerns about devolution to big business.
In South Devon we read your article with interest. We are also interested in the operations of the LEP and how they appear to be run by big business with much benefit and profits advantage for big business.
It seems to work like this……
A nice organisation that most people love like eg a large charity, colleges, universities etc wish for more money to fund pet projects. “Mr Big Developers” who makes loads of money from building open-market houses, expensive apartments, roads, nuclear power stations etc, are very unpopular locally. Most people support schemes for families on low income and the homeless.
So the Local Enterprise Partnerships broker schemes where the “nice organisation” gets the money for their pet project by partnering it with a “big developer” and with district & county council executives & LEP members ….. the general public and parish councils are usually kept in the dark about these arrangements, which they classify as “commercially confidential”.
They often justify the scheme as delivering affordable houses but the scheme does little to make truly affordable houses and nothing for the homeless, local people are ignored or overruled.
Local democracy in action…. No …. money for big business, and its friends …. Yes
These may also be of interest:
http://www.heartofswlep.co.uk/
The small print at the bottom is interesting where they mention things like their involvement with building 11,000 houses on the back of business support.
I have just come across some documents that show they now partner with organisations like Natural England and Dartmoor National Park and The enviroment Agency. http://www.lepnetwork.net/key-activities/natural-environment/
and a great one where:
“Purpose of report
This report identifies the key opportunities from and threats to the economic plans of the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) which stem from the economy’s dependence on the environment.”
It seems that tenants at Heathpark are going to be better informed about EDDC’s moving plans than the rest of us – including councillors, according to the front page of the View from Honiton today!
“… On Monday, experts called for new measures to be implemented –such as raising new buildings a metre above ground – to help cope with global warming-induced flooding.
Prof David Balmforth, a former president of the Institution of Civil Engineers, said that conventional defences, such as the barriers that line the river Greta in Keswick, had to be supplemented with more innovative methods.
We tend to design defences to a particular standard, to give an annual probability against flooding, which might be, say, a one-in-100- or one-in-200-year chance of the defence being overtopped,” he said.
“That would be a typical sort of figure that would be used. The question that now remains is: were the events that we’ve now seen in recent days so excessive that it’s reasonable to expect them to overtop defences?
Suggesting ways of coping with future deluges, Balmforth cited work that was done in Nepal. He said: “They have regulated minimum threshold levels about a metre above surrounding ground for any new major development, whether or not it’s in a flood risk area.”
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/dec/07/britain-flood-defences-storm-desmond-fit-for-purpose
East Devon Watch 