“Government planning reforms threaten to ‘destroy’ urban/rural boundaries”


“Boundaries preventing the spread of development across the South West countryside could be “destroyed” by proposed changes to national planning policy, campaigners have warned.

Members of the Campaign to protect Rural England (CPRE) claim the Government’s reforms would open up land around towns and villages to a “flood” of new planning applications.

They also argue they would make it harder for rural communities to push for the prioritisation of brownfield sites, while undermining local control over the wider planing process.

The criticisms from the campaign group come in response to a new Government consultation on plans to reform to the National Planning Policy Framework. The aim of the changes is to boost house building – thereby addressing the UK’s growing housing crisis – by simplifying and speeding up the planning process.

Policies outlined in the document include increasing development around so-called “commuter hubs”, creating up-to-date registers of brownfield sites for new housing, and freeing up “unviable” commercial land for discount starter homes. Ministers say these proposals will encourage the delivery of high quality new homes “that the country needs”.

However, some measures, including plans to loosen restrictions for development on Green Belt sites, have come under fire from conservation groups. And the CPRE has warned that even areas like Devon and Cornwall, which do not have Green Belts, will still be affected by reforms.

One policy in particular suggests that more consideration could be given to applications for small developments “adjacent” to settlement boundaries, which act as a dividing line between urban and non-urban areas. Matt Thomson, CPRE head of planning, said this could signal the end of clear cut barriers to the development of greenfield sites.

“Those boundaries have been drawn up with good intention, usually with the support of local people, to give them certainty about how development will or will not take place in their areas,” he said.

“While we recognise that there needs to be some development, this changes the established direction of planning policy…It would destroy those boundaries.

“It opens the floodgates to speculative developments because it’s raising the hope for people that they might be able to get a development on the edge of a village.

“We expect small towns and villages will be flooded with applications for these kinds of developments as a result.”

He added that while the charity supports the overall aim to tackle the lack of new housing in the UK, a focus on planning rather than the construction industry “never has the desired impact”. He also suggested that the Government should look to achieve some of its goals by empowering local communities, including through the use of neighbourhood plans.

This is a view shared by some councillors, who have expressed concern about the impact on local control of the planning process. North Devon District Council member Brian Greenslade said the reforms could see ministers “tighten the screws on local democratic decision taking”. This would be with a “very clear drive” to “open goalposts for developers” and render local planning authorities “impotent”, he added.

“With the economic recovery not making the progress the Government wants they will resort to the blunt instrument of housing development at any price to fuel growth,” he said. “They give no consideration whatever to the impact on established communities and the infrastructure provision needed to support large housing developments.

“There are unintended consequences for housing arising from what the Government seem to be proposing.”

Responding to some of the criticisms, a Department for Communities and Local Government spokesman said changes would give communities a bigger say in deciding where developments go.

He said: “No settlement will be imposed on local communities.

“These proposals are about delivering the homes local people have already agreed and have been tested through consultation and public examination.

“Local people now have a bigger say in deciding where developments should and shouldn’t go and what is needed in their area thanks to our planning reforms.”

Councils say the proposals still need “careful consideration” to fully understand their implications. East Devon District Council said it would seek members’ views before drawing up a response to the consultation, which closes on January 25.

The implications for affordable and starter homes

Government proposals to reclassify discount starter homes as affordable housing have been a growing source of concern in recent week, particularly among rural residents.

There are fears that the prioritisation of these properties over rented accommodation could see even more low income families priced out of the countryside.

These have been re-enforced by the Government’s new planning consultation, which suggests rural sites set aside for affordable housing should be used to deliver its home ownership strategy.

Critics have been quick to point out that with caps for starter homes set at £250,000, these properties will remain out of reach for many residents of rural Devon and Cornwall.

“The proposal for starter homes with a 20% discount is fool’s gold and will not assist many young local people to buy a home,” says North Devon councillor Brian Greenslade. “The very real need is for homes for rent because of the large gap between average incomes and average house prices.

“As a survey in the Western Morning News recently shows, people on average incomes in our area would need a pay increase of some 130% to get them to the point where they may get a mortgage.

“The Government’s ideas of selling off social housing just simply will make a difficult situation worse … Local young people are facing an appalling outlook for their housing needs.”

The consultation indicates that some councils could be granted powers to introduce a local connection test when allocating affordable homes in rural areas. This would allow local authorities to prioritise the needs of local residents in “exceptional” circumstances.

Matt Thomson of the Campaign to Protect Rural England is sceptical about whether this policy will make a significant difference.

“It’s a good idea in principle but they can be difficult to manage in practice,” he said. “These local connection tests are already used in other areas with patchy result – it is often difficult to prove local connection.

“Starter homes have a role where there is a large amount of young people who would like to own a home but can’t quite afford it,” he added. “But the problem is, once they’re bought and occupied, they’re no longer a starter home – there’s no affordability in perpetuity.”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Government-planning-reforms-threaten-destroy/story-28348092-detail/story.html

Successful coastal fund projects – none in East Devon

Many in Devon, many in Dorset, none in East Devon.

So, all our coastal communities must be thriving, then ….

Seaton in better nick than Lyme Regis?

Click to access Coastal_Revival_Fund_-SW_and_West.pdf

Scrutiny at its best … excuses at their worst … “corporate relations” (un)explained by Councillor Twiss

Last night’s Scrutiny committee meeting exposed two more examples of EDDC leaders’ instinct to make decisions without proper consultation.

The ubiquitous Cllr Phil Twiss (Conservative, Honiton St Michael’s) who, in addition to all his other roles, is portfolio holder for corporate relations, was summoned to explain why the democratic process had been so blatantly short-circuited by a council press release in September.

Cllr Cathy Gardner (Independent, Sidmouth Town) asked him why she and the other Sidmouth ward councillors had been taken by surprise by an announcement in the Sidmouth Herald that the Council was considering building affordable housing on Mill Street carpark. There had been no consultation with interested parties like the town council, and ward members were sent copies of the press release 14 minutes before it was published!

Cllr Twiss’ replied that he had not been involved with the release, (“It wasn’t me, guv”) but claimed it was a matter of urgency because a journalist had asked for a statement, and the deadline was pressing.

Cllr Marianne Rixson (Independent, Sidmouth Sidford) retorted that this sounded very much like “the journalist tail wagging the council dog” and it was no excuse for not consulting democratically before arbitrarily publishing controversial initiatives.

The Scrutiny Committee agreed and voted to remind Cabinet that there was a Protocol that councillors concerned should be consulted before press releases were authorised. It also welcomed guidance produced by the Communications Officer which made a similar point.

Silence remained about who had authorised the Sidmouth story but Cllr Bill Nash (Conservative Exmouth Town) may have been warm when he said only floods and other emergencies required urgent press releases. All other communications were non-urgent and should not be released if authorised only by “the Leader and senior officers.”

In passing, Cllr Nash also slammed the Council leadership for publishing detailed pictures and maps of developments along Queen’s Drive in Exmouth which were very different from any plans that had been consulted upon.

This was taken up by Scrutiny Chair Cllr Roger Giles (Independent, Ottery St Mary Town) who read a letter from two Exmouth residents complaining about pending planning applications for major works, including diverting Queen’s Drive, part of the latest, much altered, waterfront development scheme.

Exmouth Cllr Brenda Taylor (Lib Dem,Exmouth ) angrily commented that these plans proposed massive residential development which had never been agreed to by councillors. She felt she was “wasting her time” attending meetings when such arbitrary decisions were made in secret.

At this point the Democratic Services Officer and a Legal Officer intervened to argue that the Scrutiny Committee could not discuss the Waterfront Project because planning was outside its remit.

Cllr Rob Longhurst (Independent, Woodbury and Lympstone) wasn’t having any of this. “The reputation of EDDC is nil in Exmouth,” he said, because the current extravagant plans were being “justified” by a few hundred replies to a questionnaire about the different, more modest, “Splash” project.

Cllr Megan Armstrong (Independent, Exmouth Halsdon) agreed. “It’s not about planning, it’s about independent public consultation”, she said. It was about whether the people of Exmouth wanted or needed what the Council leadership was imposing on them.

Cllr Val Ranger (Independent, Newton Poppleford and Harpford) said it was quite within the remit of Scrutiny to look at questions of process, on “whether public consultation is being properly followed.”

The committee voted to do precisely that, once the current legal actions over Exmouth seafront businesses are resolved.

In the meantime, watch out for fireworks over Exmouth seafront at the full Council meeting on Wednesday 16th December.

Coastal Revival Fund – but not for us ….

£1m for the South West
Brixham, Lynmouth, Plymouth and Paignton in Devon got £250k
£250k for ten projects in Dorset
ZERO for EAST DEVON

Once again our political and bureaucratic representatives have ensured that we maintain our self-sufficiency.

Click to access Coastal_Revival_Fund_-SW_and_West.pdf

UK ” moving backwards” with climate change

With so many jobs now cut in Devon due to cuts in green energy projects we stand to suffer more than most from them.

“The UK has given up its leadership role at the UN climate talks in Paris and is “moving backwards” with a string of cuts to green domestic policies, according to Prof Anne Glover, the former chief scientific adviser to the European commission.

Her comments were endorsed by business people, NGOs, an ex-diplomat and two former ministers who are worried that the government is squandering the UK’s international standing on climate issues.

David Cameron told a gathering of world leaders at the Paris climate talks last week that they would have to answer to their grandchildren if they failed to agree a deal that stopped dangerous warming. But since taking power in May his government has been criticised for taking the axe to a series of green policies.

“The UK does not have a leadership role, nor is it regarded to have a leadership role in Brussels,” said Glover, who is vice-principal of the University of Aberdeen. “If we don’t lead, who does? To me it looks like we’re moving backwards.”

Ed Davey, who was energy minister from 2012 to 2015, told the Guardian: “No wonder the UK is being criticised in Paris – it’s the worst possible moment to undermine the UK’s strong record on leading the global climate change debate.”

http://gu.com/p/4fv6d

See how Devon County Council wholeheartedly supported these cuts yesterday in Claire Wright’s blog here:

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/devon_county_council_tories_vote_down_urgent_debate_on_crippling_renewable

Swire to have ” talks” about Exmouth Splash

As a 100% supporter of the government’s “growth agenda” we can pretty much see how those will go.

On the other hand, there must be even more Claire Wright supporters in Exmouth than ever before …!

How to appear to keep both sides happy? Well, his Foreign Office job – which keeps him away from East Devon so much – in fact, almost all the time – should help there.

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/mp_in_seafront_talks_as_group_campaigns_1_4342213