Swire says developers “gamed” Cranbrook to its detriment and Neighbourhood Plans aren’t working!

He says developers refused to create a town centre because there weren’t enough people living there! He says the council is now having to step in to rectify this!

Owl thinks that perhaps there are not enough people living there (question: how many is enough?) because there is no town centre!

2 thoughts on “Swire says developers “gamed” Cranbrook to its detriment and Neighbourhood Plans aren’t working!

  1. Or indeed that they didn’t like all that they saw at Cranbrook and elsewhere, that EDDC planning had not ensured that the garages and driveways were big enough for cars for example, that they let the planners get away with cutting corners. I recall one report of one or more residents complaining that an average car wouldn’t fit in their garages at Cranbrook, nor on their drive,way leaving them little alternative but to park on the roads. Certainly from what I have seen in Cranbrook and elsewhere (such as the estate between Topsham’s Aldi (a favourite of HS I gather) and the new IKEA, parking provision is an afterthough. Those who designed The Colony in Exeter might be forgiven for failing to think ahead to the day when every household had at least one car, but present planners and developers have no such excuses.
    Parking is not just a traffic problem, it is one of the biggest causes of neighbourhood disputes, and those who recognise this will avoid modern estates with such poor parking provision.


  2. When is a commitment not a genuine commitment:

    a. When it is made by a developers who will seek any loophole possible to save spending money on commitments they have made in order to boost their already high profit margins still further; and

    b. When the local authority to awarded them the contracts either allowed the contract to have a loophole, or fails to insist that developers meet the commitments they made.


Comments are closed.