Daily Archives: 25 Oct 2018

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

25 Oct 2018

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Housing (local), Land banking

“Developers hog land for record 130,000 homes, analysis reveals”

“Developers are sitting on land for more than 130,000 homes in England that have never been built – the worst gap on record, according to new analysis.

The record gap between planning permissions granted and new homes being built has led to calls for tough new penalties to be enforced against developers that sit on land rather than build.

… The analysis of housing ministry (MCHLG) figures showed that in 2016-17, planning permission for 313,700 new homes was given, but only 183,570 homes built, meaning a notional annual gap of more than 130,000 homes, the biggest divergence since records began in 2006.

The percentage of homes built versus permission granted was just 58%, a rate that has been roughly steady since 2012.

… Landowners sell at a price that factors in a significant increase in value after obtaining planning consent, meaning a hectare of agricultural land worth £20,000 can sell for closer to £2m if it is zoned for housing. Developers regularly deny using land to speculate, arguing more profit can usually be made from building.

Labour is considering a policy to give the Land Trust powers to buy sites at closer to the lower price, by changing the 1961 Land Compensation Act so the state could compulsorily purchase land at a price that excluded the potential for future planning consent. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/25/developers-hog-land-for-record-130000-homes-analysis-reveals

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

25 Oct 2018

Posted under

Axminster, Developers/ Development, EDDC, Persimmon, Transport (local)

EDDC hopes Persimmon and Crown Estates will pay them back for Axminster Relief Road!

Owl says: good luck with that!

“Councillors are being asked to borrow nearly £7m to ensure the long-awaiting Axminster relief road can be delivered.

The £16.7m road, which hopes to finally end the bottleneck of traffic travelling through the town centre, would be built to the east of the town near land allocated in the Local Plan for 650 homes, eight hectares of employment land, and a primary school.

£10m from the government’s Housing Infrastructure Fund will help deliver the road, with the remainder of the cost covered by developers.

But East Devon District Council’s Cabinet is being recommended to borrow and forward fund the remaining £6.7m, and claw the funds back from developers at a later date, to ensure the road can be built in one swoop and not in stages, as Persimmon Homes control the northern and southern parts of the site and would provide the two ends of the relief road, while the Crown Estate control land in the middle.

A draft masterplan which will provide a template for the development of the site is expected to come before the Strategic Planning Committee by the end of 2018.

The report of Ed Freeman, Service Lead for Planning Strategy and Development Management, to next Wednesday’s cabinet meeting says: “The relief road is vital to the future growth of the town given the impact that HGV’s and other traffic passing through the town has on congestion, air quality, the attractiveness of the town centre and the damage that has been caused to historic buildings as large vehicles try and navigate its narrow streets. The relief road has the potential to divert 30 per cent of all traffic which travels east after passing through the town centre.”

Mr Freeman is recommending that the Council deliver the road in its entirety from the start of this project using the £10m HIF funding they have successfully bid for and borrowing the shortfall.

He added: “It is considered that the only realistic and viable means of delivering the relief road and doing it in good time to deliver the benefits for the community of Axminster is to procure and deliver the entire relief road borrowing the additional funds from the public loans and works board with repayment secured from the developers.

…. Questions though have been raised about whether the proposed north/south bypass that runs to the east of the town is the best option for Axminster.

At a recent town forum event concerning the relief road, residents said that a western route would be preferable as it would eliminate the bottleneck at the Weycroft Bridge, which the current proposed eastern route did not.

However, reporting back at a town council meeting, Cllr Ian Hall, East Devon District Council’s ward member for Axminster Rural and County Councillor for Axminster, said that the £10 million Housing Infrastructure Funding was not transferable to another route in Axminster.”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/7m-borrowed-council-ensure-axminster-2147861

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

25 Oct 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Environment (local), Housing (local), Sustainability, Transport (local)

“New houses must be more than Noddy dwellings in the middle of nowhere”

“….. A report by the campaign group Transport for New Homes reveals a landscape pockmarked with new developments cut off from public transport, forcing people on low and middle incomes into car ownership – often two per household – for the sake of a cheaper house. Researchers visited 20 new housing developments around the country, many of which, in the report’s words, didn’t “connect to anything other than the road network”.

Central government assigns housebuilding targets to councils, which they must deliver purely on the basis of numbers. Local planners ask meekly for funding to integrate new developments into public transport networks and are told to get lost, because properly planned and integrated transport takes time, money and, above all, political will.

Planning incentives ‘lead to housing estates centred on car use’

The net result is that “we are building car parks as much as new homes”, according to the report. Compare this with the Netherlands, where any new development has to have integration into walking, cycling and public transport as a primary priority, and where a nationwide smartcard can be used anywhere in the country on any mode of public transport. (This fact alone makes me want to move there.)

Britain right after the war was better served by public transport than it is now. Until the late 1950s most towns and cities had extensive and cheap tram and trolleybus networks to complement buses. Rural and semi-rural areas were served by an extensive branch railway network until the 1963 Beeching report cut thousands of miles from the national network and closed more than 2,000 stations.

Only in the late 1970s did some councils, facing increasing congestion and pollution, try to redress the imbalance by offering super-cheap bus fares on their municipal services.

While car ownership appears to have peaked, the number of car journeys has risen since the 2008 crash, suggesting more pressured lives, longer and more frequent commutes, and the legacy of public transport cuts. Younger people are increasingly drawn to cities, where public transport tends to be better, and are less likely than ever to own cars. Yet those who live outside cities are increasingly forced towards car use, purely because planners can’t force developers to do anything other than build houses. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/25/new-houses-housing-targets-residents-car

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

25 Oct 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Privatisation

Government not sure PFI/privatisation was such a good thing ….duh!

The article blames Labour but it was Sir John Major who introduced it in 1992 and later Labour, Coalition and Tory governments continued with them. Many dirty hands made nowt work!

“Sources claim that in the wake of the collapse of outsourcing giant Carillion earlier this year, the Treasury wants to see whether PFI schemes represent “real value for money”.

Under PFI, the state hires contractors such as Carillion to build and deliver projects – then lease it back for a set annual fee.

But under Labour [and later Coalition and Tory governments], more than 500 schemes ended up costing taxpayers five times the original building cost. In 2011 one hospital was being charged £333 by the PFI provider to change a lightbulb.

Industry insiders claim that while the Chancellor’s review won’t “re-write” previous PFI deals, it could kill off PFI “for good”. …”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

25 Oct 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Air pollution, NHS (local)

Take a deep breath … on second thoughts – don’t

“UK ‘won fight to weaken rules on waste emissions’

The Government has successfully lobbied to water down new EU rules on waste incinerators’ emissions, according to Greenpeace. The decision comes amid concern that the UK already has levels of air pollution above legal EU limits in many cities, leading to the early death of 40,000 a year, according to the Royal College of Physicians.
i p8

Toxic air health threat at 2,000 GP surgeries
A new report by Cambridge Environmental Research Consultants, commissioned by the British Lung Foundation, has found that more than 2,000 GP surgeries and 200 hospitals are in areas with toxic air. This means people with heart and lung conditions could be putting themselves at risk by visiting these GP surgeries and hospitals. Air pollution has been linked to diseases ranging from Alzheimer’s to type 2 diabetes.
Guardian Online, Mail p21”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

25 Oct 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, EDDC, Local Government Finance

EDDC cannot protect heritage assets due to its “limited resources” leaving them at the mercy of developers

Owl says: no surprises there …..

“Hundreds of hours have been ‘wasted’ trying to protect important historical buildings after a council delayed a formal review for the third time, say a campaign group

The criticism was levelled at East Devon District Council (EDDC) by the Otter Valley Association (OVA) after a formal review into heritage assets in the area was postponed for a third time.

OVA campaigners are worried without a review planning decisions may be made which compromise important historical buildings and structures.

An OVA spokesman said: “For the third time since 2016, EDDC has postponed the long promised formal review of the local heritage assets list by the strategic planning committee.

“So, 100 hours of work wasted as the list is not legally accepted for planning purposes, as demonstrated by an inspector’s decision on a recent planning application which dismissed any idea of the ‘specialness’ to the community of a beautiful Hatchard Smith house in Budleigh Salterton.”

A spokeswoman for EDDC responded to the association’s criticisms, she said: “We very much value the hard work that the OVA has put into their list of nominations for the local list of heritage assets and are sorry that we have not been able to progress this work more quickly.

“Unfortunately, we have limited resources and, first and foremost, we have to prioritise undertaking our statutory duties in relation to listed buildings, conservation areas and other heritage assets to ensure that the nationally important heritage assets in the district are conserved.”

According to EDDC there are more than 3,000 entries on the national list in East Devon and the work involved in conserving the structures ‘leaves little time to commit to compiling a list of locally important heritage assets’.

However, work is being done on the council’s heritage strategy which will clarify the council’s position on the local list as well as provide a timeline for production of the list.

The spokeswoman added: “The heritage strategy has been delayed to enable wider engagement with the membership of the council, however this additional work will lead to a better strategy and a wider understanding of the issues among council members before it is presented to the Council’s strategic planning committee on November 27.”

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/heritage-asset-review-east-devon-1-5751668

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

25 Oct 2018

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Cranbrook, Developers/ Development, Inequality

EDDC says it can’t afford to part-fund a community worker for Cranbrook

Yet it can spend £10 million-plus on a new HQ and says section 106 funding is running out despite continued building-out of the town. Developers seem to be getting a really easy ride in Cranbrook.

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/fundraising-bid-to-employ-community-development-worker-for-cranbrook-dashed-1-5751029