An investigation is set to take place after a Conservative councillor in Plymouth was suspended due to a controversial and ‘offensive’ social media post where he was dressed as a woman.

Note: there’s going to be an “investigation” – Owl

Eve Watson www.plymouthherald.co.uk 

The Conservative Group has confirmed that Mark Deacon’s suspension is with immediate effect after he posted an image of himself in women’s clothes in response to a proposal for a 6pm men’s curfew by The Green Party’s Baroness Jones.

The suggestion was made in the wake of the disappearance of Sarah Everard and vigils in held in London and across the UK. A fierce debate about women’s safety at night has been sparked by the tragic death of Sarah, aged 33.

Cllr Deacon, a councillor for Southway, is pictured wearing a wig and a dress in the picture. Posted alongside the image is the message: ‘If the Green Party and some Labour Party politicians get their way and impose this ridiculous 6pm curfew on men, then I’m going to wear my dress more often.’

The Conservative Group leader Nick Kelly has now confirmed an internal investigation will take place, and shall commence “as soon as possible”.

He said: “Following a social media post Cllr Mark Deacon made on his Facebook account on Saturday, March 13 2021 which generated lots of differing views being shared about men being subject to a 6pm curfew, The Plymouth Conservative Council Group decided the most appropriate course of action was to suspend Cllr Deacon for an investigation to take place into his actions.

“This investigation will be in accordance with our Group rules and shall commence as soon as possible.

“Cllr Deacon has removed his post and has made a public apology on his Facebook page for any offence he may have caused.”

Cllr Deacon has removed the post and issued a short apology on his page for “any upset he may have caused”. PlymouthLive contacted Cllr Deacon but he said he would be making no further comment.

Also posted on Facebook, his statement reads: “I wholeheartedly apologise for the comments that I made on a post this Saturday Afternoon.

“I didn’t intend any offence that my comments might have caused to a section of the public.”

But the post received plenty of backlash on social media.

Plymouth Labour’s cabinet member for customer focus and community safety Cllr Sally Haydon said: “It’s extremely disappointing to see a senior councillor make a mockery of women’s deeply-felt worries about the issue of male violence.

“It is not befitting of the office of councillor and a member of the shadow cabinet of this council to poke fun at concerns of this nature.

I welcome his suspension and I hope Councillor Deacon will take some time to reflect on the anger his post has generated, to properly understand why it has caused such offence and offer a full apology for his actions.”

Taking to twitter, one user said: “Really unsettling to see sitting Plymouth Conservative councillor Mark Deacon mocking women’s concerns about male violence, trivialising such a serious matter in an extraordinarily offensive fashion.

“You should be ashamed of yourself @MarkDeacon4 “

Another person added: “@plymouthcc Really!? THIS is a PCC Councillor?! Mark Deacon, you should be ashamed of yourself. Couldn’t delete this fast enough, it seems.”

Former Labour MP candidate for Plymouth Moor View, Charlotte Holloway contacted Cllr Deacon via email urging him to remove the post and apologise.

The House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has issued a warning about the costs of failed UK border IT projects, blaming a lack of effective management, leadership, and oversight at the Home Office.

Dev Kundaliya www.computing.co.uk

According to the PAC, delays to the new Digital Services at the Border (DSAB) programme have so far cost the taxpayer £173m – exactly the cost that the National Audit Office warned about last year.

The Committee’s report [pdf] states that the Home Office had a poor record of launching immensely expensive IT projects that fail to deliver for the taxpayer, characterising them as a ‘litany of failures’.

In a statement to the BBC, the Home Office claimed the problems were ‘historical’ and had been fixed.

Earlier this year Matthew Rycroft, the Home Office’s permanent secretary, agreed that £173m was a “huge” amount of money. He claimed the Home Office was doing “everything” it could to avoid that figure going up any further.

The Home Office first launched its e-Borders programme in 2003, with a plan to complete it by 2011. However, there were repeated delays, and the Department announced the new DSAB programme in 2014, as the latest attempt to achieve its objectives by March 2019.

The programme was meant to replace the legacy Warnings Index and Semaphore systems with three new systems: Border Crossing, Advance Border Control (ABC), and Advanced Freight Targeting Capability (AFTC). The aim was to provide UK border officials with better information to make decisions about people and goods entering and exiting the UK.

Since 2014, the Department has changed its priorities to support its broader ambition for a digitised immigration system in the wake of Brexit.

In 2019, the Department announced it was resetting the DSAB programme and pushing delivery back to the end of March 2022. It decided to upgrade and improve Semaphore.

Despite spending millions on border IT systems in the past 10 years, workers still have to use outdated technology to decide whether an individual can be allowed to enter the UK, according to the PAC report.

Just 300 frontline users are currently using the new Border Crossing system at seven locations. 7,000 users were supposed to be using it at 56 locations by June this year.

When completed, the DSAB project should be able to process 140 million passengers a year at UK borders, although MPs doubt that the system would be able to cope.

‘It still has no proof that systems can cope with passenger volumes that existed prior to Covid-19, let alone the 6 per cent annual growth in the volume of passengers it is allowing for above the 140 million people that arrived in the UK annually prior to Covid-19,’ said the National Audit Office’s report in December last year.

Commenting on the delays in border IT projects, Tom Fairbairn, distinguished engineer at Solace, said: “The key to overcoming the problem of legacy technologies at the border, which is certain to have a wide range of effects on the UK, is that authorities appear to be attempting a point-to-point integration.”

“While a tried and tested method for some cases, this approach won’t work here, given the fact that there are over 20 government agencies whose systems need to be integrated. They are simply too many to go for the point-to-point approach, which is best for integrating two systems. With this amount of actors, loosely coupled systems and agility are the key, and the only way to achieve that is with an event-driven approach. This will allow for information to flow between points in real-time, seamlessly and accurately, ensuring citizens get the best possible experience.”

Mike Kiersey, principal technologist at Boomi, said: “The successful digitalisation of processes at the border will be the fundamental step to successful operations and data management in the months and years to come. If the border continues to rely on outdated legacy technologies, the technical issues outlined will continue, causing massive disruption.”

“Systems modernisation can be a significant challenge, but in this instance, it is imperative that proactive steps are made. Core legacy applications across government departments need to be open via APIs to enable emerging technologies to enter into the architecture, to digitally capture information at the borders. These systems need to be able to capture, prepare and process the data within, to ensure swift processing times and avoid deadlock.”

A Devon based artist has created a magnificent sculpture of Neptune, god of the sea, currently on display in Exmouth. Zen Wood Design designed the sculpture, standing at 2m and 12ft, using materials including local driftwood, fir wood and docking blocks from Plymouth dock yard. 

Sam Sterrett www.radioexe.co.uk 

Visit Radioexe site to view video

Zen Wood Design says after lockdown, they’ll bring him down to Exmouth beach for the public to look at. Writing on Facebook, they said: “Happy Friday Exmouth!!!

“Here he is! Standing at 2m and 12ft to the top of his trident, Neptune or Poseidon, it doesn’t matter. The piece is called ‘Old Gods Assemble’ this king of the sea is summoning the rest of the gang in Earths time of need.

I’ve used two reclaimed docking blocks from Plymouth dock yard and local driftwood for the head, trident and shield.”

Wednesday 17th March 7.00-8.30pm

As Children head back into the Classroom Devon Education stakeholders to Question Shadow Education Secretary 

On Wednesday 17th March, educators across Devon will have the chance to share their experiences and questions with Shadow Secretary of State for Education Kate Green MP on the quality of education in Devon.

This follows on from a successful listening event at the end of February which brought together parents, teachers and students to discuss topics such as academisation of schools, exams and the effect of COVID on students and teachers. 

Current Labour Councillors were at hand to answer questions which arose, as well as prospective candidates in the May 2021 elections. 

Cllr Su Aves from Devon County Council Children’s Scrutiny Committee who attended February’s event commented, “it is an unjust reality that students in Devon receive less funding per pupil than the national average and the pandemic has exacerbated the lack of resources in our schools and the achievement gap between students.” 

“As children went back into the classroom last week, this event with the Shadow Secretary will be a welcome opportunity for educators to discuss the state of education in Devon. We extend the invitation to any members of the public interested in working to make education better in Devon.” 

Members of the public can register for this free event here: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/devon-education-spotlight-with-kate-green-shadow-education-secretary-tickets-141603368487

Remember when senior officers in EDDC were found to have been “discourteous and unhelpful”, to have provided “inaccurate statements” and admitted to “amending” documents given to the Council’s own Scrutiny Committee, by no less than a Judge led Tribunal?

The context is the relocation of EDDC HQ from The Knowle, Sidmouth.

Note the ”formative” stages of this saga were taking place contemporaneously with the Graham Brown scandal which broke in the National press in March 2013.

To cut a long story short. A formal Cabinet decision to relocate was made in July 2011 in a move described as “cost neutral”. In 2012 an EDDC planning application to redevelop its site, to prepare for a sale with planning permission, failed. The Council’s own Scrutiny Committee attempted in January 2013 (unanimously) to ask EDDC to delay until more information was produced and had been examined, particularly on estimated costs and options for refurbishing existing office buildings. This was rejected by the then cabinet (see post script below).

On 17 February 2013, a member of the public, Jeremy Woodward asked under Freedom of Information for copies of the full unredacted Minutes of both Officer and Member Relocation Working Parties, and the full Relocation Manager’s formal progress reports.EDDC refused but he persisted, so did they. (Sequence of his requests can be found here). 

It ended up with EDDC appearing at two formal hearings in front of an Information Tribunal, an initial one in August 2014 and a final one in 2015. In the final decision notice of May 2015 Judge Kennedy, chairing the Information Tribunal took, in his words: the unusual and unfortunate step of commenting on the conduct of the appeal itself.

From these we learn that the Tribunal considered that EDDC, whose response was led by the Deputy Chief Executive, Richard Cohen, had been at times discourteous and unhelpful and indeed that statements made at earlier hearings had been inaccurate. This related to whether or not a fully legible copy of the disputed information could be produced for the Tribunal. (It eventually was).

During the Tribunal hearing the deputy Chief Executive, Richard Cohen, also made the extraordinary admission that he had not given an original version of a document to the Scrutiny Committee but an “amended” one.   

Despite the Tribunal ruling  that the Council were required to publish documentation for a ‘live project’, EDDC still refused citing that: “certain events have to occur before the sale to Pegasus can be concluded. Should those events not happen then we may well have to go back to negotiate with other parties (being those who were not successful the first time around) or go back to the open market and in either of those circumstance the Council’s position could be prejudiced by the information you seek being in the public domain.” Eventually this information was released in Jan 2017.

In 2018 PegasusLife won a planning appeal for the site.

We now know, from the information squeezed out of EDDC that this site, with planning approval, is estimated to have a “developable value” of £50M.

It would be usual for a developer to pay up to a third of this (£16.7M) for the purchase of the land. So a sale price of £7.5M reached by EDDC was not good value for the ratepayer. It’s less than half of what should have been obtained

Graham Brown resigned as a councillor in 2013 and died in 2019. Richard Cohen was made redundant a year ago.

In Owl’s view the reputational damage that was done to  the public’s view of probity amongst Tory Councillors and  EDDC senior officers by these events lingers.

There has never been any evidence of the sort of deep “soul searching” within EDDC that is necessary to “cleanse the stables” and remove the taint.

How can anyone have confidence in an organisation whose “Top Team” appears, by inaction, to condone such behaviour?

As recorded by Claire Wright, when a district Councillor, the phrase used by Mark  Williams (in his e-mail to councillors, 12.11.2014), was that the Brown investigation “hasn’t identified (anything) worth pursuing”.

“Nothing to see here” would seem to be a good summary.

PS Owl believes the spring 2013 cabinet comprised the following councillors, three or four of whom are still district or county councillors, some of whom seem to think they are qualified to cast stones; notably, a few lost their seats in 2019 (apologies to anyone left out):

Paul Diviani (Chairman/Leader); Andrew Moulding (Vice Chairman); Ray Bloxham; David Cox; Jill Elson; Graham Godbeer; Stephanie Jones; Ian Thomas; Phil Twiss

Chancellor Rishi Sunak, said: “The formula for the grant payments for the new fund is based on an index of economic need.”

But that is certainly not the only factor.

Read on to discover the “mechanism” by which Exmouth (and Axminster) lost out- Owl

By Anthony Reuben www.bbc.co.uk BBC Reality Check

The 45 towns in England that will share just over £1bn from the Towns Fund were announced in Wednesday’s Budget [3 March].

There has been some criticism of the towns chosen.

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer said: “If you end up with a list of 45 areas where the funding is going in and ‘by coincidence’ 40 of them are where there is a Conservative MP, I think people would be saying, ‘What’s going on here? This looks fishy.'”

But Prime Minister Boris Johnson said: “The criteria is entirely objective, looking at data, poverty, employment.”

He said the government wanted to “level up” the country in “a completely impartial way”.

Chancellor Rishi Sunak, meanwhile, said: “The formula for the grant payments for the new fund is based on an index of economic need.”

But that is certainly not the only factor.

Picking a shortlist

BBC News analysis found 56 constituencies would benefit, as some of the 45 towns cover multiple constituencies.

Of those, 47 have Conservative MPs, including 14 gained from Labour at the 2019 election.

The other nine have Labour MPs.

The Conservatives tend to do better in towns, though, with Labour support generally stronger in cities.

Sir Keir has called on the government to publish the full criteria.

But we already know quite a lot about why the towns were chosen.

The first step was to pick a shortlist of 101 towns, which would be invited to apply for £25m, or £50m in exceptional circumstances.

Ranking towns

Following concern about the lack of transparency in that process, the National Audit Office (NAO) published a report setting out how the shortlist had been compiled.

Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) officials took a ranking of English towns by an Office for National Statistics (ONS) index of deprivation and then further ranked the 541 most deprived, about half of the total, using a formula based on:

• income deprivation
• skills deprivation
• productivity (the amount produced per hour of work)
• exposure to Brexit
• exposure to economic shocks
• level of private investment
• eligibility for other government funding, which could be combined with Towns Fund money

The first four of those criteria were judged on official statistics and the last three on the judgement of officials.

Another factor was towns in more deprived areas were more likely to be shortlisted.

Setting priorities

The towns were then divided into priority groups:

• high
• medium
• low

But the 40 high-priority towns did not necessarily have the highest scores based on the formula – some adjustments were made to ensure the most deprived areas in each region of England were included.

There were 318 medium-priority towns and 183 low.

The officials recommended ministers shortlist:

• all 40 high priority
• 60 of the medium
• none of the low

They also suggested the 15 biggest towns should be excluded because they could also be eligible for city funding.

But the ministers ignored the advice on the biggest towns, putting 10 of the 15 on the shortlist.

And the final shortlist comprised:

• all 40 high priority
• 49 of the medium
• 12 of the low

In choosing these 12 low-priority towns, ministers used criteria other than scores devised by civil servants, including:

• being on the coast
• poor transport links or a good geographical spread of towns across a region
• potential for investment or growth

Officials concluded the shortlist met Treasury rules for managing public money.

But it is clear there was considerable divergence from the formula devised by the civil servants.

We do not know exactly how the 45 winning towns were chosen from the 101 invited to apply.

• 19 of the high priority
• 21 of the medium
• five of the low

And the five low-priority towns, Cheadle, Leyland, Morley, Southport and Stocksbridge are all in constituencies with a Conservative MP.

The most striking choice was Cheadle.

It had the seventh lowest score on the MHCLG officials’ list.

But ministers said it was primed for investment because of recent transport improvements in the area, as well as being strategically located between Stockport and Manchester Airport and having strong motorway links.

In a report on the process, the Public Accounts Committee of MPs said they were “not convinced by the rationales for selecting some towns and not others”.

It added that: “The justification offered by ministers for selecting individual towns are vague and based on sweeping assumptions.”

From a correspondent:

From a personal perspective having spent hours, days, weeks . . . . no actually . . . . . seven years voluntarily taking an interest in representing and contributing the views of the community on the future development in our village to the East Devon District Council for the Local Plan 2013-2031, the Villages Plan (including BUABs) and our Neighbourhood Plan – may I suggest that (even with much prompting on Facebook and social media from District Councillors to remind us that time is running out for making representations for the New Local Plan)  – the reason why many previously interested parties in our communities do not wish to comment on the new Local Plan going forward is that after multitudinous  time spent and huge efforts in the past  – one local community found that inappropriate development was approved by the Planning Committee recently (in spite of hundreds of local residents’ objections) on green fields, on high risk flood areas with proposals supported that will  increase traffic substantially in an area which already suffers with massive traffic congestion!

There was approval for 54 new homes on an agricultural greenfield outside of the Local Plan, the BUAB and the Neighbourhood Plan;

There was approval for a change of proposals from a supportable, modest amount of homes shown at a Public Consultation to a block of 40 two-three storey apartments overlooking existing residents’ homes directly opposite to a Grade II* Listed Building when, surprisingly, proposals for blocks of two/three storey apartments were not included in the Neighbourhood Plan for an historic, rural village;

There was approval for increased provision of multiple commercial uses, in tandem with adding 94 dwellings to the mix, in a countryside location because the developers’ viability reports maintained that the whole masterplan would be financially unviable without building homes on green fields;

There was approval for a significant increase in traffic (with no extra provision for public transport) in an area that already suffers with major gridlock, noise and air pollution. . . when most of us are trying to improve our carbon footprint and EDDC state they are committed to policies to improve climate change;

There was approval for a large impermeable car park on green, agricultural fields adjacent to a watercourse that is within an area of high flood risk.

It must be remembered that the preparation of the current Local Plan 2013-2031 incurred exorbitant costs, magnified by the need for a Planning Inspector to advise  for many months to ensure that the Plan was sound, with copious, administration costs that accumulated over ‘eons’ – so it is fair to say that Local Plans cost East Devon tax payers very highly!!

However, when all local representations have been taken into account and the policies have been written and the Local Plan is adopted and in place – the bad news is that around 16 elected Local Authority Councillors (as the ultimate decision makers) with recommendations from Planning Officers  can ignore the Local Plan, BUAB, the Neighbourhood Plan and National Planning Policies  and  approve an application that offers substantial economical growth to the entire district, which in their opinion, outweighs the social and environmental policies set down for the protection of a village community in East Devon!

There is little point in giving people confidence that planning policies will protect their areas with Local Plans or pretend that local democracy and community involvement has any value  in decision making when, in fact, such policies can be overridden and the local people’s representations ignored!

There were, indeed, a great deal of positive aspects attached to the approved development  that were hugely innovative and supportable – but sadly planners deemed that environmental and social aspects within their Local Plan could be ignored for the greater good of providing economic benefits for the entire district to fill a funding gap black hole!

The electorate had sent a clear message to the Council that after five decades of Conservative dominance, they wanted change and they were hoping for a reformed and improved council whose administration would bring stability and direction for the benefit of all its residents.   In this context all residents must be interpreted as some residents because some residents have had to tolerate a build, build, build policy because East Devon has vast swathes of protected Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty – so some communities in the planning lottery will have to draw ‘the short straw’ resulting in an historic, rural village being sacrificed and residents’ views being brushed aside!

And that’s why many people have lost faith in the local planning system and will not waste any more of their precious time responding to a new East Devon Local Plan Consultation that can equally be ignored if it suits the decision makers!

The Localism Act sought to decentralise power away from Whitehall and back into the hands of local councils, communities and individuals to act on local priorities and this concept is applauded.

The pandemic has shown us that our personal choices and decisions can have huge impacts on other peoples’ lives – flippancy is not supported and there will be no hand- clapping for planners in this community!

However, in an effort to end on a positive note – us ‘minions’ have all been assured by our elected members that this is the way democracy works – we elect them to be our representatives and they make the decisions – Mmmmmm!

• Construction of single storey extension Hanham Hillside Road Sidmouth EX10 8JFRef. No: 21/0657/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Reinstatement of forestry tracks Paradise Copse Clyst HydonRef. No: 21/0661/AGR | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed two storey side extension over existing single storey element of the dwelling. 16 Monmouth Way Honiton EX14 2GYRef. No: 21/0665/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Lawful Development Certificate for the construction of single storey extension1 Summers Terrace Glanvill Way Honiton EX14 2HBRef. No: 21/0664/CPL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Approved
• Construction of replacement porch and single storey front extension Greenway House Sidmouth EX10 0LTRef. No: 21/0659/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of a two-storey rear extension and associated landscape works Rhode Hill Lodge Rhode Lane Uplyme Lyme Regis DT7 3TYRef. No: 21/0643/FUL | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Roof over existing silage clamp Higher Mallocks Farm Woodmanton Woodbury Exeter EX5 1HGRef. No: 21/0647/AGR | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of first floor extension above the existing garage 26 Hillcrest Gardens Exmouth Devon EX8 4FERef. No: 21/0624/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of single storey side extension 2 Castle View Colyton EX24 6DNRef. No: 21/0622/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of rear and side extensions, alterations to the existing roof and insertion of rooflight to southeast elevation Woodhay Woodhouse Lane Uplyme Lyme Regis DT7 3SXRef. No: 21/0621/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Additional storey to the existing building to provide further office accommodation. Robson House Chapel Street Honiton EX14 1EURef. No: 21/0620/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of single storey extension to rear and cladding to rear dormer Mowhayes Withen Lane Aylesbeare Exeter EX5 2JQRef. No: 21/0632/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of single storey extension Willowmead Woodbury Salterton Exeter EX5 1PZRef. No: 21/0630/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of two storey extension and rear dormer window 48 Green Close Exmouth EX8 3QARef. No: 21/0627/FUL | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of lawfulness for the construction of single storey rear extension12 Hooker Close Budleigh Salterton EX9 6QXRef. No: 21/0625/CPL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• First floor front extension over existing ground floor porch. 6 Saxon Meadow Colyton Devon EX24 6AHRef. No: 21/0617/FUL | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Installation of solar panels on the south facing roof of garage. Lyme House Lyme Road Axminster EX13 5AZRef. No: 21/0599/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1 Oak: Crown raise Oak tree to give 1.75m above ground level. Reduce via thinning lowest primary limb to east (with large split) by 30% leaf area. Reason: To increase clearance over lawn and to remove weight from split limb. 15 Hayes End West Hill Ottery St Mary Devon EX11 1GGRef. No: 21/0616/TRE | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Gleditsia to be reduced by 15% by pruning and thinning as advised by TipTop trees of Honiton. Branches growing amongst telephone wires. 4 Summerland Honiton EX14 1HFRef. No: 21/0613/TCA | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Detailed application for the erection of a roof over existing silage clamp Twist Farm Brinscombe Lane Membury Axminster EX13 7JYRef. No: 21/0608/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Erection of roof canopy over existing silage clamp Twist Farm Brinscombe Lane Membury Axminster EX13 7JYRef. No: 21/0607/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of roof canopy over existing silage clamp Trebblehayes Farm Membury Axminster EX13 7UARef. No: 21/0606/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of roof canopy over existing open cow yard Alston Farm Alston Axminster EX13 7LGRef. No: 21/0604/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of roof canopy over existing open cow yard Alston Farm Alston Axminster EX13 7LGRef. No: 21/0603/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of roof canopies over existing silage clamps and open cow yard Alston Farm Alston Axminster EX13 7LGRef. No: 21/0602/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a roof canopy over existing silage clamp Alston Farm Alston Axminster EX13 7LGRef. No: 21/0601/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed Extension to Unit 50 Greendale Business Park Unit 50 Greendale Business Park Woodbury Salterton Exeter EX5 1EWRef. No: 21/0598/MFUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Retention of garden shed The Old Forge Axminster Road Musbury Axminster EX13 8AZRef. No: 21/0611/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replacement garden shed. Shells Knapp Upottery Honiton EX14 9PFRef. No: 21/0594/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of roof canopy over existing manure store. Lower Luxton Farm Upottery Honiton EX14 9PBRef. No: 21/0610/FUL | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Construction of greenhouse. Little Hay Yarcombe Honiton EX14 9BQRef. No: 21/0593/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Change of use of land from Agricultural to Domestic curtilage Goodlands Farm Charmouth Road Axminster EX13 5STRef. No: 21/0588/COU | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion and extension to garage to provide habitable accommodation 15 Green Close Exmouth EX8 3QHRef. No: 21/0592/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Beech : crown reduce by 2-3m and reshape. Thin crown by no more than 10%. Reason : Maintain tree to appropriate size for location Brampford Speke School Brampford Speke Exeter EX5 5HERef. No: 21/0584/TRE | Validated: Mon 01 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of lawfulness for the construction of single storey extension and dormer windows52 Featherbed Lane Exmouth EX8 3NERef. No: 21/0579/CPL | Validated: Mon 01 Mar 2021 | Status: Approved
• Raising of roof ridge and eaves of existing roof, and construction of dormer window to provide loft conversion. Construction of two storey extension including balcony. Insertion of side rooflight and windows. Lower Doatshayne Farm Musbury Axminster EX13 8ABRef. No: 21/0590/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Retention of decking 35 Underleys Beer Seaton EX12 3LXRef. No: 21/0581/FUL | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of lawfulness for the construction of a single storey rear extension14 Lime Grove Exmouth EX8 5NNRef. No: 21/0578/CPL | Validated: Mon 01 Mar 2021 | Status: Approved
• Proposed erection of 2 bedroom end terrace dwelling. 36 Millers Way Honiton EX14 1JBRef. No: 21/0580/FUL | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Creation of off road parking in front garden 4 Foxhill Axminster EX13 5LFRef. No: 21/0565/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Construction of single and two storey rear extensions following removal of rear car port. High Orchard Hillside Road Sidmouth EX10 8JERef. No: 21/0566/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of single storey rear extension. 40 Peaslands Road Sidmouth EX10 9BERef. No: 21/0564/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolish part of existing dilapidated agricultural shed and erect new general purpose building Andrewshayes Holiday Park Dalwood Axminster EX13 7DYRef. No: 21/0553/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Extension to replace existing garage area. Higher Manor Cottage Station Road Sidmouth EX10 9DJRef. No: 21/0562/FUL | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Change of use of land from agricultural to a gym (Use Class E (d)), to include the siting of containers (x3), tarpaulin covering and parking area Newcourt Barton Clyst Road Topsham Exeter EX3 0DBRef. No: 21/0546/FUL | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of front and rear dormer windows, single storey rear extension, infill front extension and raised decking. Insertion of new first floor side windows. Change of external materials. 13 Springfield Road Exmouth EX8 3JYRef. No: 21/0545/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of condition 2 of permission 91/P0654 (House) to allow for revised design of dwelling Site Of Spillers Cottage Road From Pear Tree Cottage To Deep Cut Farm Shute EX13 7QGRef. No: 21/0535/VAR | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of condition 2 (approved plans) of planning permission 18/1238/FUL (conversion of existing barn into four dwellings) to allow design changes to elevations and courtyard Winslade Barton Clyst St Mary Exeter EX5 1ATRef. No: 21/0527/VAR | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of barn and dung store Hayne Farm Awliscombe Honiton EX14 3PRRef. No: 21/0514/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion and extension of garage block into a two-bedroom self-catering holiday unit Valley Farm Whitford Road Kilmington Axminster EX13 7RGRef. No: 21/0510/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of seven new dwellings, with associated landscaping and access Stoke Cottage Stoke Canon Exeter EX5 4ATRef. No: 21/0501/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Installation of AC Plant and erection of a bin store Lancaster House Unit 1 Exeter International Office Park Clyst Honiton Exeter EX5 2HLRef. No: 21/0500/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Change of use from Office to Takeaway and changes to existing rear extension and addition of extraction system. 24 High Street Budleigh Salterton EX9 6LQRef. No: 21/0458/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of existing Garage/workshop; rear oak framed extension Summerway Farm Northleigh Colyton EX24 6BZRef. No: 21/0434/FUL | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of front porch 3 Higher Maunders Hill Otterton Budleigh Salterton EX9 7HZRef. No: 21/0447/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Forestry tool store Silver Wood Harcombe Hill Harcombe Sidmouth EX10 0PRRef. No: 21/0421/AGR | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolition of existing bungalow and holiday let and construction of two attached dwellings. Woodside Dunkeswell Honiton EX14 4RGRef. No: 21/0382/FUL | Validated: Mon 01 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of double garage to create annexe accommodation Sandy Knapp Feniton Honiton EX14 3EFRef. No: 21/0366/FUL | Validated: Fri 05 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Outline application, with all matters reserved, for the change of use of land to B2 (General Industrial) Land Adjacent To Mill Park Industrial Estate Woodbury SaltertonRef. No: 21/0337/OUT | Validated: Mon 01 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Extension of military bunker to create new summer/winter bat roost The Operations Block Dunkeswell Airfield Honiton EX14 4AJRef. No: 21/0296/FUL | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Extension of military bunker to create new summer/winter bat roost. The Operations Block Dunkeswell Airfield Honiton EX14 4AJRef. No: 21/0297/LBC | Validated: Wed 03 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Retention of repairs and remedial works to interior including re-plastering, ceilings, removal of modern cornices, removal /re-alignment of partitions; Refurbishment of sash windows, replacement of internal shutters, replacement plaster cornices, new doors, new fireplace to sitting room; Remedial corrective repairs to bulging external render over window to Bedroom 1; Removal and replacement of porch on west elevation; Replacement of 1no. window on ground floor on east elevation; Replacement of 1no. window on ground floor on south elevation; Works to separate access bridge from its attachment to building and provide new support on east elevation. Flat 1 Sidbury House Buckley Road Sidbury Sidmouth EX10 0SLRef. No: 21/0262/LBC | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of outbuilding to one bed flat and construction of brick wall and gate Utopia 20 Fore Street Sidmouth EX10 8ALRef. No: 21/0232/FUL | Validated: Thu 04 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of barn, access track and boundary treatment. Kerswell Lodge Broadclyst Exeter EX5 3AFRef. No: 21/0164/FUL | Validated: Tue 02 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed conversion of former shippen/games room to a holiday accommodation unit. Provision of 3 wooden camping cabins in woods and use of outdoor cooking area. High Grange Burrow Knapp Way Dalwood Axminster EX13 7ESRef. No: 20/2889/FUL | Validated: Mon 01 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolition of existing house and erection of 8 dwellings, 5 no. 4 bed and 3 no. 3 bed, and enlargement of existing access Land Rear Of 15 Townsend Road Seaton EX12 2AYRef. No: 20/2865/FUL | Validated: Mon 01 Mar 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

Never mind Exmouth, at the election it was the thought that counted.

Anyone looking after Axminster?

Put it down to another “mutant” algorithm – Owl

Minister’s constituency gets three pots of cash

George Grylls Political Reporter The Times (paper edition Saturday)

Robert Jenrick’s constituency of Newark has been fast-tracked to receive tens of millions of pounds from all three of the government’s funds designed to tackle regional inequalities.

The town represented by the Conservative cabinet minister has received £25 million from the Towns Fund while also being prioritised for the £220 million Community Renewal Fund and the £4.8 billion Levelling Up Fund.

The constituency is the 357th most deprived in the UK, according to House of Commons data.

Labour has accused the government of engaging in “pork-barrel politics” after political scientists ran mathematical analyses showing that Conservative marginal seats were more likely to benefit from Towns Fund money.

Jenrick, the communities’ secretary, was responsible for selecting the 61 areas that could bid for money from the Towns Fund, but he has denied any role in choosing his own constituency despite video from the 2019 election showing him saying that he “helped to secure” the money.

Steve Reed, the shadow communities’ secretary, said: “This formula confirms fears that the Conservatives are funnelling money to richer areas and leaving poorer areas to sink.”

A spokesman for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said: “This analysis is deeply misguided and demonstrates a lack of awareness of the need to level up the country, as well as failing to take into account the need to correct historic underinvestment in small towns and regions across the UK. Ministers did not see a list of specific places before agreeing the list of metrics.”

Residents in Exeter are angry after a ‘bin conflict’ erupted between East Devon District Council (EDDC) and Bloor Homes.

Chloe Parkman www.devonlive.com 

Members of the ‘Broadclyst Environment Group‘ (BEG) say that they have noticed a littering problem in and around the new Bloor Homes development in Westclyst.

According to one BEG member, residents have had difficulty disposing of their waste as there is only one bin at a new skate and play park.

A spokesperson for BEG said: ”The park is adjacent to the Co-op and so it is a no brainer that people will nip to the shop to get snacks and come to the park.

”With that said, there is only one bin and sure enough the first weekend the park opened there was litter everywhere. It has been stacked full and not emptied because nobody is taking responsibility for the bin.

”It’s a ridiculously bureaucratic situation where the management company associated with Bloor Homes are responsible for that bin but they have not yet signed the contract over to EDDC for the responsibility of emptying the bin.”

The spokesperson for the group said that a few days ago one member of the group, Kitty, was in the area when she noticed that the park was covered in rubbish.

”There was litter everywhere but also the bin was stacked full.

”Kitty decided to pick up all of the litter and left it next to the overflowing bin.”

Angered by the situation BEG took to social media to share the incident with local residents of Westclyst.

”There was uproar. This is a new community moving into these developments and it is not a great starting point when something like this happens.”

Things took a turn for the worse on March 11 after bin was covered up and put out of use.

”Yesterday (March 11) Kitty was in the area and noticed that the bin had been covered up. Nobody is emptying or taking responsibility for the bin.

”What has really wound us up is that Bloor Homes have a sign up which states that they are part of and support the community but they absolutely are not doing that.

”I can understand EDDC’s point of view, they cannot take on every single bin in the community.

”Something needs to be done.”

Following the incident, a spokesperson for Bloor Homes said: ”The play area at Westclyst has only opened to the public very recently.

”Bloor Homes can confirm that it has instructed the management company to ensure that the bin at the play area is emptied moving forward.

”As an immediate solution, we will also ensure that the refuse is collected.”

‘What has really wound us up is that Bloor Homes have a sign up which states that they are part of and support the community but they absolutely are not doing that.’ (Image: Ben Evans)

Additionally, a spokesperson for EDDC said: ”We have received an enquiry about the bin in question, which was not owned by the council.

”Nevertheless we investigated the issue and discovered that it was put in place by a developer without the council’s knowledge.

”This meant there was not a service contract in place to have it emptied, resulting in an overflow causing a litter issue. The council had it covered up until a contract could be arranged.

“Given that these new developments have not been adopted they do not fall within the responsibility of EDDC to supply or service any litter bins.

”Whilst we do offer the service to the developer they are under no obligation to use our services and can, and do, use their own contractors.

The bin has now been covered over and is unusable (Image: Ben Evans)

”This means some are managed by the developer, some the local parish council and some later become EDDC’s responsibility, once the land is adopted.

“We have since been out to this particular litter bin and one nearby and arranged through Broadclyst Parish Council for a service contract to be set up and added to our contractors list, which will be put in place as soon as it can be processed.

“We would like to thank residents for their patience while the issue is resolved and ask until the contract is in place if they could use a litter bin some 30 yards away, that is serviced by EDDC, at the bus stop.

“If you have an issue you are unsure about, please don’t hesitate to contact us through our website here. Your developer should also be aware.”

Concerns have been raised that staff working on NHS test and trace call centres used their personal email accounts to handle individuals’ health data. 

www.healthcareitnews.com

The issue was raised by a former employee of outsourcing giant Sitel, which runs a large part of the test and trace call centre operation.

She told PoliticsHome, that managers instructed call handlers to use their own email accounts to send case information for review because the internal systems made it unmanageable for details to be shared securely via their online platform.

The whistleblower believed the practice was in breach of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR).

A spokesperson at the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) confirmed it is investigating the complaint.

WHY IT MATTERS

The former staff member said it was likely that personal information, including names, date of births, phone numbers and NHS numbers, was being sent via personal email accounts.

THE LARGER CONTEXT

It’s not the first time the NHS test and trace programme has faced controversy. The contract tracing app was affected by numerous software issues including a bug that meant the system failed to send notifications to users who should have self-isolated.

Concerns were also raised about the vulnerability of health data when test and trace contracts service company, Serco was hit by a ransomware attack.

The European Commission recently granted the UK preliminary data access on the basis that its data protection rules are “essentially equivalent” to the EU’s GDPR and Law Enforcement Directive (LED). 

ON THE RECORD

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “We expect the highest standard of our suppliers and expect them to fully comply with their obligations in regard to their data protection requirements.”

A Sitel spokesperson said: “We are currently investigating the suggestion that certain team members have used personal email accounts in the course of their work.

“This is something we take very seriously and multiple controls are in place to prevent this from happening. Any actions taken by team members that are not in compliance with our controls will be addressed through the appropriate channels and consistent with our internal policies.”

Pascale Robinson, campaigns officer at We Own It said: “These revelations about Sitel’s practices are shocking. But sadly they’re not surprising. Throughout the pandemic we’ve seen numerous reports of private companies involved in running England’s broken contact tracing system engaging in dodgy practices when it comes to managing data.

“Contact tracing is delicate, sensitive work, and it requires the utmost commitment to best practice of data protection. It’s disappointing to see that this appears not to have been followed by one of the companies directly involved in the management of the system.” 

House builders that carry out repairs on newly built homes need to be more open about what work has been required, according to the chairman of Parliament’s Housing Committee.

By Dan Whitworth www.bbc.co.uk

Some home owners say they were asked to sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) as a condition of repairs being done.

The practice was “appalling” Clive Betts MP told Radio 4’s Money Box programme.

The Home Builders Federation said NDAs were “not widely used” by developers.

Mr Betts said housebuilders should be obliged to inform home owners when systematic defects were identified that might affect their property, which he said would be normal practice in other areas.

“If this kind of thing happens in the car industry for example, car companies have to tell their customers, issue a recall, and get the problem fixed.

“I don’t see why it should be any different when it comes to buying houses,” he said.

It is hard to establish an accurate, independent picture of how common such NDAs are. People who have signed them are worried about speaking out because of the threat of legal action.

But Money Box spoke to several industry experts who said these gagging orders were used regularly.

‘Despicable practice’

Chris Blythe, former chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Building, said it was “quite common” for developers to use them.

“Unfortunately, because of the nature of the agreement, i.e. non-disclosure, no-one knows very much about it,” he said.

“But it’s done for commercial reasons, because if it became known on a particular development that there are problems [then] other house buyers would be asking the house builder to do remedial work [for them too].

“So they use these to silence people… and it’s a despicable practice.”

Around 250,000 new houses were built in Britain, according to the latest annual figures, and defects in new build houses are common.

Many are minor and fixed without any problems, but serious defects can cost thousands of pounds to put right.

These include things like poor brickwork, faulty foundations, problems with windows and external doors, structural weaknesses with rooves and issues with plumbing and sewerage systems.

When remedial works cost such large sums of money developers sometimes delay carrying out work, Money Box was told. The programme was also told of cases where developers fought home owners for years and refused to carry out remedial works at all.

Hidden risk

Geoff Peter is a solicitor and founded Wingrove Law to help homeowners who bought houses and later discovered serious defects with their properties.

“Non-disclosure agreements… are of no practical benefit or use to homeowners,” he said.

“The effects of them when they’re used at scale, as they are in the [house building] industry, is really just to keep a lid on the true nature and scale of problems.

“So it’s really impossible for… the buying public, to have any real idea of the risks they are taking when they buy a new build property… because there’s no reliable source of information as to the nature and scale of the problems that they’re likely to encounter.”

When asked about NDAs industry body, the Home Builders Federation, said: “Settlement Agreements are legal contracts that are used by businesses across all sectors.

“They are not widely used by housebuilders and when they are, it tends to be with regards to details of compensation payments, sometimes at the request of the customer.”

If you’ve been asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement as a condition of getting repair work done to your newbuild house email us in confidence at moneybox@bbc.co.uk and tell us about your experience.

Rapid charging points for electric vehicles could soon be installed in two of Honiton’s car parks – Lace Walk short stay, and Blackdown House.

East Devon Council has been offered the chance to host 30 charging points in car parks across the district – provided it can move quickly to get them installed.

Philippa Davies honiton.nub.news

If the proposal goes ahead, Honiton could get two charging units, each serving two parking bays, at both car parks.

The rapid chargers can top up an empty battery to 80 per cent in around 40 minutes.

The council’s Cabinet will meet next Wednesday, March 17, to discuss the proposal, and is being recommended to take it forward.

The background is that a supplier, Gamma Energy, won funding from the Government-funded public body Innovate UK to provide and manage rapid chargers in the Devon County Council area. The project has funding for 150 charging units – and needs them to be operational by the end of March 2022.

Devon County Council and Gamma Energy approached the district council to invite interest in hosting the units in up to 30 car parks where residents and visitors would find them useful. There’s no upfront cost to the district council; it will lease the car park spaces to the unit supplier for a token rent, and receive a small percentage of the income from the charging fees.

The report going to the Cabinet describes this as ‘an exciting opportunity’ and recommends entering into the necessary legal agreements to provide up to 30 charging units, which is what Gamma Energy is offering.

Car parks in Lympstone, Budleigh, Exmouth, Sidmouth, Seaton, Beer, Colyton, Axminster and Ottery are also being looked at as potential charging sites.

Electric car sharing hub at Blackdown House?

Councillors will also hear that – in view of the possible car charging points at Blackdown House – there’s a possibility of it being used as a hub for Co-Cars. These are low-emission vehicles operated by a Community Interest Company, and available to the public for hire by the hour or the day. The district council is ‘actively exploring’ the possibility of creating Co-Car hubs at the car park of its Honiton headquarters, along with other locations in East Devon.

A separate charging units proposal under DELETTI scheme

There’s already a scheme under way to provide a different charging point at the Lace Walk short stay car park under the first phase of the Devon Low-carbon Energy and Transport Technology Innovator scheme, known as DELETTI. This will be a fast charging unit serving two designated parking bays, providing a top-up charge in two hours or more.

Car parks in Exmouth, Sidmouth and Seaton will also have these charging points. Most of the funding for this project has come from the European Regional Development Fund, meaning the district council will need to contribute only £4,000 per two-vehicle charging unit.

And more electric charging points in the pipeline

The district council has also bid for £500,000 from the Local Enterprise Partnership to install further electric vehicle charging points throughout its area, including on-street units.

The focus is on rapid charge points, and the council envisages using its experience of the Innovate UK and DELETTI projects to commission and manage its network of charging points.

Nine residents have died following a “devastating” outbreak of coronavirus at a care home.

BBC News www.bbc.co.uk 

Brandon House in Exmouth, Devon, had been free of Covid for 11 months prior to residents getting ill in February.

Diane Loxam, a training coordinator, said nine residents at the dementia specialist care home had died and two were “quite poorly”.

“It’s just awful, no words can express how we’re all feeling at the moment,” she said.

All residents at the home received their first dose of the vaccine in January.

image captionTwo residents are still poorly at Brandon House care home in Exmouth

Heather Coles, an administrator, said because many of the residents had dementia it was “harder” for them to understand the restrictions in place at the care home.

Public Health Devon said while the county had “relatively few cases of coronavirus” compared to the rest of the country “a small number of outbreaks” had occurred in some settings.

It is working “very closely” with the homes to ensure the safety of residents and staff, control the outbreaks, and reduce the risk of further transmission.

It added: “Coronavirus is still a very infectious virus, and cases like this are a reminder of how important it is for us still to remain vigilant and to take every precaution to prevent its further spread.”

Always interesting to keep an eye on our old GESP Partners – in this case Teignbridge which bottled pulling out of GESP last July. – Owl

Daniel Clark www.devonlive.com 

A High Court ruling dismissing an appeal against a 1,210 home housing plans for the edge of Newton Abbot has left locals outraged.

PCL Planning’s scheme, submitted on behalf of the Rew family, was granted planning permission in June 2020, after the Secretary of State allowed the appeal for the land at Wolborough Barton, in Newton Abbot.

As well as the 1,210 new homes, the Wolborough scheme includes a new primary school, employment land, community facilities, including a day nursery and a health centre, a local shopping centre, play area, allotments and a multi-use games area, as well as a link road connecting the A380 and the A381.

Full planning permission to convert the Wolborough Barton farmstead into a boutique hotel, restaurant and bar, has been granted by the Secretary of State as well.

Abbotskerswell Parish Council had taken legal action over the granting of the appeal, but after a two day hearing in the High Court in February, Mrs Justice Lang ruled that the Secretary of State was entitled to grant permission for the development without having comprehensive information on biodiversity and climate change, as this can be considered at the reserved matters stage.

The Judge also has ordered the parish council to pay costs of up to £10,000, and they will now be calling in the pledges that residents had made in the event of them losing the case.

Abbotskerswell parish council have been left outraged by the ruling, while Newton Says No councillors says that the battle to save Wolborough from NA3 continues, but the Rew family have welcomed the decision and Teignbridge District Council have said that now the development is going ahead, they will work together with stakeholders to make it a place where people want to live, work and play.

A spokesman for the parish council said: “We are outraged at this judgement. Teignbridge District Council’s decision to allocate Wolborough Barton (NA3) for development in the local plan is something that Abbotskerswell Parish Council has challenged because the environmental information and protections are completely inadequate.

“The implications of this judgement are of national importance. In the High Court the Judge has said, despite the law saying that environmental matters need to be dealt with at the earliest possible date, that such matters can be delayed and should be dealt with in reserved matters at a later date. In effect further delaying all environmental surveys until the very last minute.

“The decision to persistently delay or avoid being presented with key environmental information and protection is alarming. We believe that the lack of firm environmental protections is unacceptable.”

The parish council is now considering carefully whether to appeal the High Court decision to the Court of Appeal, but the spokesman said they need to consider the question of costs in doing so.

They added: “In the meantime, the parish council wholeheartedly thank all those who supported our cause and pledged their money to help us with the costs in the event that we lost this case. We are very sorry to have to call in those pledges and we are considering funding options that might enable an appeal.”

Aerial view of the Wolborough Barton site

Newton Say No councillors, who were in part elected to Teignbridge District Council due to their opposition to the development, said that the decision was shameful.

A statement from Newton Says No said: “Teignbridge District Council continues with the shameful false narrative that anyone other than a small number of vested interests they support and enable will benefit from the environmental and climate change disaster that is NA3.

“They have shown utter contempt and disdain for the residents since they shoehorned NA3 into the Local Plan in 2013. In the fullness of time their actions will be laid bare. In the meantime, they will continue to soft soap and gaslight the residents with stories of ‘live, work and play’, whilst below the waterline their plans simply destroy the environment and pollute the district to profit the few.”

Cllr Richard Daws, deputy group leader, added: “The decision to allow NA3 is similar to the Drax power station and the coal mine in Cumbria in terms of being a nationally relevant environmental and climate change catastrophe. The Government cannot be allowed to escape its own promises. After public pressure, Robert Jenrick today admitted the Cumbria coal mine raises issues of wider importance.

“NA3 is something the people need to keep fighting every step of the way with all their might, so that, as a community, we can all look our grandchildren in the eyes and reassure them that we understood and tried our hardest to fight blind greed and ignorance. The battle for NA3 will continue.”

Cllr Janet Bradford added: “Once again I repeat what I said when I was elected by the residents of College Ward in Teignbridge. There are some things that are just wrong and this is one of them. At this point, no one has the ethical or moral right to destroy the nature that we are part of and depend upon. The fight goes on for the voiceless, our wonderful wildlife and our children and grandchildrens’ future.”

And Chris Watts, from the Wolborough Residents Association, added: “In Newton Abbot, developers are in the process of destroying our access to high quality open spaces and in the process exacerbating the process of climate change and the diminution of our biodiversity. It is bewildering to keep reading government texts exhorting the need to mitigate the effects of climate change and halt the loss of biodiversity but witness the exact opposite in our lived experience.”

But a spokesman for the Rew family, who own the land, said that they welcomed the court ruling, that the proposal would help people on the housing waiting list, and it was a ‘great shame that these proposals have been delayed by legal challenges’.

They added: “We welcome the court’s ruling that the Secretary of State was right to agree that outline planning permission, first applied for in 2017, should be granted.

“This site was included in the Teignbridge Local Plan in 2014 and is a highly sustainable location, suitable for a new mixed-use urban extension to Newton Abbot.

“At the last count there were almost 1,000 households in Teignbridge on the housing waiting list and our proposals will help to deliver almost 250 much-needed affordable homes for local people.

“We are sure that many people will, like us, feel it is a great shame that these proposals have been delayed by legal challenges partly funded by local council tax payers.

The new link road between the A380 and the A381 as part of the NA3 Wolborough Barton development framework plan

“We are now looking forward to working constructively with Teignbridge District Council and other stakeholders as we take the next steps towards delivering 1,210 new homes and a new link road which will connect the A381 with the A380 South Devon Highway, easing congestion and improving air quality.

“In addition, there will be the creation of new jobs and investment in the local community including a community centre, shops, workplaces, a network of green infrastructure and a site for a new primary school.”

And a spokesman for Teignbridge District Council said that they hope the ruling would bring an end to the process and that there will be polarised views on this decision.

They said: “This decision removes uncertainty and enables us now to work with the developers to ensure that the detailed planning requirements are properly met and that homes, amenities and surroundings are built to meet the needs of future generations.”

“It has been considered by the Planning Inspectorate, the Secretary of State and the High Court. Despite the many challenges at different stages, the outcomes show that officers acted appropriately, following the correct planning processes and gave sound professional advice on planning, ecological and environmental issues.

“There will be polarised views on this decision with some people being disappointed, while others will welcome the economic and housing benefits that will flow from the development.

“Now this development will go ahead, the Council will work together with stakeholders to make it a place where people want to live, work and play.

Wolborough Barton

“The permission, that was part of the council’s planning blueprint for the next 10 years and beyond, will see 300 affordable homes delivered, as well as key infrastructure and accessible green spaces for residents and communities.

“There will still be planning conditions to comply with and detailed designs and environmental impact assessments will need to be approved so that construction of the new neighbourhood at Wolborough can start.”

The decision can still be challenged in the Court of Appeal, although this could have significant costs implications for Abbotskerswell Parish Council if they chose to go down this route.

While the application has outline planning permission, a reserved matters application for elements of detail for the application, concerning access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale will need to be submitted and approved before work can begin.

A £6m contribution will be made from developers towards Cranbrook and other new developments on the edge of Exeter becoming zero carbon – and hopefully end the frustration of residents who say they have been faced with endless power outages leaving them without heating or hot water.

Daniel Clark www.devonlive.com

Residents in Monkerton, Tithebarn and Westclyst have been faced with endless power outages leaving them without heating or hot water, and alongside Cranbrook, the areas are heated by a district heating network provided by E.ON.

But those already living in the area say the system is blighted by problems, some saying that they have been forced to buy a plug-in electric heater as they don’t trust the heating system.

A proposal has though been submitted based on securing a connection from the Energy from Waste plant to both the Cranbrook/Skypark and Monkerton heating networks which would take the form of a trunk heat main carrying hot water under pressure.

East Devon District Council’s planning committee on Wednesday morning almost unanimously backed the proposals that will help find a ‘cost effective solution that can be delivered at scale and at pace’ for the area around Cranbrook and Monkerton.

The district energy network to meet a zero carbon standard, rather than rely on fabric and renewable energy measures on each home, will serves the region, and will ultimately connect 12,000 homes and 2m sqm of commercial space.

There is a requirement for all homes to be connected to a district heating network became a key part of the planning strategy for Cranbrook and the neighbouring Skypark commercial development, with all homes tied into a contract with EON.

Together there are now over 100km of heat pipe in the ground, while the first permanent energy centre at Skypark was commissioned in 2013 and a second energy centre, currently under construction at Monkerton, is due to be commissioned later this year.

Picture of the E.on centre, the heating pipes, and the heating unit. Image shown to the EDDC planning meeting. (Image: EDDC planning meeting)

Planning permission for the energy centre had previously been granted and that in recognition of the need to ensure that the district heating network would meet increasingly stringent carbon performance standards for the first 2,900 homes at Cranbrook, the section 106 legal agreement attached to the planning permission included the provision of a solid biomass Combined Heat and Power (CHP) system.

But with the benefit of further technical advice, councillors heard that it was accepted that the gasification and pyrolysis technologies, which it was hoped would be scalable, as well as being more efficient and lower cost than traditional steam based technology, had not matured sufficiently in the decade since the section 106 agreement was negotiated to provide a reliable way forward.

Instead, the energy from waste (EfW) plant at Hill Barton, which is due to start construction during the summer of 2021 and be operational by the summer of 2023, has been taken forward as the preferred method of providing the district heating network.

A proposal has been submitted based on securing a connection from the EfW plant to both the Cranbrook/Skypark and Monkerton networks. This would take the form of a trunk heat main carrying hot water under pressure, and will enable connections to the two existing concession agreements totalling circa 8,000 homes and 2m sq ft of commercial space as well as the potential to serve the Cranbrook expansion areas (an additional 4,000 homes).

In light of the revised plans, councillors agreed to convert the obligation to install solid biomass CHP in to a financial obligation to be fixed at £6m, which will be taken as a payment in kind in relation to the extra over costs for the rerouting/future proofing of the Eastern Transmission Main which to be delivered in 2021/22.

The future proofing of the Eastern Transmission Main and its use to serve the expansion areas is critical to making sure that a key policy provision of the Cranbrook Plan can be achieved and that the ongoing roll out of district heating is both seamless and cost effective.

And Cllr Kim Bloxham, who represents Cranbrook, said this should solve the issues of the interruptions some residents have where their heating supplies are cutting out.

She added: “This reflects the views of the town to drive forward with a low carbon solution and it deliver the much needed the Eastern Transmission Main to ensure the eastern part of Cranbrook and its Eastern Expansion is well served with district heating, as without the main, we will continue to have interruptions to supply to some of the residents from the temporary energy centres.

“Low carbon is essential and this presents a way forward for delivery and a pathway to deliver an alternative form of heat and I look forward to working with officers to take this forward.”

The meeting heard from Andy Wood, service lead for growth, development & prosperity, that utilising waste heat from the EfW plant will therefore bring forward the timing of the transition away from gas, the inclusion of the Monkerton network, which will ultimately serve 4,600 homes as well as Exeter Science Park, and will both add scale and achieve accelerated carbon savings,

He added that the future proofing of the Eastern Transmission Main and its use to serve the expansion areas is critical to making sure that a key policy provision of the Cranbrook Plan can be achieved and that the ongoing roll out of district heating is both seamless and cost effective.

Councillors, with one abstention, voted to note the further technical work that has been undertaken to support the delivery of low and zero carbon development in the West End of the District and agree the principle of the proposed Deed of Variation for the £6m payment in lieu of the CHP.

Rolle College’s buildings to go

Thirteen years after it closed, councillors have approved what they say is “the best possible” redevelopment of the undeveloped part of the former Rolle College site in Exmouth.

Daniel Clark, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk

Redundant buildings, right, will go. The Deaf Academy stays (courtesy: East Devon District Council)

Rolle College’s buildings to go

Thirteen years after it closed, councillors have approved what they say is “the best possible” redevelopment of the undeveloped part of the former Rolle College site in Exmouth.

After more than a decade as a redundant eyesore, the western side of the former further education campus comeback into use when Exeter Deaf Academy moved to the town.

Developers had sought planning permission for the demolition of a number of vacant buildings on the eastern side to provide 29 new homes, together with the conversion of the former student bar, a Grade II listed building called Eldin House into four flats.

East Devon District Council’s planning committee unanimously supported the scheme, which they say is “a well-designed and well thought out residential scheme that would be positively contribute to the character and appearance of the area.”

Development manager Chris Rose, recommending approval, added: “The existing site is vacant and run down and its number of derelict and vandalised buildings do detract from the character and appearance of the area.

“It is considered that the proposed design, layout and form of development has been largely sensitive to the topography of the site whilst addressing the complex constraints posed by the retained trees.”

Cllr Mike Howe said: “This brings the building back into use. Yes, we lose some trees, but they are not the best quality trees, and if the officers thought we were losing good quality trees they would be screaming about it. This is far in advance of a lot of other developments, so I am happy to support this, and I cannot see how they could design it any better.”

Cllr Olly Davey added: “It is a shame to lose the trees but if the officers feel the best we will get, I am happy to accept their view. This is the best quality we will get in the same within the constraints,” while Cllr Philip Skinner said: “This is a scheme that works for Exmouth and the right density of housing in the right place.”

The scheme will see the demolition of existing buildings for a residential development of 33 new homes, in a mix of 10 house and 19 apartments, as well as the four apartments in the former bar.

East Devon recycles more than 60 per cent of all household waste, beating a national target by 10 years – but Exeter is the worst performing recycling council in the county.

Daniel Clark, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk

Keep on truckin’ (courtesy: East Devon District Council/LDRS)

But Exeter is nowhere near

East Devon recycles more than 60 per cent of all household waste, beating a national target by 10 years – but Exeter is the worst performing recycling council in the county.

The government expects councils to recycle that amount by 2030. 

But East Devon resident already among the best recyclers in the country, with the tenth highest recycling rates. At county council level, Devon is  the second best county in the country for recycling with a countywide rate of 56.6 per cent.

Cllr Geoff Jung, East Devon District Council’s portfolio holder for coast, country and environment said: “We can’t thank residents enough for embracing our curb side recycling scheme introduced five years ago.

“Recycling is more important than ever as we work to build a greener economy and combat climate change. The materials that we collect from households are valuable resources that benefit our environment and our economy.”

In 2016/17, East Devon District Council was recycling just 46 per cent of its waste, but since moving to a three-weekly residual waste collection system in the last three years, has seen that rise to 60.5 per cent.

Across the rest of Devon, councils are rolling out plans to boost recycling rates. Teignbridge District Council has a new ten point action plan to try to rates rise to 60 per cent.

South Hams District Council has launched a ‘super recycler’ service which means residents will have a weekly recycling collection and, for the first time, will be able to put glass and plastic pots, tubs and trays out for recycling. Food waste will also be collected weekly.

West Devon Borough Council has extended its trial for around 1,000 homes where non-recyclable waste collections take place every three weeks, rather than fortnightly. That’s due to finish this month, but early results of the trial are positive.

Torbay Council says three-weekly bin collections will be as a last resort if recycling rates fail to go up enough.

Exeter City Council had previously put forward plans to change the way waste is collected and to move to a three-weekly model, but councillors have launched a review to look at alternatives, citing ‘financial and operational’ considerations.

RECYCLING RATES FOR 2019/20

East Devon – 60.5 per cent

Exeter – 26.1 per cent

Mid Devon – 53.1 per cent

North Devon – 49.5 per cent

South Hams – 54.4 per cent

Teignbridge – 56.3 per cent

Torridge – 54.1 per cent

West Devon 53.7 per cent

Devon County Council 56.6 per cent

Plymouth 34.1 per cent

Torbay 40.2 per cent

Dear Owl, I am glad that you raised the fact that 2/3rds of East Devon is situated in Areas of Natural Beauty. I am now in the process of completing the on-line consultation and, living in a town that is actually situated in the East Devon AONB, I am very disappointed that Question 8 seeks to have my opinion on the number of houses I would like to see in the area with no mention of this constraint.

EDDC is aware of a constraint as it is finally in Chapter 10 that the presence of AONBs is mentioned

– Our outstanding natural environment- Objective 8: To protect and enhance our outstanding natural environment and support an increase in biodiversity–

10.1         East Devon is blessed with a truly outstanding natural environment. Around two-thirds of East Devon falls within Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). These areas have the highest level of landscape protection in England, EQUAL to that for National Parks. There are two AONBs in East Devon, the East Devon AONB occupies much of the south of the District, and the Blackdown Hills AONB which although mostly in East Devon also extends into neighbouring mid Devon and Somerset and occupies much of the north of the District.

10.3         The AONBs and other protected landscapes of East Devon are both of national and local importance, the countryside and coast that falls within them helps define much of the essence of the District. Protecting and indeed seeking to enhance our environment may, however, PLACE LIMITATIONS ON THE AMOUNT AND SUBSEQUENT LOCATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT. Government policy states that AONBs are not normally appropriate for large scale development schemes, though to help support local communities and enterprises there is scope for smaller developments. 

Further in the document the seven towns and Cranbrook are lumped together for urban expansion and once again, it is only at the end of a long list of challenges that the following sentence appears-

The AONBs come close to or wash over most East Devon towns and this could LIMIT POTENTIAL.

It seems EDDC have a tremendous problem on their hands. Many of the villages are in the AONBs as well. Where can they accommodate housing?

Could they try and argue a “special case” with government?  

I urge everyone who hasn’t already done so to fill in this consultation bearing the above in mind.