Posted by

Posted on

18 Feb 2016

Posted under

District council wins appeal at Planning court which overules Inspector’s decision

“A district council has won a Planning Court appeal after an inspector granted outline permission for a 103-dwelling development.

Wealden District Council had refused to grant Knight Developments permission for the site at Steel Cross, north of Crowborough in East Sussex.

However on 16 July 2015 a planning inspector upheld the company’s appeal.
The council then applied under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for that decision to be quashed.

In Wealden District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2016] EWHC 247 (Admin) the council advanced three grounds in the Planning Court. These related to:

i) Nitrogen deposition (through the additional traffic generated). The Inspector had erred in law when concluding that the proposals would have no significant effect on the Ashdown Forest Special Area of Conservation (SAC), pursuant to section 61 of the Habitats Regulations, in particular:

a) in finding that contributions to SAMMS (Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Strategy) would mitigate any such effect; or

b) by failing to have regard to evidence that proposed contributions to heathland management could not effectively mitigate any such effect.

ii) NPPF 116 & alternative sites. The Inspector had erred in his consideration of National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 116 when concluding that there were no alternative sites to meet the need for the proposed development, by failing to take into account relevant evidence or acting unreasonably.

iii) Inadequate reasons. The Inspector’s reasons for his findings on grounds (i) and (ii) above had fallen below the required standard.

Both defendants – the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Knight Developments – submitted that the inspector’s decision did not disclose any error of law.” …

For remainder of summary see:
http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=26035:district-council-wins-planning-court-appeal-over-permission-for-103-dwelling-scheme&catid=63&Itemid=31

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

17 Feb 2016

Posted under

Clyst St Mary

Clyst St Mary update – addendum

“It has been pointed out that in the previous email that you received that I stated the Sports and Recreation Club was set up by the Parish Council. In fact the Sports and Recreation Club was set up by Peter Cain and has two Parish Council members on it.”

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

17 Feb 2016

Posted under

Coastal erosion, DCC, EDDC, Hugo Swire, Sidmouth/ Sidford/ Sidbury, Stuart Hughes

Sidmouth beach erosion: support – but no money

Everyone SEES the problem
Everyone KNOWS the solution
NOBODY has the money

And all Swire can say: nice to see a bit of progress since 2001 but don’t look at me – pay for it by flogging off Port Royal!

“After the recent wild weather, Councillor Stuart Hughes fears that the Ham’s sewage pumping station could be ‘overwhelmed’ and said it needs protecting – and now, writes Stephen Sumner.

East Devon’s MP Hugo Swire also says any necessary work will have his ‘full support’.

However, East Devon District Council (EDDC), which is leading a long-term plan to protect the beach, told the Herald that there is no government funding available for immediate intervention.

“If the sewage pumping station was affected, Sidmouth would close down,” said Cllr Hughes. “Where would all the sewage go? How can you have a holiday resort without a sewage system? We need to do something before it’s too late.”

South West Water (SWW) has played down any concerns.

EDDC is drawing up a beach management plan (BMP) for the town and a draft of it is expected in the autumn. However, the implementation of any protection scheme could take years.

Mr Swire said: “This is a prime example of why it is absolutely vital that we deal with the problem of cliff erosion at Pennington Point and improve Sidmouth’s flood defences. This has been an ongoing issue since I was first elected as MP in 2001, and I am pleased that progress is finally being made with the publication of the BMP. However, it is likely that the BMP will not be implemented for another five years, so interim measures might be needed. Any necessary measure will, of course, have my full support. Generally speaking, I believe that any solution which addresses the problem of cliff erosion and the Alma Bridge needs to be part of a wider redevelopment that includes Port Royal and the Ham.”

Sewage is pumped from The Ham up to the treatment works at Sidford and final effluent is discharged out to sea.

A spokeswoman for SWW said the ‘substantial reinforced concrete’ pumping station is not considered to be at ‘significant or immediate risk’ of structural damage by the sea. It has an overflow it can operate in the event of it becoming overwhelmed by surface water.

An EDDC spokeswoman said there is currently no government funding available for interim measures to protect the seafront while the BMP is being drafted and funding would need to be found elsewhere. She added that a repair project to stabilise the training wall and retaining wall at Port Royal is under way.

“The timeframe for work to start on the main scheme depends on the preferred option coming out of the BMP, but we are looking to complete the funding application to the Government as soon as practicable,” said the spokeswoman.

Among potential protection works being considered in the BMP are options to remove rock groynes from the main beach and raise the height of the sea wall. Other possibilities are the construction of new groynes off the east beach, a replacement promenade at Jacob’s Ladder and a continuation of shingle recycling.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/fears_for_sidmouth_seafront_do_something_before_it_s_too_late_1_4415417

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

17 Feb 2016

Posted under

Local Enterprise Partnership, NHS (local)

HAVE YOU BOOKED FOR THE LEP ANNUAL CONFERENCE 2016?

“The 2016 LEP Annual Conference on 22 March is attracting some heavyweight thought leadership to give you a valuable insight into what LEPs can do for your business to generate economic growth and drive up UK productivity. They include the newly appointed Director-General of the CBI, Carolyn Fairbairn, the Chair of the Local Government Association, Lord Porter, Chief Economist and Director of Policy at the IoD, James Sproule, and Martin Donnelly, BIS Permanent Secretary.

If you want to know how to effectively engage with LEPs, what they can do for you, and how they can help your business boost growth, make sure you book your seat to join other leaders of Government, business and local government who are at the heart of economic policy.”

http://www.lepnetwork.net/

But if you don’t have a business that needs to boost growth or drive up UK productivity – beggar off!

(How do you get “health and wellbeing” to boost productivity? when our LEP takes it over? Get more people to die quicker? Then pay fewer carers less money, perhaps).

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

17 Feb 2016

Posted under

Economy, EDDC, Local Enterprise Partnership

In 2014 our enterprise partnership had an income of £250,000 so how come it can now run Devon and Somerset?

Here is an interview the LEP CEO, Chris Garcia, gave in February 2014:

“We have core funding but we are not a Regional Development Agency. I get £250,000 as core funding per annum and there’s some money to pay for contractors so you can see that’s not a lot of money.”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Q-HotSW-LEP-chief-executive-Chris-Garcia/story-20658175-detail/story.html

Was this including salaries of Board Members and staff – we don’t know because they don’t publish accounts.

He then went in to say, in the same article:

… Partnership is fundamental to us. My view is that the LEP is there to facilitate and build those partnerships that will make a difference.

Q) That sounds like a public sector approach when the LEP is meant to be private sector-led. What’s your response to that?

A) Investment comes from two sources –the private sector and public sector. Our role is to maximise both so we can’t just say we’re only private sector. We have to recognise that the £200 billion that is out there is money controlled by the public sector and distributed by the public sector. If I’m to maximise the amount of money that comes into the South West, I have to satisfy the National Audit Office and government departments. We have to recognise that’s fundamental – but at the same time we need the flexibility to work however we wish. …”

However they wish – hmmm.

For anyone wanting to understand the history of LEPs (originally having taken over Regional Development Agency assets and tied in only with Enterprise Zones) this is useful reading:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2010-to-2015-government-policy-local-enterprise-partnerships-leps-and-enterprise-zones/2010-to-2015-government-policy-local-enterprise-partnerships-leps-and-enterprise-zones

How our LEP (secretive, unaccountable, non-transparent, politically-appointed business people whose only driver is “growth”) suddenly morphed into a group capable of taking control of millions and millions of pounds of our assets, potential grants and direct income from all of us in Devon and Somerset – as well taking responsibility for “health and well-being” AND directing where Housing IN ADDITION to that in neighbourhood and Local Plans should go, is not covered in that document and remains a mystery.

Whose idea WAS it to give this small group such a lot of power?

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

17 Feb 2016

Posted under

Devolution, Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership

Hinkley Point decision: substance or spin?

“We have the intention to proceed rapidly with the investment decision for Hinkley Point,” EDF CEO Jean-Bernard Levy told reporters.

He added that EDF had not yet finalised talks with its Chinese partners before the Chinese New Year break. “Today we estimate this final decision is very close,” he said.

Levy said it would take about three years, possibly a bit more, of study and work with sub-contractors before EDF will begin building the first definitive structures on the Hinkley Point C site, though the company will do terracing and other preparatory work between now and then.”

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-edf-results-britain-hinkley-idUKKCN0VP1TU

Er, not quite a decision then, more a bit of spin?

And, still, we need a BREXIT strategy … how much more will it cost if we are not EU members then?

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

17 Feb 2016

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Economy

“Growth” and zero hours contract hell

When you read all those promises of 1,000 jobs to be created here and 500 jobs there, first realise that this is rarely the true number (in East Devon recently such promises led to only half the number of jobs originally promised at Premier Inn, Exmouth, for example) and the read this article on zero hours contracts – a favoured method of employment in many companies:

“Employers counter any criticisms of the use of zero-hours contracts by arguing that employees like the flexibility. The ONS findings, and discussion with those on the contracts, suggest otherwise. In Liverpool, a young mother with two children told me over a cup of tea how both she and her partner were on zero-hours contracts. He had originally planned to meet me at their house as well, but had been offered more hours and felt that the precarity of the contract meant that if he turned it down, he would deliberately be overlooked for future shifts. By the end of the week, he would have worked 70 hours.

The mother worked in a shop, alongside sales assistants on regular contracts. Her work ebbed and flowed with the seasons: more work at Christmas and over New Year, with sales and the festive run on gifts, and more shifts over the summer and Easter breaks, when the staff on regular contracts took their children on holiday. During school breaks, both rarely spent a whole day with their children, but the fear of the weeks where there was a shortfall in rent meant they’d never turned down a shift, even when sick. She told me that they were desperate for permanent contracts offering economic stability and a routine for their children, but were told they were lucky to have anything. …

… A Guardian investigation revealed appalling working conditions at a Sports Direct warehouse, where over 80% of the staff were employed on zero-hours contracts. The conditions included labyrinthine rules on uniforms, pay docked if staff were a minute late, and pay rates that were effectively below the minimum wage. It was able to get away with this because staff without guaranteed pay are effectively powerless, and have to operate at the whim of their employer. Parents who were too scared to take time off work told schools to keep children in when they were sick, rather than risk losing their job.

That’s the fear of zero-hours contracts: that one day, you find your hours have dropped to zero and you’ve effectively been sacked. You can’t challenge your employer over their decision, because effectively, contractually, they were doing you a favour by giving you any shifts at all. A man in his 40s in Redcar told me outside the jobcentre that he had been given no shifts by his construction firm for eight weeks. The jobcentre adviser insisted he was employed, so he wasn’t entitled to jobseeker’s allowance. If he left the job, he’d be deemed to have quit voluntarily … so wouldn’t be entitled to jobseeker’s allowance. This paradox is precisely why so many people are against zero-hours contracts: they make low-paid workers completely powerless, and let their bosses act with unaccountable impunity. Everyone deserves a fair wage for a fair day’s work, and to be able to depend upon it.”

http://gu.com/p/4gz27

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

16 Feb 2016

Posted under

Misc

Swindon Council to fight decision by inspector to grant permission for 100-home

Swindon Borough Council is to bring a High Court challenge over a planning inspector’s decision to grant an appeal by a developer seeking to build up to 100 homes on a site.

Ainscough Strategic Land brought the appeal over the site at Berkeley Farm in Wroughton after Swindon’s planning committee refused its application. The appeal was heard over four days in November 2015.

The council has taken legal advice “from a leading planning QC” and will challenge the inspector’s decision under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Swindon said its legal advice suggested that the inspector had erred in law in two respects:

He failed to properly apply the legal test under section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, “which requires that planning decisions are made by having regard to a local authority’s Local Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise”.

He misdirected himself in law “by suggesting in his report that the level of the shortfall in the council’s required five-year housing land supply is immaterial to his decision”.

Cllr Toby Elliott, Swindon Borough Council cabinet member for Communities and Strategic Planning, said: “The planning inspector’s decision is a disastrous one and we must stand up for local people and the integrity of the Local Plan process by challenging it. I am pleased that the legal advice we have been given supports this position.

“I hope this announcement gives the residents of Wroughton, who came together and produced a neighbourhood plan for their area, confidence that the council is doing everything it can to challenge the planning inspector’s decision.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=26016:council-to-fight-decision-by-inspector-to-grant-permission-for-100-home-scheme&catid=63&Itemid=31

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

16 Feb 2016

Posted under

Cranbrook

Anti-social behaviour and vandalism in Cranbrook when youth bus in town

“Concerns have been raised by Cranbrook Councillors following a spell of anti-social behaviour from youths in the town.

It was revealed at the town meeting on Monday 15, that anti-social behaviour and vandalism is becoming an issue for the residents of Cranbrook.

Councillor Kevin Blakey said that youth provision in the town currently isn’t working and action needs to be taken. He said: “We have had endless complaints from residents on for vandalism and anti-social behaviour.

“Bad behaviour seems to be escalating and we can’t sit on our hands a decision has to be made. It is becoming a focal point for some young people to misbehave and vandalising property as well.

It is not a massive rise but what has given us more concerns of anti-social behaviour was an incident where the railings by the primary school were damaged and a number of residents are rightly upset about it.

“What residents seem to be saying is that the behaviour seems to be worse on the youth bus days, which falls on Monday’s and Thursday’s.

“In the overall scheme of things it’s not a vast issue, it is not acceptable to anyone, especially the residents.”

The council made a proposal at the meeting to work with Devon Youth Services to further discuss how they can address the anti-social behaviour in Cranbrook.

“We did discuss as a council whether to suspend the youth bus, however we agreed that we are going to work with Devon Youth Services to try and find a solution of how we can make this work.

“What is going on at the moment is just not working and it is causing a lot of disruption to the town, and a lot of kids aren’t going because of fear of being bullied.

“We can’t be seen to close services for children when there is not enough as there is.

“We want to try to work more positively and look for more activities for younger people in Cranbrook.

“We need to recognise that there is an issue and we need look at how youth changes can be made in the town.

“As a council we want to be engaging in a lot of the youth, not just a handful of them.”

A spokesman from the Town Council said: “The County Council provides a mobile youth service (youth bus) to younger people in the area.

“It engages with about 70 young people with an average 15 to 20 people attending each of the two sessions each week.

“It’s an opportunity for young people to talk to trained youth workers for advice or assistance about things concerning them. It also gives the young people opportunity to get together to take part in activities. Each session runs for about 2.5 hours.

“The County Council is currently reviewing provision of the service in Cranbrook, with the Town Council and East Devon District Council, to look at what the service currently offers young people, what the community’s need for the service are, and where the best location for it might be.

“There is no evidence to support the notion that the act of vandalism which occurred on Thursday was connected to the provision of the youth bus on the same day.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Plans-tackle-anti-social-behaviour-Cranbrook/story-28745234-detail/story.html

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

16 Feb 2016

Posted under

Misc

MEPs and an EU deal …

Owl isn’t hooting about its EU views but has to say that Dave saying MEPs agree with it (whatever it is) is hardly surprising:

they get hundreds of thousands of pounds in pay;

they get hundreds of thousands of pounds in allowances including €275,000 for assistants;

they get massive pensions and pay-offs.

Do you agree with Christmas, Santa Claus?

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

16 Feb 2016

Posted under

Colyton, Neighbourhood Plans

Comments

1 Comment

Colyton: newspaper editor adds his views on “unseemly”behaviour

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

16 Feb 2016

Posted under

Local Enterprise Partnership

Comments

3 Comments

Hinkley Point update

“Dr Doug Parr, Greenpeace policy director, said: “EDF’s accounts show growing debts and falling earnings. EDF management and employees warn taking on further risk could easily spell disaster for the company. Hinkley is a bad investment and most people with an ounce of financial acumen have now come to realise this.”

Greenpeace is now putting pressure on Chancellor George Osborne to drop his support for the project.

“Hinkley will be one of the most expensive objects on earth,” Dr Parr said. “George Osborne is happy to force this year’s school-leavers to pay over the odds for it until they are about to draw their pensions.

“But wind and solar power could be subsidy free well before Hinkley could ever come on stream.”

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Doubts-18bn-Hinkley-Point-nuke-plant-EDF-profit/story-28744016-detail/story.html

Still awaiting the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership pres
take on this and its plans for if we do exit the European union …

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

16 Feb 2016

Posted under

Colyton, Misc, Neighbourhood Plans

Comments

2 Comments

Colyton Parish Council in trouble again

Honestly, with an ex parish councillor who is a district councillor and ex-chair of the EDDC Planning Committee (not to mention wife of the current Chair of Colyton Parish Council) you really would think they would have some expertise with a Neighbourhood Plan. On second thoughts … scrub that!

Text:

THE development of Colyton Parish Neighbourhood Plan has got off to a rocky start with resignations and claims that the parish council, which is leading the project, has acted in a “threatening, aggressive and hostile” manner towards volunteers.

After a slow start on the plan, issues came to a head at last Monday’s council meeting, where volunteers complained that they had been accused of “having a shindig at the parish council’s expense” after suggesting that wine and nibbles would be available at a neighbourhood plan meeting.

Last year, Colyton Parish Council agreed to develop a neighbourhood plan, which will shape how the parish is developed in future years, and asked for volunteers to come forward to work on the project. Separate committees were set up in Colyton and Colyford, consisting of both councillors and volunteers, to deal with the individual issues which faced the two communities, as well as an overarching steering group to bring representatives from the two committees together.

The steering group met for the first time earlier this month, where it was agreed that an informal meeting would be held on February 24th for the two committees to get to know one another and potentially form working parties, and it was suggested that wine and nibbles would be available.

Parish clerk Liz Berry disagreed with the format of the meeting, saying that the council could not pay for wine and nibbles and that any neighbourhood plan meeting should follow official guidelines, which resulted in a number of emails being circulated between the clerk and volunteers.

Former Mayor of Colyford and chairman of the neighbourhood plan’s Colyford committee, Howard West, spoke in the public forum of last week’s parish council meeting, saying he was “offended” by comments made in the emails, which he described as “the last straw”.

The next day he announced his resignation from the neighbourhood plan committee, claiming that he and his wife had been threatened by a member of the parish council. But parish council chairman Andrew Parr claimed that Mr West had been fighting a “turf war” between Colyton and Colyford and said he now hoped to be able to move forward with the plan.

Frustrating

Speaking at the parish council meeting before his resignation, Mr West said: “Today, as far as I’m concerned, was the last straw. I have had 13 emails today and I’m quite offended that we’re being accused of having a ‘shindig’ at the parish council’s expense.

“It is so frustrating; everything we’re trying to do for the neighbourhood plan is for the good of the parish and we never had any intention of asking the parish council to fund what the parish clerk calls a ‘shindig’, which is isn’t, it’s a meeting of all the people involved in the two committees of the neighbourhood plan to get to know one another.

“Does the parish council really want us to do a neighbourhood plan, because every time we try to move forward we get pushed back a step? I’ve spent nearly all day today trying to deal with this problem and it’s not just me, a lot of other people are quite upset about the way we have been treated… we can’t just let it carry on like this.”

Fellow Colyford resident Diane Nason commented: “I second that. I went to a steering group meeting last week and I was quite apprehensive about it because what has been coming from the council has, it seems to me, been quite aggressive, hostile.”

Mrs Berry said: “Having got the message that there would be an informal meeting of the two committees potentially to form working groups, obviously decisions would be made at the meeting.

“Anything to do with the neighbourhood plan has to be a community engagement exercise, open to public, have an agenda, be minuted, and as a council we can’t fund a get together where there’s wine and nibbles, and I’ve been told by the chairman that the public would not be allowed to go to it. It’s not a meeting to form working groups, you can’t make decisions.

“As the responsible financial officer for the council’s money, which is indeed public money, we can’t fund a shindig, a party, a get together – call it what you like. We can fund a meeting that makes decisions. You don’t need wine and peanuts.”

Councillor Huntley Evans, who sits on the neighbourhood plan steering group, said: “Let’s not undo the good work that we did last week. In all innocence it was suggested that the two committees get together, mostly with the idea that, for the vast majority of things which affect this community, the two committees would be able to work as one.

“I propose that we carry on with our meeting of the two committees; we don’t need wine or nibbles, perhaps we’ll have a cup of tea or cake, and we’ll carry on as planned.”

Mrs Berry asked if the meeting would be open to the public. Councillor Evans said it would be, and that an agenda could be published in advance.

“That’s the way I suggest we go forward and diffuse this rather unnecessary spat,” he added.

Mr West added: “That’s exactly what it was all about but all these emails that were flying around today were totally uncalled for.”

Mrs Nason commented: “It’s not just today, it’s been the same for some time. There are other people involved in neighbourhood plans in other areas and they’re very happy groups but I have to say, if this is a neighbourhood plan there’s not been very much neighbourly about it. I’m getting quite upset about it.”

Later in the meeting Councillor Evans gave a full report on the steering group meeting held earlier this month. Members made no further comments on the matter, prompting Councillor Paul Dean to ask if the council was going to address concerns raised during the public forum.

“What’s the council’s views on what has been said? People are upset and we either need to allay their fears or not. We can’t just say, ‘OK, they’ve said their piece and we’re not even going to listen, discuss it or anything’,” he said.

Mrs Berry then explained the situation again, adding that there was “no way” that public money could be spent on drinks and nibbles. She said that after questioning the meeting she received a “flurry of emails” saying it was just a “get to know you” event.

“Working in working groups you’ll get to know each other,” she continued.
“If you’re having a meeting it has to be properly advertised, it has to have an agenda and minutes. If you’re going to make decisions then it all has to be open and transparent, open to the public.”

Councillor Evans said he would ensure that the meeting on February 24th was publicised.

Speaking to Pulman’s View later that week, Mr West announced that he was resigning from the neighbourhood plan committee and standing down from “involvement in all Colyford village affairs”. He reported that he and his wife Anne had been “accused of splitting the village in two”, had received verbal threats from a parish councillor, and another member of the Colyford committee had received similar threats and had also since resigned.

In his letter of resignation, Mr West said: “After attending the Colyton Parish Council meeting last night, and making an impassioned plea in public question time for the parish council to let us all get on with the neighbourhood plan, I came away totally demoralised and feeling intimidated by the parish council once more.

Mr West went on to explain the situation regarding the planned “social get together” and expressed disappointment that Councillor Evans was “forced to concede that it would not be a social evening”.

He added: “Councillor Evans cannot and should not be allowed or encouraged to arbitrarily alter what was agreed at the steering group meeting. This can only be democratically done at the next steering group meeting. “I therefore feel that there is no further point in me continuing as your elected chairman, and I resign with immediate effect. The treatment yesterday was in addition to the verbal threats given to my wife Anne and I a few weeks ago by a councillor. This has been followed by a resignation of a member of our Colyford neighbourhood plan ommittee, who has received similar threats also from a councillor.

“The continuous intimation from the parish council, its parish clerk and some councillors is totally unnecessary and should stop immediately. I do feel that I have let you all down, but enough is enough, let someone else have a go.

“I will now stand down from involvement in all Colyford village affairs and leave it to others, especially as Anne and I are accused of splitting the village of Colyford in two! Those who are against what we are trying to achieve have won. Let them get on with it! We have worked hard over the last 10 years or so with the sole aim of improving things in Colyford and the surrounding area.”

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

16 Feb 2016

Posted under

Beach huts, East Devon Alliance

“Staggering rise in beach hut charges” says Councillor Rixon

Which weird and wonderful councillor had the idea to compare Seaton and Brighton!

At least Independent EDA Councillor Marianne Rixon saw through that one (it wax she who recently described the Local Plan as a “hokey-cokey – in, ou, in again, out again, in again).

Not that her common sense cut any ice with her Tory rivals – who probably have spent more time in Brighton anyway!

All View from digital editions can be acessec from their website.

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

16 Feb 2016

Posted under

Development Management Committee, Rural communities

Another attempt to ignore local plans and neighbourhood plans!

Why does Owl think that the report on this public consultation that ends in April has already been written? And that it will make it even easier for developers to ruin the countryside and ride roughshod over local plans?

Because the whole point is “to reduce regulatory burdens” on said developers.

You can imagine the responses they will already have their spinners working on.

“The Government has issued a call for evidence as part of a ‘Rural Planning Review’ which it says will “look to reduce regulatory burdens in support of new homes, jobs and innovation”.

The review will examine – amongst other things – the rules for converting agricultural buildings to residential use.

The call for evidence has been published jointly by the Department for Communities and Local Government and the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

It was promised at the launch of the Government’s Rural Productivity Plan last summer.

Environment Secretary Elizabeth Truss said rural areas had “huge potential”, adding that the Government’s plan would help “create thriving towns and villages, where families can turn disused agricultural buildings into new homes for the next generation and entrepreneurs can launch the latest cutting-edge start-up from an office with a stunning countryside view”.
Communities Secretary Greg Clark, added: “The need for new homes doesn’t stop where our cities end, it’s just as real in rural towns and villages that need new housebuilding to keep thriving.

“That’s why we are looking carefully at how our planning reforms can deliver this whilst at the same time ensuring local people have more control over planning and the Green Belt continues to be protected.”

The deadline for submitting evidence is 21 April 2016.

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=25994:government-issues-call-for-evidence-as-part-of-rural-planning-review&catid=63&Itemid=31

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

16 Feb 2016

Posted under

Asset sweating, NHS (local), Police (local)

Sometimes you simply cannot do cheaper and better at the same time

NHS to carry out investigation of 111 service in the southwest
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35586997

Devon 999 response worsens again for sixth year:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-35585147

Why is anyone surprised? That’s austerity. There are some things you cannot do cheaper AND better.

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

16 Feb 2016

Posted under

EDDC, Phil Twiss, Rural communications

Rural broadband – another omnishambles – our public (non EDDC) champion addresses Parliament

A cracking good appearance before Parliament by our own rural broadband champion on broadband – or lack of it. No, definitely not Councillor Phil Twiss who has seemed woefully out of his depth on the current and future situation – but real expert Graham Long.

If the audio or transcript are too long for you, simply open the transcript and look at Mr Long’s replies to MPs – highly enlightening:

The Video record of the hearing is online at:

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/677e94ae-4479-451e-b139-ee2af3dc2a2e

And a transcript of the hearing is at:

http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/culture-media-and-sport-committee/establishing-worldclass-connectivity-throughout-the-uk/oral/28948.html

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

16 Feb 2016

Posted under

EDDC, Freedom of Information Act

Comments

2 Comments

EDDC would rather we did not bother them with Freedom of Information requests

“The Herald reported in July how authority bosses were considering hiring an extra member of staff – at a cost of up to £33,000-a-year – to help process the hundreds of applications the council receives.

This has since gone ahead, but EDDC says it still ‘expends a large amount of resource’ on handling FoI requests – including time spent by senior officers, their staff and the council’s legal team.

The FoI Act allows anyone to request information which is not already publicly available.

At present, people can lodge a request with a local authority or public body, so long as finding the information does not cost more than £450. Last year, Sidmouth resident Jeremy Woodward successfully used FoI requests to force EDDC to release confidential documents about its relocation from Knowle.

EDDC dealt with 486 requests in 2014/15 – down from 563 the year before.

But at a meeting in December, EDDC leader Councillor Paul Diviani told members that the council still spends ‘an awful lot of taxpayers’ money dealing with FoI requests’.

The Herald asked EDDC exactly how much is spent, but a spokeswoman said it does not usually quantify officer time spent dealing with FoIs as part of their day-to-day work.

The spokeswoman added: “We employ one permanent (part time) member of staff to deal with FoIs and complaints and have more recently taken on another post (fixed-term for one year) to assist in dealing with the volume of work in this particular department.

“Approximately, over half of their time is spent on FoI requests as opposed to complaint handling. Of course, it is not just the time of the officers directly responsible for handling requests that should be noted.

“The monitoring officer also has to spend time dealing with internal reviews and, perhaps more significantly (in terms of overall time), the time spent by other senior officers (and their staff members) in dealing with a request that involves their service, also has to be taken into account.

“Finally, there is the time spent by the legal department in helping the information and complaints officers carry out their role.

“Suffice to say, given the number of requests, the council expends a large amount of resource in dealing with FoIs.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/eddc_spends_a_large_amount_on_foi_requests_1_4416248

Good heavens, the amount of money spent is miniscule when you compare it to the amount EDDC spends trying to keep things secret ( they also refuse to say how much last year’s court case on FoI ( which they lost) cost where they also refused to cost the time of their lawyers and consultants in fighting it.

Sour grapes Owl thinks!

The more transparent things are, the less work the FoI officer will have to do.

And why engage another person when the number of requests have fallen?

Are you anticipating a high number of new requests for some reason? The HQ move, shrouded in secrecy; the devolution deal being done behind closed doors; the meetings with developers that have things cut and dried BEFORE public consultation? Hhmm.

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

15 Feb 2016

Posted under

Clyst St Mary, EDDC HQ, Environment (local), Flooding, Local Plan, Neighbourhood Plans

SAVE CLYST ST MARY – FEBRUARY UPDATE

“Apologies for the length of this update. There have recently been a number of significant developments with regard to planning applications of which we feel you should be aware. You are therefore strongly urged to read the whole document.

As always, thank you for your continued support; we remain committed to protecting Clyst St Mary from inappropriate developments.

1. Local Plan

The most significant event since the last update has been the formal adoption of the Local Plan by EDDC. In theory this should protect the village from further large scale development other than the 150 houses on the brown field areas of the former Friends Provident site.

At the meeting of the Parish Council on 8th February, which was attended by members of our Campaign Group, Councillor Howe gave a very warm and upbeat welcome to the Plan and emphasised that it would give EDDC the clout it needed to prevent inappropriate development of green field sites. He also said that the Planning Committee had already refused several planning applications in East Devon on the basis they were not in accordance with the Plan.

We hope that this robust approach will be sustained when the planning applications for the Friends Provident site are eventually scrutinised by the Planning Committee. We are very fortunate that our District Councillor lives in the village and has been such a strong supporter of our Campaign against inappropriate development over the past 12 months. We are particularly grateful for his input to the draft of the Local Plan last March which resulted in the house numbers for the Friends Provident site being reduced from some around 300 to 150.

Within the Plan we have our own map! This clearly shows the playing fields of the Friends Provident site and the Plymouth Brethren field as remaining green and where building will not be permitted.

Interestingly it also shows the areas that become flooded when Grindle Brook bursts the banks, as it has several times this winter. You can view the map in the online version of this update on our website http://www.saveclyststmary.org.uk

2. Future of the Friends Provident Playing Fields

The Save Clyst St Mary Campaign Group has consistently taken a robust line that the green areas in and around Clyst House should remain green and, as already mentioned, we have been successful by having this included in the Local Plan.

We do not see it as being in our remit to get involved in deciding what these green spaces would be used for in future or how they should be administered. We feel this is a matter for the Parish Council. Our assumption and hope has always been that the existing sports pitches would remain and continue to be used by local sports teams to the benefit of the village and wider community.

At the Public Meeting held at the Village Hall on 16th November we listened with interest as Mr Peter Cain, who has a role in the administration of Clyst Valley Football Club, outlined his vision for the future of the sports fields. Our understanding that he has consulted with various sports related bodies and the agents for the Friends Provident Site.

We are also aware that the Parish Council has formed a Sport and Recreation Committee which will eventually be responsible for the administration of the sports fields and hold the land in some form of trusteeship.

Mr Cain also made some suggestions regards agreeing the release of some parts of the green field for house building in order to give something back to Friends Provident for allowing the sports pitches to remain as such. This is something we would strongly oppose because it would be against the Local Plan.

At the Parish Council Meeting on 8th February further details of these plans came to light and these are now causing us concern.

The Parish Council have been briefed by a representative of the agents, JLL, about a plan to build around 100-150 extra houses on the Plymouth Brethren field and in a line running from the Brethren field eastwards towards Clyst House.

The Parish Council has been sounded out by JLL about the possibility of a three way land swap. This would involve swapping the current Clyst Valley Football field for a new pitch on the Friends Site. The Plymouth Brethren land would swopped be for the Clyst Valley Football Pitch. An application would then be made to build a Plymouth Brethren meeting hall and large car park on the pitch.

These are proposals in principle and until a formal application is submitted the Parish Council cannot comment.

At this time we do not know the exact status of the football field land beyond that it is held in some sort of trust and from hearsay that it may have been given to the football club and/or village many years ago. If you can help us in any way with more information please get in touch.

It was confirmed at the Parish Council meeting by Councillor Howe that the trustees of the Football Club had agreed in principle with JLL to a land swap.

Obviously this is very disturbing news because it runs contrary to the aims of our Campaign Group, the Local Plan and the soon to adopted Neighbourhood Plan. We must now await the submission of fresh planning applications by JLL and the Plymouth Brethren. In the meantime we will keep you updated on further developments by email and on the website at http://www.saveclyststmary.org.uk.

When and if appropriate we will ask the Parish Council to call another Public Meeting in the Village Hall.

Over the past 12 months we have, with your invaluable support, achieved a great deal. Providing we stick together as residents and remain strong we will succeed in blocking further appropriate development from whatever quarter. As a village we are now in a far stronger position with the full backing of a Local Plan and very soon the Neighbourhood Plan.

3. Neighbourhood Plan

This is currently in the final consultation phase and is expected to be published in May. Once in place this will provide a further level of protection against the onslaught of the property developers. It can be seen at http://www.planning.bishopsclyst.co.uk/

For those that would prefer to look at a printed copy, it can be seen, until 1st March, at the following locations:

Cat & Fiddle Inn
Clyst St Mary Church
Clyst St Mary Post Office (Mills)
Clyst St Mary School
Clyst St Mary Village Hall
Half Moon Inn
Sowton Church
Sowton Village.

4. Foul smell coming from the Digester (pink ‘bubble’ situated in Oil Mill Lane)

Should you smell a strong odour which you believe is coming from the digester, remember that this needs to be reported to the Environmental Agency on an individual basis (they will not accept a group complaint). It is simple to do this: telephone (free) 0800 80 70 60.

5. Traffic Action Group
(distributed on behalf of the Parish Council)
As a member of our Parish Council, I am aware that there are any number of concerns relating to traffic, speeding, and general pedestrian and driver safety within the village and around the Parish.

One thing has become very apparent when pursuing any traffic related issue. Because Devon Highways are so cash strapped, and from experience difficult to communicate with, it has been suggested that a Traffic Action Group be formed.

If you have an issue you wish to raise, then so far as Devon Highways go, they require documented evidence of any problems. Therefore we are looking to local residents to write in to the Parish Council together with any photographic evidence highlighting their concerns.

It is no good grumbling to neighbours, or in the pub or shop, or even to your PC. Written documentation is what is needed, sent to your PC, so it can be collated and prioritised before approaching Devon Highways. As with so many local government departments, the more letters and pieces of evidence presented to them, the more likely they will take notice.
This is especially so if a safety issue plays an important role in any given concern. But it must be supported by as many individual missives as can be got together.

Therefore your Parish Council is encouraging you all to put pen to paper, or fingers to E-mail: bishopsclyst@gmail.com .If any of you wish to participate in helping to run an Action group you would be most welcome. You would not have to be a Parish Councillor as the group would gather information to present to the PC.

It seems that in the present climate of local and central government austerity, local lobbying as I have described is becoming an essential way of getting things done within a community like ours.

6. Flood insurance survey
(letter distributed on behalf of the Parish Council)
Dear Supporter

Please help Flood Re with research about the cost of flood insurance

The cost of flood insurance is high on the news agenda again following the flood damage caused by Storms Desmond, Eva and Frank. It is only two years since the previous significant flood event in the UK and experts predict that the risk of flooding is set to increase even further.

A new scheme called Flood Re has been set up by the insurance industry with the support of the Government to help those struggling to find affordable home insurance and will launch in April 2016.

In order to better understand what impact the new scheme will have, it is important for Flood Re to measure the availability and cost of home insurance now and then compare this with data collected after the launch in April.

National Flood Forum would like you to contribute to this research by taking part in an online survey. This study is being carried out by Consumer Intelligence http://www.consumerintelligence.com on behalf of Flood Re http://www.floodre.co.uk . It should take less than 10 minutes of your time to complete and as a thank you for helping Flood Re with this vital work, Consumer Intelligence will send you £5 via email to a registered PayPal account or if you prefer, they will donate £5 on your behalf to the National Flood Forum.

What do you need to do?

Simply complete the online response via the link below. Flood Re will use this information to obtain home insurance quotations at four points during 2016 and 2017. Your details will not be used for any other purpose without prior consent. https://consumerintelligence.fluidsurveys.com/s/flood_research/

National Flood Forum hopes that enough people will participate in the research to demonstrate how effective Flood Re is at making household insurance available to households in flood risk areas and that this can be used to shape and develop the scheme in the future.

N.B. There are still a few places left on the FloodRe roundtable discussions notably Reading (18th Feb), Wrexham (22nd Feb), York (25th Feb) and Gloucester (3rd March) for further details please contact Laura Furman on laura.furman@floodre.co.uk.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: