No compromise: pay higher charges for a full service or leave your sheltered accommodation:
We have to hope that compassion will return to EDDC after the elections on 7 May 2015.
Category Archives: Affordable and Social Housing
Man in suit and tie in Cornwall with hard hat: must be George Osborne!
Telling us he’s going to stop his pals buying second homes in Cornwall. Pull the other one, George!
“As reported in yesterday’s WMN, just 6,000 votes could swing 10 seats in Cornwall, Devon and Somerset.
He denied his plan for Cornwall was a series of national policies strapped to local “bribes”.”
Housing: shortage of bricks and bricklayers – migrant labour having to be used
It’s no use political parties saying how many houses they will build if there are no bricks and no bricklayers so we need migrant labour!
Anyone remember “Auf Wiedersehen, Pet”, the black comedy where unemployed brickiez and labourers went from Newcastle to Germany for work? No-one criticised migrant labour when it went the other way!
And how can we fulfil the enormous demand of the new Local Plan if there are no materials or labour available?
“According tot the FMB’s survey half of all construction SMEs are finding it difficult to recruit bricklayers while 62% of firms are waiting for up to two months for new brick orders while almost one quarter are waiting for up to four months.
An additional 16% are waiting for a staggering six to eight months.
Mr Berry said: “The brick manufacturers are working hard to reignite their kilns which were mothballed during the recession.
“However, in the meantime, let’s make sure small local house builders are not overlooked in favour of large house builders when it comes to manufacturers meeting requests for new bricks.”
The organisation also expressed concern at the shortage of skilled bricklayers.
He said that compared to this time a year ago, more than twice the firms were now reporting difficulties recruiting these tradespeople.
Mr Berry added: “In the short term, many SME house builders may have to rely on migrant labour.”
Hugo Swire predicted in 2010: “We will go back to the bad old days when MPs went back to their constituencies once every five years just before elections”!
Daily Mail – July 2010 – NOTE PARTICULARLY THE LAST SENTENCE BELOW!
“Two Tory Ministers have accused Commons expenses chiefs of wrecking their right to have a family house in their constituencies by slashing their second-home allowances.
Solicitor General Edward Garnier and Northern Ireland Minister Hugo Swire each charged around £24,000 a year expenses to cover the costs of renting elegant country homes in their constituencies, while living most of the year in private houses they own in London.
Mr Garnier claimed the maximum allowance of £24,006 last year for his beautiful house, Little Dalby Hall, which is on a 5,600-acre estate in Leicestershire.
His allowance this year to cover the rent has been slashed to £8,366.
Mr Swire’s claim for £23,103 to cover the cost of renting a large farmhouse in Devon has been reduced to £9,756.
Both have protested to IPSA, the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, after they were told they can only claim for the equivalent of a one-bedroom flat.
Mr Garnier is said to have accused IPSA of turning MPs into ‘visiting country squires’.
He was backed by Mr Swire, who said the new system threatened to take politics back to pre-Victorian times when some MPs rarely visited their constituencies. …
… They deny they are trying to ‘have their cake and eat it’ by demanding the right to live like gents with two full-sized family homes – one in London and one in the country – with the second funded by the taxpayer. …
.. Mr Swire, 50, the MP for East Devon, is a close friend of David Cameron and related to the Swire Hong Kong trading dynasty.
Last year, he received £1,400 a month in second-home allowance to rent the pretty Lincombe Farmhouse near the Devon resort of Sidmouth. It has been cut to £812 a month, with extra for council tax and bills. He too complained the
ruling was unfair.
Mr Swire and wife Sascha and their two young children live in a £1 million house in the heart of affluent Fulham, West London. The property is owned by Mrs Swire.
Educated at Eton and St Andrews University, Mr Swire served with the Grenadier Guards before becoming a director of Sotheby’s auction house.
In his bachelor days, he dated Jerry Hall before she married Mick Jagger. The late Joe Strummer, singer with the punk band The Clash, was his brother-in-law.
A friend of Mr Swire said: ‘Hugo is not whingeing. If he is forced to give up his Devon house for a one-bedroom flat he could not take his children down there and so obviously would spend less time there. His constituents would lose out.
‘We will go back to the bad old days when MPs went to their constituencies once every five years before election time.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1291791/Youre-turning-MPs-visiting-squires.html
Local Plan consultation – Inspector will reconvene hearings on 7 July 2015
East Devon Local Plan and Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule – Consultation on Proposed Changes:
I would like to draw your attention to a public consultation, which East Devon District Council is undertaking, regarding a series of proposed changes to the East Devon Local Plan and to the Community Infrastructure Levy Draft Charging Schedule.
These changes, together with supporting evidence for the local plan and information about our consultation, can be viewed on the council web site at: http://eastdevon.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/emerging-plans-and-policies/the-new-local-plan/examination-and-hearing-sessions/
Proposed changes to the Community Infrastructure Levy, as well as supporting documents and forms for comments can be read at: http://eastdevon.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/community-infrastructure-levy-cil/cil-examination/
The consultation will run for eight weeks, starting on 16 April 2015. Anyone can comment on the proposed changes and can reply to questions set by the appointed Planning Inspector. Responses must be received by the council at or before midday on Friday 12 June 2015 at the latest.
Responses received will be sent to Mr Thickett, the Inspector and it is envisaged that the first day of hearing sessions will start at 10 am on 7 July 2015 at the Council Offices in Sidmouth. Paper copies of the plan changes, together with supporting documents and response forms will be sent to libraries and Town Council offices in East Devon where they will be available to the public. We will also make paper copies available for inspection at the Council Offices, Knowle, Sidmouth EX10 8HL. Documents will be available during the normal opening hours for offices and libraries.
Housing associations threaten to sue over “right to buy”
Unintended consequences?
Housing associations set to be crippled by Conservative plans to extend the right-to-buy policy will launch a legal challenge against the move, they have said.
The Tories announced today that they will force housing associations to sell off homes at a fraction of their value despite warnings that the policy could cause the not-for-profits to go bankrupt.
Tony Stacey, chair of a group of 100 housing associations and chief executive of South Yorkshire Housing Association, told trade publication Inside Housing when the policy was first mooted in March that he would “definitely” launch a challenge.
“I would definitely challenge it legally. This is so fundamentally critical to us. It would shoot up to the top of our risk map if it was confirmed. We are duty bound morally to fight it in any way we possibly can,” the Placeshapers chair told the publication.
Other housing association chief executives are quoted as saying they “would be surprised” if a legal challenge did not happen because the policy would risk the viability of the entire social housing sector.
Because housing associations are private not-for-profit businesses, forcing the sale of homes at below market value could potentially breach Article 1, Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which gives everyone the “right to the peaceful enjoyment of one’s possessions”.
Industry sources also say charity law would have to be changed to accommodate the move because charities, including many housing associations, are prohibited from selling off their assets at below market value.
Today’s move by the Conservatives was criticised by both the Chartered Institute of Housing and the National Housing Federation, which represent housing associations and the industry at large.
Ruth Davison, the Federation’s policy director, said: “We fully support the aspiration of homeownership but extending right-to-buy to housing associations is the wrong solution to our housing crisis.
“Following 40 years of successive governments’ failure to build the homes the country needs, soaring rents and house prices and the biggest baby boom since the 1950s, ensuring that there enough homes today and tomorrow must be our nation’s top priority.”
A spokesperson for the Federation said they would need to see the detail of the policy before they could say whether they would support a legal challenge.
CIH deputy chief executive Gavin Smart said he feared “the figures simply won’t stack up” for the extension.
“Right-to-buy has already had a huge impact on the supply of genuinely affordable homes, which is being cut at a time when more and more people are in need. The next government should be reviewing the way the policy currently works, not extending it,” he argued.
David Cameron officially announced the policy in a speech today, arguing that it could benefit 1.3 million families and turn Britain into a “property-owning democracy”.
“We are the party of working people, offering you security at every stage of your life,” he said.
John Healey, a former Labour housing minister, described the policy as a “cheap Thatcher tribute act” and said it would worsen Britain’s housing shortage.
and more reasons why it is a poorly-thought out policy:
EDDC and the Case of the Mysterious Numbers
An article in ine of today’s newspapers is about health and the figures for Body Mass Index and cholesterol ( Sunday Times). It makes the point that figures for “healthy” BMI and cholesterol were picked arbitrarily and based on little firm evidence and may be quite wrong.
Rather like EDDC’s old AND new annual housing figures.
Several readers have made the point that they can find no evidence at all for the figure of 950 houses a year for the next 18 years in any of the latest Local Plan documents. All sorts of figures are mentioned for all sorts of scenarios but 950 does not seem to be one of them.
Perhaps this is why Mr Thickett, the Inspector who is usually so quick at responding to EDDC, has yet to reply to EDDC’s submission of the new draft which they sent to him on 18 March 2015 (with Community Infrastructure Levy rate information sent on 30 March). He usually replies witin a few days.
This new draft must be giving him much food for thought.
Surely not yet another enormous blunder that will allow a developer free-for-all to continue well beyond the life of this (currently) Conservative-controlled district council with its “economic growth” at all costs mantra?
More on the demonstration on planning outrage to be held in Sidmouth on Sunday
More on balanced growth
Balanced Growth
Definition of Balanced Growth:
“Balanced Growth refers to a specific type of economic growth that is sustainable in the long term. Balanced growth is opposed to the boom and bust nature of economic cycles.”
It was felt the UK had balanced growth between 1993 and 2007 – a long period of economic expansion and low inflation.
However, the credit crunch of 2007, showed the growth wasn’t as balanced as previously thought. Despite low inflation, there was a boom in bank lending and growth of credit. There was also a boom in house prices which got reversed from 2007.
http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/glossary/balanced-growth
So, why has EDDC chosen “economic growth” which is highly susceptible to boom and bust, particularly in the housing market, where a change in mortgage interest rates could lead many people into negative equity?
Where are all the houses going? Where are we with land supply?
This might give some clues:
Click to access housing-monitoring-update-to-30-sept-2014-ver02.pdf
“Economic growth” (EDDC choice) or “Balanced growth” (Mid Devon choice) for Local Plans
Based on the same reports from the same consultants, East Devon District Council has chosen “Economic Growth” but Mid Devon has chosen “Balancec Growth” . Here, in their Core Strategy, is why Mid Devon made its choice:
Economic growth strategy alternative:
5.7 Economic development would be the main priority for this strategy option, with social and environmental objectives set at a lower level of importance.
· High housing and employment growth, with sites chosen largely for economic viability.
· Limited affordable housing provision.
· Housing concentrated at Tiverton and Cullompton
· Employment to be promoted at locations such as motorway junctions.
· Employment provision in the rural areas strongly encouraged.
· Efforts to attract major tourist attractions.
· Retail development promoted in the three Area Centres.
· No limitations on car use.
5.8 This strategy is in many ways the converse of the environmental protection strategy and the Sustainability Appraisal found that its costs and benefits to sustainability are therefore largely a mirror image. It would involve the greatest use of Greenfield land for development for both housing and employment, with inevitable landscape impacts arising. Notably, the location of development, with its emphasis on car – based access, will lead to greater travel overall than the other strategies, with much worse impact on climate change.
</em
Balanced growth strategy alternative
5.9 The Balanced Growth strategy option would seek to minimise the conflict between social, environmental and economic objectives, and promote the balanced achievement of sustainable development. It was an evolution of the current strategy and policies set out in the Mid Devon Local Plan First Alteration.
· Development of new housing concentrated on the Area Centres, particularly Tiverton.
· Housing density generally higher than in the past but based on design – led solutions.
· Smaller dwellings provided, with maximum affordable housing provision.
· Rural housing generally limited to local need.
· Employment close to housing, encouraging town centre provision
and homeworking.
· Small scale employment and tourist provision encouraged throughout the rural areas.
· Promotion of a significant retail provision in Crediton.
· Some increased control over design, particularly in historic areas,
with targeted environmental enhancements continuing.
· Renewable energy schemes encouraged, together with low energy development.
· Car restraint, and provision of alternatives to the car, to concentrate on the Area Centres.
5.10 This strategy is the most sustainable of the strategies proposed, being positive in the majority of the factors, and negative in none. It would provide for both housing and economic development in locations which minimise traffic generation, allowing for small rural economic diversification. For these reasons, it formed the initial basis for the Core Strategy policies.
Affordable housing figures lowest since 2000
“Spending on affordable housing is at its lowest point for 14 years.
Latest figures show it stood at £965million last year – the same as it was in 2000.
But the Tories were so embarrassed about the stats they waited five months to put them out. …
… Labour’s Chris Ruane tabled a Commons question in November asking ministers to provide details of their spending.
Housing minister Brandon Lewis finally answered as Parliament was dissolved last week for the General Election.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/affordable-homes-spending-lowest-2000-5418836
East Devon? Where’s that?
Our local, current MP has used one of his final columns of this Parliament to extol the virtues of George Osborne saying he knows him ” pretty well”.
His ONE mention of the South West (not East Devon) is to say that Help to Buy ISAs could help 95,000 people to buy their first homes. (Surely not all of them in East Devon but you can’t be sure of anything about “economic growth” in East Devon these days!).
IT WILL NOT HELP IF OUR YOUNG PEOPLE DON’T HAVE JOBS AND CAN’T GET AFFORDABLE HOUSING!
Whilst general unemployment has dropped (thanks in large part to tax credits and part-time zero hours contracts favouring employers rather than employees) youth unemployment stubbornly refused to fall.
Still, Cranbrook, phases 1-100 will benefit local developers.
East Devon will have one of the highest populations of over 65s/over 85s in the country by 2030
A new report reveals that East Devon will be one of the districts to see an above average increase in pensioners, with 36 per cent of its population over the age of 65 by 2030 and ten per cent of those will be over 85 – currently the percentage over 65 is 18%. At the same time the proportion of under 16’s will fall to only 14%.
Seems like the vast majority of the people living in those little boxes in Cranbrook will be in low-paid, zero hours contracts looking after old people.
And where does this appear in our Local Plan?
Source: Office of National Statistics/Express and Echo (page loading problem for wrb address)
Pickles overturns Pinn Court development and allows its 400 plus houses to go ahead
“430 residential units, local centre comprising retail space of up to 240 m2 and a community centre, care home of up to 60 bedspaces, specialist care home of up to 60 bedspaces and a park and change facility, together with associated areas of open space (formal and informal), cycleways, footpaths and infrastructure, safeguarded vehicular route to Langaton Lane, served off new access from the highway”
Claire Wright’s analysis of housing figures – curious, chilling and mysterious – and not in a good way
The disappearing houses
… And something sinister has happened to all the houses built between 2006 and 2013.
They have disappeared!
Before I get on to this I should explain that in the old draft local plan the plan period was between 2006 and 2026.
The new revisions propose a plan period of 2013 to 2031.
So what has happened to all the houses that were in the old draft local plan between 2006 and 2013?
Have they been erased from the towns and villages that they were built in?
No. They simply have not been counted! This means that the figure of 18,000 is a considerable underestimate. I am not sure how many houses are now unaccounted for but I think we can assume it is several thousand. Which does rather increase the true housing hike up to well over 20,000.
I gave the council quite a blast over all this (as did other councillors including Susie Bond and Ian Thomas and a more than a dozen residents) at this morning’s development management committee meeting, which was packed with around 100 members of the public.
I also asked whether the planning inspector had recommended a housing number for the district. The chief executive indicated that he had not.
Then why I asked, does it say on the press release dated 9 March, that the planning inspector had advised on housing growth of 950 a year? This gives a clear (and totally false) impression that the council was implementing the sort of development levels that the planning inspector had told them to. …”
Scorched earth – literally.
Local Plan version 2: a layperson’s summary
The Development Management Committee meets this week to nod through the latest draft of our Local Plan, after which it will go out for consultation.
It’s just about a year since the first version was inspected and thrown out straight away – the Inspector saying he expected to re-hear it in October 2014.
That month came and went and the excuse was: we have LOTS more work to do, be patient.
Those dealing with the revised plan were given few extra resources (around £50,000 worth when costs last published), more resources being piled into headquarter PRE-relocation work (£750,000 plus at least £10,000 to keep consultants reports on the project secret after EDDC was taken to court by the Information Commissioner for refusing to publish them).
February 2015: and we are told consultants reports are “imminent” but must not be published before local elections (May 2015) as they are deemed to be “too politically sensitive”. However, Mid Devon (relying on the very same consultants reports) decided to put their Local Plan out for consultation, eventually publishing the reports for the public with no qualms about their sensitivity.
Our Inspector would have no truck with this “political sensitivity” excuse and said he expected our new draft Local Plan to be out for public consultation by April 2015, election or no election.
Out of the mist came the consultants report – short, based on widely available figures and with no explanation as to why they had taken so long and soon after what appears to be a new draft Local Plan hurridly changed to reflect the new numbers and with an extra addendum of vastly more housing for Cranbrook and Clyst St Mary.
The Local Plan still appears to be (possibly fatally) flawed. Whereas it fixes on a number (18,000 plus houses including windfalls) IT DOES NOT MAKE IT CRYSTAL CLEAR WHERE EXACTLY THEY WILL GO except for Cranbrook and Clyst St Mary.
The report says some towns will have their built-up boundary respected (e.g. Sidmouth) whereas no such promise is made in other places (e.g. Budleigh Salterton). Some towns and villages have little idea of what their allocations will be or where they are to go. That makes Neighbourhood Plans very difficult.
What are the chances of this draft Local Plan being passed by the Inspector? Layperson’s opinion: very slim.
Whatever happens it will be a THIRD council that carries the can – the previous two having failed to get to grips with an out-of-date plan. Let us hope the new council will do a better job than the first two (big Conservative majority) councils did.
A vote for Independents is a vote for a new Local Plan to protect the district from free-for-all development. Heaven knows what a vote for Conservatives would bring on past and present performance!
Where can children play in our towns and cities?
” ... Throughout the country, they become prisoners of bad design, and so do adults. Without safe and engaging places in which they can come together, no tribe forms. So parents must play the games that children would otherwise play among themselves, and everyone is bored to tears.
The exclusion of children arises from the same pathology that denies us decent housing. In the name of market freedom, the volume housebuilders, sitting on their land banks, are free to preside over speculative chaos, while we are free to buy dog kennels priced like palaces in placeless estates so badly designed that community is dead on arrival. Many want to design and build their own homes, but almost no plots are available, as the big builders have seized them. …”
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/06/children-towns-and-cities-robbed-spaces-play
Questions for the Local Plan
When maximum, minimum and average figures were compiled why was maximum chosen, as maximums can be skewed.
Why was the final figure designated as the MINIMUM number to be built if maximum numbers were chosen?
Where are these houses to be built: sites for such numbers are not identified nor the number of houses per site. This will encourage very large initial developments with no ability to refuse (aaah). Only Clyst St Mary seems to have designated (large) numbers.
Where is the Community Infrastructure Levy document which specifies the cost per square metre of development to support local and district-wide infrastructure for these massive increases?
What is our current 5/6 year land supply?
With the future of the inter-modal freight terminal uncertain why is this not designated as extra employment land?
East Devon Watch 