The Financial Times does not allow sharing of its articles but you can imagine the content.
Owl has one observation: isn’t this what Building Regulations are for?
Build to code and there is no problem!
Oh, except pretty much all of the Building Control officers have been let go in austerity cuts.
“Controversial plans that would see 350 new homes built on the edge of Exmouth have been narrowly approved, despite it being called a wish list full of ifs, buts and maybes. …
East Devon District Council’s Development Management Committee on Tuesday gave a reluctant thumbs-up to the scheme, despite serious concerns raised about the access to the site on Dinan Way and the ‘disgusting’ number of affordable homes that would be provided and objections from Exmouth and Lympstone councils, local ward councillors, Devon County Council and residents.
Outlining the application, planning officer, Chris Rose said that the site was allocated in the Local Plan. He said that it had been tested that the site was not viable if 25 per cent affordable housing was provided but instead only five per cent, 18 houses, had been offered. …
Mike Deaton, Principal Planning Officer for Devon County Council said that they were objecting to the application, partly as the junction of Hulham Road and Exeter Road already exceeds capacity and the new development will therefore compound an existing problem, particularly as the use of Wotton Lane, Summer Lane and Featherbed Lane is unsustainable.
… He said that the solution was an extension of Dinan Way to connect Hulham Road with the A376, but that as there was no guarantee of where the funding could come from, it made it difficult to support the application without the infrastructure being in place.
He also said that the county council’s first priority around education needs would be to expand Exmouth Community College which is already at capacity ahead of the new primary school as part of the development site.
Cllr Paul Carter though said he didn’t see many positives of the application and said that the whole thing needs to be better.
He added: “This is somewhat of a pig’s ear. We have taken so much time to get to this stage and still so much is undecided. I am just flabbergasted that there is only five per cent of affordable housing and has the feel of ‘we will make do’.”
Cllr Maddy Chapman said that Exmouth doesn’t need a new primary school, and added: “I very much doubt that the good ladies of Exmouth will want to breed a second family to fill it.”
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/yes-plans-350-new-homes-1743813
Owl says: Since when did “addressing issues” and “looking into measures” ever count for ANYTHING? More meaningless claptrap.
“In his first major speech as housing, communities and local government secretary today, Brokenshire said communities felt let down when developers reneged on pledges to build essential local infrastructure or affordable housing.
“We’re addressing these issues head on through our consultation into reforming developer contributions,” he said in his speech to think-tank Policy Exchange.
“These will ensure that developers are left in no doubt about what’s expected of them. Local authorities will hold them to account.” …
… Brokenshire added that, in future, government would require much more transparency from developers on the pace and timing of delivery. “We’re currently looking at measures to make this reporting a compulsory requirement.”
Not saying this is the same, but don’t a lot of companies take out money just before they crash …BHS, Carillion …
And is this a proper time?
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/06/29/new-facebook-page-avoidpersimmonhomes/
“A group of 130 bosses at housebuilder Persimmon are set to share a £300 million bonus bonanza in the biggest windfall in the history of the industry.
The unprecedented payout is part of a notorious bonus scheme that is delivering £75 million to the chief executive Jeff Fairburn.
Tomorrow’s payday will hand 130 senior managers an average of £2.3 million each. The handout is the second and largest part of an incentive scheme, that will take the total for managers below the board level to £500 million.
They previously shared in a £200 million payout over Christmas which was overshadowed by the storm over Fairburn’s £50 million. …”
“A minimum tenancy term of three years would be introduced under government proposals to give people renting homes in England more security.
Figures show 80% of tenants currently have contracts of six or 12 months and ministers say longer agreements would allow them to put down more roots.
They add tenants would be able to leave earlier under the plans while landlords would get more financial security.
Labour says the plans do not go far enough and rent rises should be capped. …”
“The government is under pressure to set up an independent ombudsman with the power to order housebuilders to pay out up to £50,000 or even reverse a sale, following reports of new-home buyers lumbered with defective properties.
A group of MPs and peers has called on the government to make it mandatory for housebuilders to belong to the proposed scheme, which would be free for consumers and offer a quick resolution to disputes. The scheme would be funded by a levy on housebuilders, with larger ones such as Berkeley Group, Persimmon, Barratt, Galliford Try, Redrow and Bovis Homes, paying more than small and medium-sized firms.
A report, Better Redress for Home Buyers, by the all-party parliamentary group for excellence in the built environment, highlights the confusing landscape buyers face when trying to resolve building defects, not helped by a plethora of warranties, housebuilding codes and complaints procedures.
It says the proposed ombudsman should be able to order payouts of up to £50,000 so buyers are not left out of pocket. Disputes over larger sums might have to be settled in court, but the report adds: “In certain extreme situations the new homes ombudsman should be able to reverse the sale.”
People have no idea that when they buy a new home directly from the developer, they have no access to redress.
The recommendations come after a scandal over the poor quality of new homes built by Bovis, while other housebuilders have also faced similar complaints.
A recent survey by the Home Builders Federation and the main warranty provider, NHBC, showed that 98% of new-home buyers reported snags or bigger defects to their housebuilder after moving in.
The parliamentarians have proposed a snagging app that would enable buyers to photograph defects and send them to the builder, monitor the progress of complaints and go to the ombudsman if needed.
Dominic Raab, the housing minister, said this week that the “vice-like grip” of the big developers must be broken to boost the building of affordable homes.
Lord Best, vice-chair of the all-party group, says: “Buying a new home is stressful enough, but buying a defective one, as we heard from witnesses, can take a toll on people’s wellbeing as they wrestle with a Kafkaesque system seemingly designed to be unhelpful.”
The proposed scheme would be modelled on the property ombudsman, to which all estate agents must belong. If they are struck off, they can no longer trade.
Katrine Sporle, the property ombudsman, says: “New homes should be covered by an ombudsman. People have no idea that when they buy a new home directly from the developer, they have no access to redress.”
The proposed scheme would cover the first two years following a house purchase when housebuilders are liable for defects, while subsequent problems would be down to the warranty providers.
The report says: “Affected homebuyers are exasperated not so much by the existence of defects but by a builder’s failure or even refusal to put them right. Submissions we received described how buying a new home had been ‘the worst decision of their life’; how it was like ‘going through hell’ as the complaint passed between housebuilders and warranty providers; and how fighting for redress was taking a toll on their health.”
The proposals have been presented to the ministry of housing, communities and local government as part of its consultation on a single housing ombudsman.”
Owl says: Time to get some baseline air pollution data in Sidford before the planned business park increases it? Evidence, evidence, evidence.
“While obesity, lack of exercise and genetic risk are major drivers for diabetes, studies have shown a link between the disease and pollution. Air pollution is thought to trigger inflammation and reduce the ability of the pancreas to manage insulin production. …
… Levels of air pollution well below what is considered safe by the US Environmental Protection Agency and the World Health Organization are causing an increased risk of diabetes worldwide, according to a study published Friday in the journal Lancet Planetary Health.
In 2016 alone, the study found that air pollution contributed to 3.2 million new diabetes cases –14% of the total — around the world. In the United States, air pollution was linked to 150,000 new cases of diabetes per year.
“There’s an undeniable relationship between diabetes and particle air pollution levels well below the current safe standards,” said senior study author Dr. Ziyad Al-Aly, an assistant professor of medicine at Washington University. “Many industry lobbying groups argue that current levels are too stringent and should be relaxed. Evidence shows that current levels are still not sufficiently safe and need to be tightened.”
Particulate or particle air pollution is made up of microscopic pieces of dust, dirt, smoke and soot mixed with liquid droplets. The finest particles regulated by the EPA are 2.5 micrometers; to put that in perspective, a strand of human hair is 70 micrometers, or more than 30 times larger.
Anything less than 10 micrometers can not only enter the lungs, it can pass into the bloodstream, where it is carried to various organs and begins a chronic inflammatory reaction thought to lead to disease.
“Ten or 15 years ago, we thought that air pollution caused pneumonia, asthma and bronchitis and not much more than that,” said Dr. Philip Landrigan, dean for global health at Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, who was not involved in the study. “We now know that air pollution is a very important cause of heart disease and stroke and contributes to chronic lung disease, lung cancer and chronic kidney disease.” …
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/29/health/air-pollution-diabetes-study/index.html
“Nearly 30 per cent of the houses built in East Devon by a government body, responsible for improving the amount of affordable housing, were unaffordable.
Newly-released figures have revealed that Homes England, whose stated aim is ‘to deliver a sustained improvement in affordability’, built 262 homes in East Devon between April 2015 and March 2018.
Of those, just 71 per cent were defined as ‘affordable’ – including social housing and homes with rent capped at no more than 80 per cent of the local market average. Properties bought through a scheme such as Help to Buy or shared-ownership are also included.
It means 76 of the homes, built by private contractors with support from the Government, were sold or rented at market value.
The statistics have been released at the same time as data, from the Valuation Office Agency, which revealed the median cost of renting a home in East Devon was £675 a month. The figure is the median monthly rent for all houses in the area, between April 2017 and March 2018.
In the last four years the price has risen by 3.8 per cent – which is less than the average increase across England.
East Devon’s overall median rent is however lower than average for the South West, which is £700 a month.
The data also revealed that the median monthly cost of renting a one-bedroom property in East Devon was now £495 – 2.5 per cent more than in 2013/14.
Where as renting a three-bed family home the median cost was £795 a month – which has risen by six per cent in four years.
So far all of the 66 new builds, started by Homes England in the last year, have been designated as affordable.”
Homes England’s chief executive Nick Walkley said: “These official figures show that the overall number of homes being built continues to steadily increase, but we know there is more to do. Homes England will bring together our money, expertise, and planning and compulsory purchase powers to secure the delivery of new homes, where they are most needed, and improve affordability that can be sustained over time.
“We are investing over £3billion of affordable housing grant over the 2016-21 period to help housing associations, local councils and developers build affordable homes for communities across England, and are working closely with the sector to realise their ambitions for affordable housing.”
A new Facebook page called “AvoidPersimmonHomes” has been overwhelmed with stories and pictures of homes which occupants are finding impossible to live in. At the time of writing it has 269 members.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/316825475386299/about/
This follows on from a similar page for Bovis homes which has 3,113 members
https://www.facebook.com/groups/BovisVictimsGroup/
“Community groups have been given six months to make their submissions by January 11, 2019.
Exeter-based JLL, have been appointed by East Devon District Council as property marketing advisor, and will be offering advice and taking bids from non-commercial organisations immediately.
In the autumn, the company will open the bidding up to commercial property sector who will have only three months to put forward a bid.
Councillor Jeff Turner, of Sidmouth Town Council, said: “I’m pleased to see that the six month period has now started for the local community in Sidmouth to come forward with any ideas they may have.
“This commences the next stage of the process in finding a way forward for this area of the seafront which is of significant interest to a great many people in Sidmouth.”
It follows 18 months of consultation, which included a scoping study around the town’s Port Royal area to find out what the community would like to see there.
EDDC also carried out a marketing exercise to see about the possibility of adding attractions such as a high quality restaurant/bar development or something similar.
An EDDC spokeswoman said: “As a result of hearing what local people wanted and also acknowledging the constraints of the site including increased risk of flooding, a lack of financial viability in relation to large scale mixed use development and existing covenants, it was agreed that the original proposals should be ruled out.”
Cllr Philip Skinner, Deputy Leader of East Devon District Council and its economy portfolio holder, said: “I’m delighted that we are now able to offer this opportunity for the local community in Sidmouth to come forward during the next six months with their ideas for the site.
“Our property advisor will be available to offer guidance to interested parties and I look forward to seeing a range of proposals when the marketing period concludes in January next year.”
http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/bids-now-open-to-redevelop-sidmouth-s-drill-hall-1-5580801
The long-suffering residents of Farringdon and Woodbury Salterton are now one step closer from being a little more confidant with their fears of further growth from the Industrial Business Parks on their doorsteps from Hill Barton and Greendale Business Parks.
These 2 business parks have been growing at a considerable rate over the last 20 years which has provided important business opportunities and employment. However, it has been felt that further growth would be inappropriate in the open countryside some distance away from any major towns.
East Devon Local Plan proposals in the Local Plan approved in 2016 supported planned commercial growth would be at Cranbrook and areas close to Exeter together with other major towns in the district.
However there has been a number of challenges made to these policies with a number of Planning Inspectors hearings and High Court cases to these particular policies.
It was always known that the Local Plan would be challenged for development at these Business Parks and some villages. Therefore, the Local Authority proposed an additional planning document known as the “Villages Development Plan” which is an additional planning document drawn up by the Strategic Planning Department at East Devon which will provide further guidance and clarity to the largest villages in the district and the two business parks.
Finally, after 3 years of deliberation and public consultations, East Devon`s Strategic Planning Committee meeting this week, agreed to recommend to the East Devon`s Full Council meeting on the 25th of July that the “Villages Plan” be adopted.
The Villages Plan has been through several rounds of public consultation and the plan text has been refined to reflect the comments made.
Then followed a Planning Inspectors hearing plus an examination and recently returned by the Planning Inspector with an agreed approval following further changes and amendments.
The result of the Strategic Planning Committees approval and recommendation to the next Full Council meeting to adopt the new policy document will provide clarity and guidance on planning matters to the Villages and to the two Business Parks.
In the case of the Business Parks new planning policies are to be adopted.
Policy VP04 and VP05 which include a map that shows the extent of authorised uses at the Business Parks. Beyond the “Employment Area” shown on the map, any further planning applications will be considered to be in the “open countryside” and will be subject to stringent countryside protection policies.
It is therefore hoped by the rural villages of Farringdon and Woodbury Salterton that this endorsement of restricting further expansion at these Business Parks will provide clarity and certainty for the community for many years.
Says there are not enough spaces on his other business park in Sidmouth (remember that if an application to build housing there ever comes up!) so he has no choice but to build in the AONB with access on a narrow road:
But … but … but ANOTHER businessman hoping to build similar units on a brownfield site with direct access to the A3052 nearer to Sidmouth:
Answer to a Freedom of Information request:
1. The total amount of land (in acres) currently owned by your Council – 2302 acres
2. The total amount of land (in acres) currently owned by your Council that has been identified as surplus to requirements – 0 acres
3. The total amount of land (in acres) currently owned by your Council that is scheduled to be sold – 0.3 acres
4. The total amount of land (in acres) currently owned by your Council scheduled for joint venture housing development or where such development is already taking place – 0 acres
Date responded: 20 June 2018
Monopoly planning:
No affordable housing? Check
Too many houses? Check
Primary school which may never get built and in wrong location? Check
You have 3 ticks – do pass Go and don’t go to jail!
“Controversial plans that would see 350 new homes and a new primary school built on land at the edge of Exmouth are being recommended for approval – despite concerns about a lack of affordable housing and whether a new school is even needed.
The outline plans, for land at Goodmores Farm, off Dinan Way, also seeks outline permission for employment, commercial, and community uses.
The plans, which will be considered by East Devon Council’s development management committee on 3 July, are recommended for approval despite considerable concerns by Exmouth and Lympstone councils, local ward councillors, Devon County Council and residents.
Some objectors question whether there is a need for future housing and a new primary school in the town. Others accept the principle of the development but question if the primary school is in the best location, and they fear that the development will not provide adequate funding of about £2.5m toward the school.
But the council’s officers say the application from Eagle Investments Ltd has been viability-tested and the proposal was “considered to comply with existing planning policies”.”
Letwin interestingly does NOT blame planners. After this interinpm report he will further investigate and issue a fuller report at some point in the future x no doubt guided by whether what else he finds is vote-losing due to problems caused by his own government. He will further focus on:
lack of transport infrastructure,
difficulties of land remediation,
delayed installations by utility companies, constrained site logistics,
limited availability of capital,
limited supplies of building materials, and limited availability of skilled labour
alleged intentional “land banking” on the part of major house builders
Report:
Click to access Build_Out_Review_Draft_Analysis.pdf
Annexes:
“Britain’s ten biggest builders have seen the value of their shares drop by a combined £3.6 billion in the last two weeks as fears grow that the housing market is heading for a downturn.
Fears of a rise in interest rates – and mortgage costs – are growing after three members of the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee voted in favour of a hike.
Bosses at housebuilding firms have cashed in over the past 12 months, with payouts to senior executives running into tens of millions of pounds.
A downturn in share prices in the sector would provoke fresh criticism of managers who have already been accused of making hay due to low interest rates and taxpayer subsidies for the industry, rather than their own skill and merit.
‘There is a fear that interest rate rises could be on the way,’ said Clyde Lewis, an analyst at broker Peel Hunt.
He added that estate agents had flagged a slowdown in the market. ‘With the housebuilders it looks like we are fairly close to the top of the cycle,’ he said. …”
“Private landlords have put home ownership beyond the reach of at least 2 million families, research shows, while Britain has built only half as many new homes as France over the same period.
The radical report from the new Conservative thinktank Onward recommends ending or severely curtailing tax breaks for buy-to-let and private landlords, a stronger role for local councils and major reform of the planning system to allow communities rather than developers to lead the process.
The report, which was written by Neil O’Brien, a former aide to George Osborne who also worked for Theresa May at No 10, calls for government intervention in the housing market, including giving London councils the power to limit foreign ownership.
“We need to change the balance between the rented sector and home ownership,” O’Brien said. “We should protect existing landlords but discourage more people from investing in rental property, because the buy-to-let boom has bid up prices and reduced homeownership among younger people.”
Previous governments have already acted to curb tax relief on mortgage repayments and maintenance for landlords, but the thinktank says it is still a privileged form of investment that reduces the number of homes available for owner-occupiers while reducing the amount of capital available for more productive investment.
“The UK is one of the cheapest countries for investors involved in residential rental investments,” the report finds.
Emphasising the link between shortage of supply and rising home prices, the report offers radical ideas for increasing the number of new homes.
It argues that planning permission for a hectare of agricultural land can add as much as £2.5m to its value. If the community could benefit from some of the increase, the report argues, it could be used to pay for the kind of services and infrastructure that new developments sometimes lack.
Instead of piecemeal development, it recommends that councils should have the power to put together land and create new settlements with services. It looks across Europe, where most local authorities have strong powers to initiate and shape development and link it to public transport.
It proposes better support to help councils plan new developments drawing on expertise from across the sector, as well as abroad. It also recommends much higher density urban occupation, where the UK lags behind most other comparable countries. …”
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/25/footballer-zeli-ismail-rentcharge
Already covered by Owl as regards Cranbrook here:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/01/12/cranbrook-herald-reports-on-estate-rent-charges/
and what had to be done here:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/01/26/cranbrook-estate-rent-charges-to-be-transferred-to-council-tax/
Yet another retrospective planning application from FWS Carter and Sons! It appears this planning application is yet another example (of many) of the company jumping the gun as the new building already seems to have been built!
“FWS Carter and Sons wish to expand the existing farm shop as well as build a new dedicated classroom facility at the site on the A3052, between the Greendale Business Park and Crealy.
They say they would be making a significant investment in the farm shop, that already makes sales of around £100,000 a week, would create 30 new jobs, and expand on the shop which is a focal point to the rural community which it serves.
The farm shop already employs 68 people (56 full time and 12 part time), but the company says the new proposals would directly create 30 new jobs (8 full time and 22 part time) in documents submitted with a planning application to East Devon District Council.”
Owl wonder why they need a classroom at a farm shop?
Maybe for the training of the Greendale and Ladram Bay management of how to correctly apply for planning permission? Not build it then submit a planning application again, again and again!
Quote from Cllr Geoff Jung the EDA District Councillor.
“I am totally exasperated by their total lack of conformity to the planning system!
However this application will be treated by East Devon District Council in the normal manner as required by the National Planning Policy”
Perhaps new planning guidance should bring in hefty fines for retrospective planning applications?
As reported in “Decisions, Decisions, Decisions – original article from today’s Sunday Telegraph.
Owl says Well, we could have written this, couldn’t we! And where is the Magic Money Tree for infrastructure?
“It is two years since Sir Oliver Letwin formally left the government, and yet in recent months he has found himself relied on by Theresa May almost as much as if he had retained his role in the Cabinet Office.
The former Conservative policy chief has been credited with averting at least two major Tory rebellions over Brexit by developing compromise amendments to the Government’s EU (Withdrawal) Bill.
In November he was asked by Philip Hammond to tackle another thorny issue for the Prime Minister, who has pledged to increase the number of new homes to 300,000 per year: the vast gap between the number of properties given planning permission, and those that have actually been built.
Sir Oliver’s inquiry began amid claims developers were deliberately “banking” land. The only “land banking” that does exist, he has concluded, is as a result of the “absorption rate”, which sees builders sell new properties over a longer period of time because putting a large number of similar homes on to the market at the same time was depressing prices.
Sir Oliver’s analysis found that firms were taking an average of 15.5 years to complete large developments, with work progressing at a rate of 6.5 per cent of the development per year. At the extreme end of the scale the buildout rate of a development was almost 44 years. “It is an extraordinary fact,” he says. The larger the site, Sir Oliver’s team found, the smaller the percentage of the development that would be built each year.
The problem, he has concluded, is that homes on the largest sites were too alike, both in terms of the buildings themselves and their surroundings, and the “tenure” of the properties – whether, for example, they were ultimately aimed at private purchasers or renters, or those who would be renting through local authorities or housing associations.
‘Co-ordination across the various layers of government… is not good enough’
“When you go to these estates they will sometimes tell you, ‘we have three or four different flags’, as they put it, or ‘outlets’, or even ‘brands’,” he says.
“We have wandered up and down these sites and looked for the differences. I assure you, it’s very difficult to tell which is which.”
He adds: “There are people who want retirement living, people who want student accommodation, people who want homes that look and feel completely different from the sorts of things builders are building on these sites. They will find them in the second hand market very possibly, but they won’t find them on these sites, because these sites are being built like these builders build them – that’s what’s on offer. Any car you want as long as it’s black.”
The exact “policy levers” that Sir Oliver will recommend to tackle the problem will be the subject of the next six months of his review, on which he will report ahead of the November budget. But he now knows what he is aiming to achieve.
“The outcome we need is an outcome which somehow varies in lots of different modes and ways what’s on offer. Just as important that they should be varied in soft ways to do with architecture, urban design, ecology and style as in the hard ways of tenure and size.
“If you can have different markets that you’re addressing… you will end up with more homes.”
Sir Oliver has been careful to keep his focus on the time period between planning consent being gained and a site being completed, in line with his formal brief. But he will also make recommendations for tackling problems that he has discovered are delaying – by an average of more than four years – the point at which full consent is provided.
“We discovered en route that the provision of major infrastructure, particularly major transport infrastructure… has a huge effect,” he said.
“Barking Riverside [in east London] for years and years didn’t happen to speak of because everyone was discussing how not to provide an extension of the Docklands Light Railway. They eventually decided it wasn’t going to be provided and they would instead extend the London Overground. Then Barking could proceed.
“It would be much better if our country were one in which once someone’s decided that there’s a large area of post-industrial land which it would be really useful to build, somebody got their act together and got the infrastructure in place.”
He added: “There are lots of government schemes and money and so on available… but I have noted that co-ordination across the various layers of government – departments, agencies, Highways England and National Grid and all these others – is not good enough to create the energy to get rapid decisions made.”
Another problem is a shortage of bricklayers – which will only get worse if the Government’s efforts lead to a rapid expansion in the number of homes being built, he warns.
He calls for a five-year “flash” programme of on-the-job training to increase the number of bricklayers by around 15,000 – adding almost a quarter to the current workforce.
Sir Oliver understands the scale of the task on his hands. Housing, as Mrs May has realised, could make or break the Conservatives at the next election.
“I think there’s absolutely no doubt that any political party that doesn’t take really, really seriously the need to provide sufficient homes for our population… is going to suffer.”
East Devon Watch 