“A housing development of 282 flats in central Manchester has only two British families living there because foreign nationals have bought the apartments as investments.
Overseas investors in Number One Cambridge Street hail from 18 nations including Azerbaijan, China and Zimbabwe.
Many of the properties are empty as the investors simply hold them until the price goes up and they sell them.”
Too late for the many people in Axminster and elsewhere in East Devon, sadly.
“The Competition and Markets Authority is examining payments between housebuilders and the providers of warranties for new homes as part of a review of NHBC, the largest warranty provider.
The CMA announced last month it was reviewing undertakings made by NHBC, the standard-setting body for new-build properties in the UK and the main warranty provider. These 22-year-old undertakings were designed to improve competition in the warranty market.
The review was announced amid concerns that NHBC is compromising its independence by paying millions of pounds to developers every year. However, the CMA said it was launching the review following a request from NHBC and that it would not consider the “wider issues” relating to the organisation. …”
“A total of 14 East Devon towns and villages have been earmarked for expansion, and residents have got a final chance to have their say on it.
Following consultation event in 2016, the public is invited to give even more feedback on the version of the East Devon Villages Plan that the district authority is going to submit.
The consultation includes details of the feedback received in response to the 2016 consultation and how the council amended the document after listening to those views. ..”
Any comments received in response to the latest consultation will be forwarded to the Inspector appointed to examine the plan – this is expected to happen during Autumn 2017.
Councillor Andrew Moulding, Chairman of the Strategic Planning Committee, said: “We would like to hear from as many residents as possible, as their views are an important part of the process in finalising the Villages Plan, which is destined to help determine planning applications across the district.”
Residents affected have until 12pm on
Wednesday May 10
to comment on the plan and the supporting documents and all comments will be sent to the Inspector appointed to examine the plan.
The Proposed Submission Villages Plan is available to view on the East Devon Council website:
as well as at local libraries and in the council offices in Sidmouth.
Villages/towns affected are:
Beer
Broadclyst
Clyst St Mary
Colyton
East Budleigh
Feniton
Kilmington
Lympstone
Musbury
Newton Poppleford
Sidbury
Uplyme
West Hill
Whimple
Woodbury
Maps are helpfully provided in the Express and Echo article. In addition, maps showing the extent of land authorised for business use at Greendale and Hill Barton business parks have been included in the Villages Plan.
“A slowdown in housebuilding last month dragged down activity in the construction sector, adding to concerns that the economy may be losing some momentum.
The Markit/CIPS purchasing managers’ index for construction in March dropped to 52.2 from 52.5 in February, falling short of forecasts. Although the index was still above 50, indicating growth, economists described the data as disappointing.
“The construction sector remains at the sharp end of the decline in corporate confidence and the renewed squeeze on households’ real wages, both of which are consequences of the Brexit vote,” Samuel Tombs, chief UK economist at Pantheon Economics, said. “We continue to expect the construction sector to tread water this year.”
Signs of a slowdown in housebuilding will come as a setback to the government, which announced a white paper last month to help to boost new homebuilding and to fix what it called Britain’s “broken” housing market. The country is building about 100,000 fewer homes than the 250,000 it needs annually, which is helping to drive up prices.
The PMI’s sub-index on housing dropped to 51.7, its lowest level since August 2016.”
Source: Times (paywall)
“Bovis Homes today snubbed a £1.2 billion takeover bid from rival Galliford Try — and lured its former chief executive to be the new boss. …
… Fitzgerald admits he is obsessed by work, though he does find time to listen to Level 42. He told the Sunday Times in 2015 that he has “never read a book”.
At Bovis he will get a basic salary of £650,000. Bonuses and incentives mean he could make up to £7 million in the first three years.”
http://www.standard.co.uk/business/bovis-fends-off-galliford-and-nabs-its-old-boss-a3507821.html
“A development of luxury homes in Cambridge has been daubed with graffiti – written in Latin, of course.
Vandals spray-painted the new five-bedroom river-front houses with the words Locus in Domos Loci Populum.
Locals have said the messages, which appear to be a protest against the development, could “only happen” in the university city.
The homes, in Water Street, Chesterton, priced from £1.25m are on the site of an old pub.
Cambridge University Professor of Classics, Mary Beard, said: “This is a bit hard to translate, but I think what they’re trying to say is that a lovely place has been turned into houses.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-39490537
Owl says: are these audited costs or still on
“District chiefs are being advised to press ahead with their £10million relocation from Sidmouth – despite having no guaranteed buyer for their ‘not fit-for-purpose’ Knowle HQ.
East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) cabinet is being asked to sign off nearly £8.7million to press ahead with building work at Honiton’s Heathpark, on top of the approved £1,7million pot to refurbish Exmouth Town Hall.
If approved, the relocation project’s total budget will stand at £10.36million, up from £9.2million in March 2015.
Members will also be asked if they support a further £225,000 cost for an improved access road to the Honiton base when they meet next week.
EDDC originally promised that the relocation would be ‘cost neutral’, that it would not borrow money and the project would not progress before Knowle was sold.
But after refusing PegasusLife’s £7.5million bid to redevelop Knowle into a 113-home retirement community, the authority now has to decide how to proceed with the relocation.
According to cabinet agenda papers, members have three options to choose from:
• ‘Go now’ – press ahead with building in Honiton in anticipation of an acceptable combination of cash for Knowle and prudential borrowing. Work could be completed as soon as December 2018.
• Delay relocation for one to two years, or more, so planning permission for Knowle can be secured to fund the project. EDDC understands PegasusLife is preparing an appeal, which would have to be lodged before June 9.
• A ‘do minimum’ option of giving up on the new-build Honiton HQ, completing the refurbishment of Exmouth Town Hall and modernising a section of Knowle. Essential repairs to Knowle would cost £1.9million, but there is no capital receipt for this expenditure.
Councillors have been recommended to pursue the ‘go now’ option. EDDC maintains that the move will save money in the long-run.
Its development management committee refused PegasusLife’s application because it represented a departure from Knowle’s 50-home allocation in the authority’s Local Plan and due to the lack of ‘affordable’ housing.
EDDC has considered various re-marketing options for Knowle – if a PegasusLife appeal is unsuccessful – that could fetch between £3.22million and £6.8million. One scheme proposes 50 homes, half of which would be ‘affordable’, and could bring in £4.2million.
Critics have long said EDDC could remain at Knowle rather than relocate. The cabinet papers say modernising the former hotel would cost nearly £11.3million, or, for the newer offices, the bill is expected to be more than £5.9million.
The relocation project has cost £1,784,884 to date.
Cabinet members will meet to discuss the options at Knowle at 5.30pm on Wednesday (April 5).”
http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/budget_for_eddc_s_relocation_tops_10_3million_1_4955207
Though basically it was just a developer/developer spat – one developer fighting another about who got to build 3,000 houses and where – Persimmon saying that the other developer shouldn’t be allowed to build where it was given permission to build.
Nothing like the right to build masses of houses to bring out the developers’ lawyers!
Letter in Guardian:
“There is a lack of political will to fix our broken housing market,” says your leader (28 March). In fact, there is political will not to fix it, because to offer any degree of stability to today’s nascent and growing families would need more than “flatlining” house prices; it would need prices to fall back to a realistic multiplier of local earnings, which is something this government will not have, as evidenced by the outrageous shovelling of public money to development-sector shareholders through Help to Buy.
There should, as you say, be public control over development land, and greater security for tenants, including rent control. You could add penal taxing of vacant property; a separate-use class for second homes; and the taxing of inherited property wealth which continues to widen social division.
But none of this will happen until Generation Rent is sufficiently populous to be electorally threatening and plausible politicians are putting its case. On present indications, that won’t be in time for the 2020 election (and there won’t be one sooner because the Tories are comfortable with a derelict opposition). “
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/apr/02/decent-housing-a-necessity-for-a-healthy-society
“… “Standards are falling all the time as demand from shareholders takes priority over quality,” says Phil Waller, a retired construction manager who runs advice and campaigning website brand-newhomes.co.uk. “It used to be unheard of for people to have to move out of their home while it’s repaired, but now it happens far too often.” …
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/apr/02/new-build-homes-reputation-problems-developers
Quote from the Vice-Chancellor of Exeter University in this week’s Express and Echo:
“… Exeter powered through the recession with almost no unemployment. Two months ago there were 68 unemployed, 4,800 jobs” …
Yet our LEP and our councils push for more and more jobs.
Without the infrastructure (roads, affordable housing, schools, community hospitals, dentists, doctors) to support those jobs (anyone tried getting into or out of Exeter from East Devon at peak times these days?) how on earth can this be sustained, let alone sustainable?
“The voting membership of the Board may invite additional non-voting members as detailed above to join the Board as they deem appropriate. The may also remove non-voting members from the Board as they deem appropriate.
Eligibility for non-voting membership of the Board will be subject to a protocol that ensures that members are fit and proper persons eg covering matters of criminal record, bankruptcy, not being subject to planning enforcement etc.
To assist the Board they may invite any individuals with particular expertise (including other elected Members) and/or representatives of organisations to attend.
Officers of the District Council, County Council and the Exmouth Town Clerk will attend in an advisory capacity only. The District Council will provide the secretariat service for the Board.”
Click to access combinedcabagenda050417publicversion.pdf
“Fit and proper persons” … fit for what and proper for what?
” … The invention of academies has involved a different kind of transfer of assets (schools) from public hands to private. In most cases, publicly owned schools are leased to academies and trusts on 125-year leases, with the local authority retaining the deeds. The academies must carry on educating children but can “maximise their assets” by using the premises to raise money. It is this area of money-making that has on occasions caused problems, as with Durand academy and its on-site businesses.
Academies can also flog off land and buildings, if the much weakened local authorities agree. Serious money can be made, management salaries are high, and hidden in all this is the long-term public subsidy in such sites.
The birth rate didn’t stay low. Children need schools. The very same councils that flogged off their prized school buildings are forced to squeeze children into overcrowded schools elsewhere in their districts. Fair enough: children from overcrowded homes should go to overcrowded schools, eh? Local authorities are not allowed to open new ones. The government solution is to use our money to send search squads to find and buy sites for new schools, some at enormous cost, such as £7.6m paid for a former police station, some within spitting distance of the ones now converted into flats.
I must remind myself that these new schools are called “free” and I do hope that these transactions and new arrangements have enabled a few thousand people to make some serious money out of the public sector. …”
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/mar/28/fat-cats-sale-schools
“If the price of milk had risen in line with average house prices over the past 40 years, consumers would now be shelling out more than £10 for a four-pint carton: a sobering reminder of just how broken Britain’s housing market is. With price increases like these, it is little surprise the number of first-time buyers relying on family loans is now at a historic high, according to new research from the Social Mobility Commission: one in three rely on family help, and the proportion of 25- to 29-year-olds who own their home has almost halved since 1990.
A world where a growing proportion of young people can only afford to buy a home with family support makes a mockery of equal opportunity. Home ownership matters in Britain: yes, as oft remarked, it is a cultural aspiration; but one that is underpinned by rational financial interests. Home ownership provides a stability and financial security simply unavailable to those who rent, thanks to house price growth that benefits owners but drives up rents, and our very weak framework of tenants’ rights.
The success of government attempts to improve housing policy should be judged by a simple indicator: price. For decades, governments have rolled out policies aimed at improving affordability and helping people to get on the ladder, but at the same time long-term house price growth has far outpaced any increase in wages. What’s gone wrong?
The biggest problem is a land market that serves landowners and developers at the expense of buyers. Land is a fixed commodity and a public good: its sale should be highly regulated. Yet our planning system delivers huge windfall gains to landowners in areas of high demand: giving agricultural land residential planning status increases its value on average by a factor of 328. Landowners sell to developers offering the highest price, who maximise profit by slowly releasing houses on to the market to fuel further price growth, skimping on build quality and affordable housing.
This is a distortion relatively easily fixed. As Shelter has argued, local authorities and public development corporations should be given the power to buy undeveloped land based on its existing value: a power widely used across much of Europe. They could then sell land on to developers who commit to building affordable housing of better quality for quick release. This should be accompanied by tax reform – council tax is a hugely regressive property tax based on property values from 1990 – and stronger rights for tenants in the private rented sector, including caps on rent rises and longer-term minimum tenancies of at least five years.
This package of reforms would slow house price growth while increasing security for renters. But it is one the government shied away from in its recent white paper: it took only the most tentative of steps towards land market reform and improving tenants’ rights. Instead it has lifted regulations on minimum home sizes, paving the way for a flurry of tiny “rabbit hutch” homes to come on to the market. It is focusing the bulk of its political capital on deregulatory planning reforms, unlikely to have much impact given that planning permission has already been granted for almost half a million homes yet to be built.
The problem is not a lack of solutions, but a lack of political will. This is an area where ministers fear their own success. What government truly wants to preside over years of flatlining house prices at the expense of relatively affluent homeowners in the south-east? Almost 10 years after the financial crisis, economic growth remains too fuelled by the consumer debt enabled by rising house prices, and too little by long-term investment. And so the charade continues: politicians tout over-ambitious house building targets while tinkering at the margins, avoiding the market intervention needed to truly put a brake on price growth. It is young people without family wealth who will pay the price.”
“Hundreds of tiny studio flats, many smaller than a budget hotel room, are to be squeezed into an eleven-story block in north London as its developer takes advantage of the government’s relaxation of planning regulations.
‘Rabbit hutch’ homes should be consigned to the past, say architects
Plans for Barnet House, used by the London borough of Barnet’s housing department, reveal that 96% of the 254 proposed flats will be smaller than the national minimum space standards of 37 sq metres (44 sq yards) for a single person.
The tiniest homes will be 16 sq metres – 40% smaller than the average Travelodge room. They are legal because of government deregulation designed to promote the conversion of underused office space to help meet housebuilding targets.
Local residents have labelled the Barnet scheme “ridiculous” and “immoral”, comparing the planned homes to dog kennels.
Once kitted out with basic furniture, such as a small kitchenette, bed and wardrobe, the smallest flats will have very little room to move around. There appears to be little space, for example, for a sofa or a washing machine, unless it is stacked on top of the fridge.” …
“Concern has been raised about whether a new strategic plan that will affect half a million people is being dumped on them against their wishes. Mid Devon, East Devon, Teignbridge and Exeter City Council, in partnership with Devon County Council, are teaming up to create a Greater Exeter Strategic Plan (GESP) which focuses on the creation of jobs and housing until 2040. …
… Peter Finch, chairman of Teignbridge Campaign to Protect Rural England, raised concerns that overdevelopment could diminish the area as a tourist attraction.
Mr Finch said: “I don’t see any evidence of the need for this amount of development in the Greater Exeter area. I think it is undermining the work that people have done in their communities in getting together their local plans.
“We need to protect the rural environment from overdevelopment, as that is what attracts people to come here. If we lose that rural environment then there is less of a reason for tourists to visit.
“There is also nothing about affordable housing here. There is a need for housing around Exeter but there are sites that could be developed already rather than building in the countryside around Exeter.”
Elaine Cawthaw, from the Bishopsteignton Residents Association, said: “Lots of people are concerned that there is already lots of development but the infrastructure is not in place, and I am concerned that this could be repeated with future development.” …
… However the plans have raised fears that councils are “sleepwalking” into becoming unitary authorities. Liberal Councillor Jenny Roach who represents Silverton said: “We’re looking like we could be ceding power to this planning partnership, and I know people will shake their heads and say no, but there are several points which worry me.
“Exeter needs land and you can imagine where I sit in my ward, Exeter City Council could be looking at developing the swathe of land that is between Silverton and Exeter and similarly between Thorverton and Newton St Cyres.. It worries me that it’s being done by degree and almost by stealth. When we went to the public to talk about the sort of governance the district wanted, they didn’t like the cabinet, but unfortunately we didn’t get the 3000 signatures we needed in that period of time.
“There are a tremendous amount of people who were not happy with the governance of this authority as it is now, they don’t like the cabinet system, and it is the cabinet system that is sleepwalking us into a unitary authority.” …
“Responding to the decision by the Secretary of State on Thursday (16 March) to allow up to 97 houses at Hassocks, in contravention of the village’s emerging neighbourhood plan, Arundel & South Downs MP Nick Herbert said:
“I am dismayed by the Government’s decision, which actually admits that it will erode local confidence in neighbourhood planning, and I simply cannot reconcile it with what I was told in December when Ministers agreed to give more protection to neighbourhood plans.
“While the Government rightly wants to see more housing, they are now undermining the very policy of neighbourhood planning which they championed and which has delivered more homes than expected.
“Until the Government decides to protect neighbourhood plans properly, communities will see little point in going ahead with them. Ministers had better decide whether they want neighbourhood planning or not.
“The Government cannot go on encouraging volunteers in local communities to invest time and money in neighbourhood plans, going to all the trouble of holding a local referendum, if their plans are then torn up in front of their eyes.”
“A national group representing community groups throughout England launches its “Month of Action” in April with a big rally in Manchester on April 1st.
CoVoP, which represents more than 100 campaigning groups, was formed to protect green spaces perceived to be under threat throughout the country.
Last year CoVoP members held a “Day of Action” but this year April has been designated the “Month of Action”.
Affiliated groups throughout England will be participating in various activities and the launch event on April 1st will be in Manchester. It is expected that thousands will attend a rally organised by the Save Greater Manchester Greenbelt alliance.
Cheryl Tyler, Chairman of Community Voice on Planning (CoVoP), attacked the long-awaited white paper, “Fixing Our Broken Housing Market” as short on detail and soft on developers.
“It is very disappointing that having waited so long for a sensible document this falls far short of our hoped-for expectations. It does not address the fundamental issues people up and down the country are experiencing, leaving them vulnerable to unscrupulous developers”. She added that “members are extremely frustrated” by the lack of understanding of the concerns of communities”.
These issues include:
• Local Plans failing to take into account empty properties sometimes abandoned for years that could be put back into use.
• Permissions being granted on appeal for greenfield sites outside of local plans
• Not doing enough for urban regeneration but allowing green fields and the greenbelt to be developed preferentially.
Cheryl Tyler says “The government must listen to the voice of the people and realise that the National Planning Policy Framework requires urgent reform to rebalance the needs of communities and the interests of developers”.
For more information about CoVoP: http://www.covop.org”
“A developer, whose controversial application to build a house in Budleigh Salterton was refused, has labelled residents in the town as ‘moaners’.
The application, for land between 25 and 24 Meadow Close, would have included the re-routing of a public footpath.
In the decision notice, East Devon District Council (EDDC) officers said the proposal would ‘reduce the convenience and attractiveness of an existing and well-used right of way’.
Applicant Andrew Mann sent a letter, two days before the decision was made, looking to answer any issues raised about the plan.
In the letter, he said: “I know there are many objections from the locals, but when you read their comments, nothing relates to the build.
“We are in Budleigh, where the population is made up of mainly old people who have no building knowledge or modern outlooks, but like to moan about progress.
“Yes, there are worries about the footpath, but we propose to create a new, wide path to the corner of the land, which will be well lit up by our own lighting.
“The siting of the footpath gives a better view of the oncoming traffic.”
Budleigh Salterton Town Council had previously opposed the plan, believing it to be over-development of the site.
It also had concerns about the traffic in Meadow Close with the proposed building being so close to the road.”
http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/developer_budleigh_likes_to_moan_about_progress_1_4934114
“East Devon Villages Plan –
Notice of Publication –
Representation period
22 March 2017
until noon on
Wednesday 10 May 2017
East Devon District Council is inviting representations on its Proposed Submission Villages Plan and the accompanying Sustainability Appraisal until noon on 10 May 2017.
Please see below the ‘Statement of Representation Procedure and Availability of Documents’, which gives details of where the proposed submission documents can be viewed and how to make representations.
The proposed submission plan, sustainability appraisal and all of the supporting documents may be viewed through Proposed submission plan and supporting documents – East Devon
This link will take you directly to the published plan:
Click to access villages-plan-publication-version.pdf
and this will take you to the comments form, which is our preferred method for making representations
http://eastdevon.gov.uk/media/2049608/villages-rep-form-2017.pdf”
East Devon Watch 