Brexit and the environment

“… Boris Johnson was careful to say that deregulation “will not come in any great rush”. However, since the 2010 election, the Government has already shown some eagerness to disengage from the environmental agenda:

In December 2012 Eric Pickles made a statement to Parliament on the emerging new EIA Directive criticising the ‘regulatory creep’ of the European Union
In June 2013 the Environmental Audit Committee report on the UN Rio+20 Earth Summit noted that: ‘the Treasury appears to view the environment as a block to economic development.’

The Technical Consultation on planning carried out in 2014 stated that there was ‘over-implementation’ of environmental assessments;

In March 2015, the Code for Sustainable Homes was removed, and only partially reinstated into Building Regulations;

In July 2015, the Government announced it would no longer proceed with regulations to make all new homes carbon neutral.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=27567%3Adontleave-me-this-way&catid=63&Itemid=31

And that is only the tip of the iceberg. The current government has always wanted to reduce the environmental load on developers and now, with developers on the back foot, they will be inclined to put their interests first.

Who pays? Who benefits? Who cares?

Construction slows down, right down.
Local Plan targets are not met.
Government penalises councils by raising targets 20%.

Anyone spot the flaw?

And will developers cease buying up land for land-banking during this period?

Dream on, dream on.

Development Management Committee defers Bovis Seaton affordables decision to study viability figures

East Devon’s Development Management Committee has refused to approve an application from Bovis to build extra houses on the Tesco regeneration site at Harbour Road. It decided instead to bring the matter back to its next meeting to look more closely at the viability assessment for Affordable Housing.

Members were surprised when officers said that they were free to look at the viability assessment, although it will not be made publicly available.

This setback for the developers came after the DMC’s chairman, David Keys, and the Council’s Development Officer, Ed Freeman, recommended approval of an extension of the ‘zero relaxation’ for affordable housing (which means NONE at all in the huge project) in March, without bringing the matter to the Committee or informing the town council of the application.

However, it transpires that Bovis had already applied for extra houses on the site, and said no affordable housing should be included because the scheme overall was still £6 million in the red.

But as Seaton ward member Jim Knight asked the DMC, why would they be building these additional houses if the site was not profitable?

The issue came to DMC only because of the persistence of Seaton Town Council, supported on the DMC by Councillor Peter Burrows who insisted that the matter be on the DMC agenda.

The Chair of Seaton’s planning committee, Martin Shaw, argued that the viability assessment for the new application, which linked it to the viability of the scheme as a whole, was flawed because it did not take account of the improved density of the development. He questioned whether the District Valuer had been fully informed when he signed off the viability assessment.

DMC members on all sides expressed concern. Independent leader, Ben Ingham, said that for a long time Seaton had not had enough new housing, but now that it was coming on stream, Seaton people could not afford to buy the houses being built.

Conservative councillor Simon Grundy said ‘We need to stop being treated like children over this matter. The Town council seem to have got a lot closer on this than we did.’

“exmouth shows opposition to big seafront development”

The strength of feeling among those against the large scale development of Exmouth seafront was apparent when more than 200 people packed All Saint’s Church Hall in the town for a public meeting.

Organised by Save Exmouth Seafront (SES) the aim was to update residents and seafront users on the group’s actions and enable questions to be asked.

People put forward many relevant and knowledgeable arguments to support their thoughts and feelings, and expressed particular frustration that EDDC have continued to fail to engage with residents.`

Laura Freeman, an Exmouth resident who attended the meeting said “The fact that so many people came to SES’s public meeting shows that people do want to do something to force East Devon District Council to reconsider their plans to develop on Queen’s Drive, they just aren’t really sure how they can achieve that, but meetings like this are great for people to feel connected and share ideas”.

SES spokesperson Louise MacAllister would like to thank all who gave up a sunny Saturday afternoon to attend and contribute to the meeting, especially those who had to stand throughout.

Members of the public who were unable to attend the meeting are welcome to contact SES by email: exmouthsplashdiscussion@gmail.com.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/exmouth-shows-opposition-to-big-seafront-development/story-29476988-detail/story.html

Osborne has a 5 point plan …

Chancellor George Osborne has come up with one [plan] and his also has five points [see Johnson, Boris], key among them a proposal to cut corporation tax to below 15% – the lowest of any major economy – to encourage businesses to invest in post-Brexit Britain. The others, as revealed in an interview with the Financial Times, are:

Ensuring support for bank lending.

A push for more investment in China.

A focus on delivering the Northern Powerhouse.

Maintaining Britain’s fiscal credibility.

No word from the chancellor on the brightness of the future, though he does urge everyone to stop “moping around”.

Source: Guardian Live blog

If that’s the plan, where does it place devolution outside the “Northern Powerhouse”?

And did he mean investment IN China or FROM China?

Whatever, our LEP members – all hit hard by Brexit implications in their individual sectors (nuclear, arms dealing, housing development and universities) – must surely be taking time out from their LEP duties to spend more time with their own businesses, now in dire need of their expertise.

Exeter City Council protects its centre from out-of-town development

And the Secretary of State rules in their favour:

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/minister-throws-out-big-edge-of-city-shopping-centre-plan-for-exeter/story-29465764-detail/story.html

Meanwhile, in Sidmouth …

Devon and Somerset Devolution: would you buy a used car from these people?

DID YOU SPOT THE ELEPHANTS IN THE ROOM?

No members of the business- and developer-heavy Local Enterprise Partnership in the video – particularly the LEP Chairman, who is Chairman of Midas house builders and the half-dozen with vested interests in nuclear power and those University chiefs who want to ensure they get all the money for skills and training! Together THEY make up the majority of the Board taking decisions, NOT councillors.

And that LOVELY bit from Diviani about other councillors getting a chance to comment AFTER this loathsome group has created its “blueprint” for devolution in its own image.

Planning permission refused due to diminution of light to artists’ studios

” … The owner of a pub in East London has won a Court of Appeal battle over the grant of planning permission for a three-storey building on the site of a former nightclub next door.

The case of Forster v The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2016] EWCA Civ 609 centred on a planning inspector’s grant of permission to a housing association for the demolition of a single storey building in Stepney – previously home to Stepney’s Nightclub – and the erection in its place of a three storey building with commercial uses on the ground floor and six flats on the floors above. Tower Hamlets Council had previously refused permission.

In August 2015 Mr Justice Lindblom (as he then was) dismissed a claim brought by the appellant under s. 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

The appellant, the owner of the George Tavern, took her case to the Court of Appeal, where she argued:

There was a risk, unacknowledged by the inspector, that complaints from residents of the new flats might ultimately lead to the revocation of her late night music licence or the grant of an injunction in a private nuisance claim. This would curtail the activities that kept the George going;

There would be reduced sunlight and daylight at the George, which was used as a studio for artists and photographers and as a film location.

Giving the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Laws allowed the appeal on the light issue, but not on the noise issue. …”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=27553%3Apub-owner-wins-court-of-appeal-battle-over-housing-association-development&catid=63&Itemid=31

Brexit and housing

From Daily Telegraph Money/Property:

“What does it mean for the supply crisis?

While we don’t know whether immigration will be curbed, if there are fewer people allowed to work in the UK’s construction industry, it will exacerbate the already acute skills shortage. About 12 per cent of construction workers across the country are from abroad, and in London that rises to 23 per cent.

Construction costs could jump 12 per cent as a result of the vote to leave, according to Ted Macdougal, development director for Forrest, a housebuilder.

Our housing supply-demand imbalance will not be solved any time soon: the Government’s pledge to build 200,000 homes per year is still way off target. Investment in house building is on hold and until there are enough homes built, the lack of supply could cushion house prices, regardless of Brexit.”

https://t.co/xgEUvuoaHs

Sidford: Environment Agency “not using new flooding figures to save developer money”

The Sid Vale Association is to take legal advice on the Environment Agency’s “incomprehensible” decision to support a planning application for a business park on a Sidford floodplain.

Here’s an extract from the Sidmouth Herald’s report :

” … The Environment Agency (EA) has defended its ‘incomprehensible’ support of plans for a 9.3-acre business park in Sidford – because using its new flood risk figures could cost the developer money.

A climate change report by the government body states that the region’s peak river flow is expected to increase by 85 per cent – four times more than anticipated – while surface water is likely to increase 40 per cent by around 2070, which is double the previous forecast.

In light of the increased risk to the flood-prone valley, representatives are calling for the agency to rethink its support of an outline planning application for the business park between Sidford and Sidbury, submitted by Fords of Sidmouth.

But the EA states it has not taken the new figures published earlier this year into account because the site is already allocated in the adopted East Devon Local Plan – a development blueprint to cover the next 15 years.

The EA’s policy states: “The advice will come into immediate effect. However, where local plans or development proposals and associated flood risk assessments are well advanced, the application of the updated allowances could significantly slow down completion or add to costs.”

An EA spokesman said: “We considered the plan and application to be well advanced and therefore reasonable to base advice on the existing allowances.”

The Sid Vale Association (SVA) has threatened legal action if the agency does not review its ‘short-sighted and potentially dangerous’ position on the matter.

SVA conservation and planning committee chair Richard Thurlow said: “Our letter [to the EA] reflects the comments of many Sidmouth and Sidford residents. We find it absolutely incomprehensible that the Environment Agency is not using its own regulations which came into operation in February. … “

Increased flood risk: SVA calls for Environment Agency rethink on the Sidford planning application.

“House builders stocks down 37%”

Financial services group Hargreaves Lansdown says:

Around £40 billion has been wiped off the value of banking stocks in the last two days, with over £8 billion wiped off house builders, representing around 18% and 37% of their total market capitalisation respectively.”

http://gu.com/p/4mmv6

Brexit, developers, local plans and devolution

So, we voted out – and suddenly housebuilders (developers) shares plunged by 40%.

There does not seem to be an immediate link with voting out, but there is. We are in for an unstable time. There will be a recession and pundits differ only on whether it will be short (around 2 years) or long (anywhere from 5-20 years depending on who you listen to). House prices will reflect this by falling and mortgage rates may well rise, pushing some into negative equity and others wary of buying in case they fall into negative equity.

Housebuilders will also need to factor in higher import costs coming in the near future when EU trade reduces and new trade agreements have not begun, along with a local skills gap as workers from the EU dry up. Plus likely (possibly temporary)increases in income tax to cover lost government income from (again possibly temporary) shrinking markets. Not to mention higher unemployment benefits to those whose jobs currently depend directly and indirectly on those employers who would normally benefit from being in the EU.

To compound this, many developers have recently taken their huge profits out of their businesses by giving their directors massive bonuses.

All these factors cause a “perfect storm” for Local Plans and the general East Devon economy. Our Local Plan is predicated on continuous growth and increasing employment, fuelling a constant demand for new housing. And, more worryingly, there are penalties if this does not happen. If we (and all other councils) do not maintain a 5-year land supply, we are penalised by having our housing numbers INCREASED by 20%.

Another complication is that, currently, our council (and others) depend for income on the government’s “New Homes Bonus” – the more new homes it gets a developer to build, the more income it gets.

All this conspires to suddenly make our local plans hardly worth the paper they were written on.

Then there is devolution – which in Devon and Somerset also highly depends on housebuilding – having “promised” an extra 176,000 houses over and above Local Plans, and also dependent on continuous growth and constantly increasing employment. It is no coincidence that the Chairman of our Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP: the lead in the devolution bid) is Chairman of big developer, Midas.

Our LEP was also promised “jam tomorrow” funds (over 30 years) from the government AND anticipated masses of EU funding, all riding on the back of a new Hinkley C nuclear power station. All other devolved areas were given similar promises.

Our new government will now have its hands full attempting to negotiate its way out of the EU, rewriting or scrapping those EU laws we have (including those on environmental protection and workers rights) and trying desperately to work out where this notional extra £350 million a week is eventually going to be spent. It has already been promised to the health service, areas currently in receipt of EU regeneration funding and academic research programmes currently supported by EU grants. That is simply an arithmetical nightmare and almost certainly an impossibility.

This leaves East Devon in a precarious position: heavily dependant on new housebuilding and continuous year on year economic growth with constant employment growth and receipt of funds from a distracted government which has also promised to stem immigration – many having voted for this as its first priority. These two priorities will mean little time for other things. Not to mention having to deal at the same time with the implications of Scotland and Northern Ireland’s differing position on their future in the UK and EU.

The Local Plan and devolution deals are now almost certainly of much lower priority to this beleaguered government and this may well lead to unintended consequences the like of which our council and our LEP can only imagine and for which they have no plan B.

Many warned that economic growth and increasing employment between now and 2030, when our local plan ends, was unattainable and that at least one event would intervene for which there was no contingency. Few expected it to happen quite so quickly.

Developers and their promises

What Donald Trump promised at his golf course in Scotland:

… a sprawling resort in the ancestral home of golf with two courses, a 450-room luxury hotel and spa, a conference center, employee housing, a turf-grass research center and a holiday community with hundreds of villas, condos and homes. The project would pump millions of dollars into the local economy and create 6,000 jobs — maybe even 7,000 jobs, Trump said at one news conference. Tourists would travel here from around the world, he promised, along with well-known celebrities such as Scottish actor Sean Connery.”

What they got:

“… the Trump International Golf Links near Aberdeen employs just 150 people and consists of one golf course that meanders through the sand dunes, a clubhouse with a restaurant and 19 rooms for rent in a renovated mansion and former carriage house. There is also a maintenance facility and a road running through the property. Lonely and desolate, the resort has attracted no major tournaments, and neighbors say the parking lot is rarely, if ever, full.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-top-example-of-foreign-experience-a-scottish-golf-course-losing-millions/2016/06/22/12ae9cb0-1883-11e6-9e16-2e5a123aac62_story.html

What is EDDC’s highest risk in its Risk Register?

In the full risk register there is one risk currently scored as high:

The Council’s income now relies on income from new homes bonus monies which is directly related to new house building in the district.

There is a risk of lower growth than estimated or the Government changing the mechanism for payment.
Impact: Major
Likelihood: Likely

The reason for the escalation of this risk is that the government is currently considering a new scheme following a period of consultation. There is now uncertainty as to the implications of any changes to the scheme.

Click to access combined-a-and-g-agenda-final-300616.pdf

Latest information on EDDC and devolution – done deal

Pages 104-116 here:

Click to access 280616-overview-agenda-combined.pdf

NOTE: THERE HAS BEEN ABSOLUTELY NO CONSULTATION WITH RESIDENTS ON ANY PART OF THIS DEAL WHICH IS BEING RAILROADED THROUGH EACH MEMBER COUNCIL

A summary:

Our Prospectus for Prosperity was submitted to Government at the end of February 2016. Since then the Partnership has pressed the Secretary of State to enter into discussion with its negotiation team to secure a deal for the Heart of the South West.

Following an invitation from the Secretary of State, on the 25th May 2016, leaders from the upper tier authorities met with the Greg Clarke, Secretary of State for the Department of Communities and Local Government to seek his view on our next steps forward.

The Secretary of State made the following comments:

Geography – the Devon and Somerset area is agreed as the appropriate scale. The proposal must clearly demonstrate why this is the right geography for the Devolution agreement and all councils and MPs must support the proposal.

Combined Authority – the Partnership will move forward into the negotiation process based on a Combined Authority model. The Mayoral issue may be considered at a later stage, within the timeline agreed by our Partnership. A Mayor will not be imposed or be a pre-condition of any initial deal.

Extent of the deal – areas that have agreed to have a Mayor will get more powers than a non-Mayoral Combined Authority deal. However, the negotiation process will be an opportunity to push the limits of this initial deal, and the process should be viewed as being incremental.

Timeline – we will still work towards an Autumn Statement timeline for the announcement of an initial deal.

Growth Deal 3 – the LEP would not be penalised in Growth Deal 3 negotiations because the area does not have a Devolution deal with a Mayor. The decision for allocation will be based purely on the quality of the Growth Deal bid.

The Secretary of State went on to advise that if the Partnership, backed by each Council and MPs, would sign up to the principle of creating a Combined Authority by the end of July 2016 he would arrange for the Treasury to open up negotiations towards a deal.

This report seeks approval to sign up ‘in principle’ to the pursuit of a Devolution Deal and the creation of a Combined Authority for the Heart of the South West sub-region to administer the powers devolved through the Deal.

An ‘in principle’ agreement from all of the authorities, partners and MPs involved in the Heart of the South West devolution process will open up negotiations with Treasury to work towards a deal.

Any final devolution deal with government will be subject to further approval/ratification by all partners individually. A Heads of Terms document will be used as a negotiating tool to seek additional powers and funding to accelerate the delivery of 163,000 new jobs, 179,000 new homes and an economy of over £53bn GVA by 2030.

It should be noted that there is no intention for the Combined Authority to take existing powers or funding from local authorities, or existing city deal governance structures, without the explicit agreement of those constituent local authorities. More detailed work will be undertaken to identify the decision-making powers and the constitution of the Combined Authority, and all partners will be fully involved and consulted on these arrangements as they develop.”

Save Exmouth Seafront public meeting Saturday 2 July 2pm

To update people on the campaign before and after the Town Poll and to hear what residents think and what to do next

All Saints Church Hall
Exeter Road

All welcome

Newton Poppleford affordable housing: “and then there were none”

EDDC have received an amendment to planning application 16/0218/OUT at Waterleat, High St. Newton Poppleford.

“Reduction in number of units from 12 to 9 (all open market following a change in Government advice); provision of a financial contribution towards affordable housing, open space and habitat mitigation (subject to viability); and submission of a new indicative layout plan showing the reduced number of dwellings and two parking spaces per dwelling.”

So GOVERNMENT ADVICE now means no affordable homes in this site in the centre of the village with its level access to transport and the village’s facilities which, of course, particularly lends itself to homes dedicated to the elderly.

A 2012 application was refused, one reason being the inadequate number of affordable homes. Consultee’s comments from EDDC’s Housing Strategy Officer, the Parish Council and the emerging Neighbourhood Plan Strategy Group all expressed deep unhappiness at the derisory 2 affordable housing units previously submitted in this current application. Now there are to be none!

Given the location of the site this is an opportunity sorely missed.

“Cronyism in the south west”

Something we all know about in East Devon!

“Cronyism in the South West”
The sheer amount of unsuitable and damaging development that has been pushed through against all objections in my home town of Totnes, but also throughout the south west, is making me question the role of cronyism in the deals made.

It starts at the very top of course in government, but appears to have sucked up many of our more august bodies that we are more used to seeing as our defenders and protection, into its net. The National Trust for example, now has a right wing business leader as its head. I wouldn’t suggest for a moment that this is as a result of any wrong doing, but I question why he is there, when he comes with no history of interest or involvement in conservation or the heritage sector. It is a coincidence of course that the National Trust appear to be engaged recently in the development business themselves, aiming to sell land, given to them in trust in Bovery Tracey and also in Somerset, for housing. To say local people aren’t happy is a bit of an understatement.

Natural England also, is now headed up by a right wing business man, an ex-developer actually, with little to no interest up to now in the environment, or preserving the countryside, he was too busy working to concrete it over as head of Linden Homes. George Monbiot describes his appointment as, ‘The government wants a chairman who can flog nature and have chosen a Tory party donor with a background in investment banking and housing developments.’

So our conservation and heritage organisations appear to be headed by cronies, our secretive Local Enterprise Partnership appears to be also. This is the self-appointed group tasked with pouring vast amounts of public money into encouraging enterprise and business down here and with running our devolution bid. The fact that the majority of those on the board come from the construction and housing sector and a few who are involved in weapons manufacturing won’t come as a surprise when you see that our devolution bid, which they mostly engineered, is very heavy on giant construction projects, which the board’s companies appear to profit from and very weak on tourism, farming and sustainability. This bid is about growth. ‘I want to only build structures that you can see from space,’ the chair is quoted as saying. The fact that this undemocratically elected group hold their meetings in private, have no head office, very little accountability and have managed to keep the lid on their activities very successfully is worrying and the ultimate in cronyism.

This culture goes down the line; housing developments pushed through when they are so obviously damaging and ridiculous. In Totnes, Great Court Farm was sold to developers in very suspect circumstances in my opinion. It is the last dairy farm in Totnes, the home to a fourth generation of farmers, a totally unsuitable spot for yet more mass building in this beleaguered town. The access is terrible, the logistics ridiculous and yet it was pushed through by a combination of cronyism and mis-management. The people who suffer are the people who always suffer when cronyism is allowed to flourish and that’s us – everyone else and in this instance the farmer and his family and the people of Totnes, who see their landscape the plaything of those in power.

Across the county, across the country in fact, the same story is played out endlessly. Local people left shocked and devastated as those in power find the wherewithal to circumnavigate due process and make an absolute fortunes flogging nature and our land to line their own pockets.”

https://allengeorgina.wordpress.com/2016/06/19/comment-piece-for-western-morning-news-cronyism/

If Persimmon tells you they can’t afford affordable housing …

… this is why:

A leading City investor has called on housebuilder Persimmon to cut back an executive pay plan that could see the management share £600m over the next five years.

The scheme is one of the largest ever at a FTSE 100 company outside banking.

The biggest beneficiary will be chief executive Jeff Fairburn, who could earn more than £100m.

Mike Fox, from Royal London Asset Management, said the payments were too high “in all circumstances”.
He called on the board to show restraint in the light of the housing crisis and government support for the housebuilding industry.

When the scheme was put in place, the housing market had begun to recover from the 2008 recession. About 150 managers were given the opportunity to earn shares worth up to 10% of the company’s total value, provided they hit tough targets on returning money to investors.

The company recently said it was running well ahead of those targets, and analysts say it is likely the scheme will pay out in full. Persimmon shares have more than tripled in value since the incentive plan was put in place, rising from £6.20 to about £20.

Disclosure of the size of the payments is likely to stoke the debate over executive compensation.

There has been a string of investor rebellions against pay deals this year, and in April a majority of shareholders voted against a £14m package for BP boss Bob Dudley.

Shareholders cannot veto amounts paid, but do have the final say on companies’ pay policies. …

… The company has defended the payouts, saying that since the scheme was put in place. Persimmon has increased the number of new homes it builds by half and invested more than £2bn in new land. Over the same period it has handed back £1bn to shareholders.

“This is a long-term plan that runs for almost a decade which is designed to drive outperformance through the housing cycle and to incentivise the management to deliver the capital return, grow the business and increase the share price,” the company said.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36501536