Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Brownfield sites, Developers/ Development

Government cuts funds for remediation of brownfield sites

“The government has drastically cut funds needed to encourage new building on “brownfield” sites, despite claiming that such sites would be key to solving the housing crisis.

Many sites that have previously held buildings or other developments need remediation – a process to remove potentially dangerous toxins from the soil – in order to be considered for new houses, of which the government plans to build hundreds of thousands a year to ease the pressure on the UK’s over-stretched stock.

At least 300,000 hectares (741,000 acres) of contaminated land have been identified, according to a report from an influential committee of MPs. Many of these sites could be used for housing, farmland, industry or other developments, which could both ease the housing crisis and reduce the need to claim more of the UK’s diminishing stock of “green belt” or agricultural land for building.

Doing so would require work to remove remaining toxins from the soil, which is technically feasible but carries a cost. To date, that cost has often been borne by the government and local authorities, but the MPs on the environmental audit committee found that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs had drastically cut its funding for remediation, and is planning to phase it out in 2017.

This would discourage developers from planning new building in areas of housing shortage, particularly those in poor areas, the committee heard from experts. In richer areas, hopeful developers frequently pay for decontamination themselves, but in poor districts they rely on the council or central government to do so in order to render the site suitable. …”

http://gu.com/p/4k3c3

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Developers/ Development, Seaton/ Colyford / Colyton

Seaton Heights – promises for June 2016 broken

Planning permission granted years ago, regular promises of action, a “buy off plan” website where:

…”Once complete the Deck Houses will be supported by “The Gatehouse” a luxury four star leisure facility (opening in June 2016) consisting of a gymnasium and swimming pool with glass fronted views over the bay. A luxury spa with five treatment rooms, sauna, steam and herbal suits with a therapeutic thermal pool for the ultimate indulgence. The ground floor has a reception, coffee shop and sea facing restaurant providing a wonderful dining experience 7 days a week … ”

… Over the coming few days our website will be updated and we apologise if you experience any difficulties when navigating around our website. Once complete you will be able to view all the latest images of the Gatehouse and Deck Houses as well as our new promotional video. We will be pleased to receive your comments.

http://lymebayleisure.co.uk/luxury-properties/

So, here we are in June 2016 … no spa, no Gatehouse, no Deck Houses .. but still off-plan deposits of £1,000 per property are being solicited.

Something not quite right here …

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, EDDC, Feniton/ Talaton, Wainhomes

Wainhomes, Feniton: another second chance, and another and another …

Where and when do ” second chances” end? From a correspondent:

“You may recall the following item published some time ago:

https://susiebond.wordpress.com/2016/03/16/patience-wears-thin-as-another-breach-of-condition-notice-is-slapped-on-wainhomes/

Today the time allowed for some of the work to be done expires and yet, as expected by many of the villagers, nothing has even been started. The question is: will EDDC planning now actually throw the legal book at Wainhomes or, as I suspect, give them yet more time.

A heavy hand surely is now required since being ‘nice’ clearly doesn’t work.”

EDDC, heavy hand, developers – dream on!

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Devolution, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

Chair of LEP – proud of a conflict of interest?

The staggering arrogance leaves Owl stunned (but not for long). Though, no doubt the Government, Mr Hindley and the LEP see no problem.

“The Millfields Trust’s state-of-the-art Genesis building received the Community Benefit award at the prestigious RICS South West Awards 2016 held at Cheltenham Racecourse. …

… The pioneering, ERDF and Heart of the South West LEP’s Growing Places funded building was designed to create employment and serve the local community in one of the most deprived areas of Plymouth. It comprises of flexible workspaces, meeting rooms, a full height internal atrium and Plymouth’s first living walls. …

… “Steve Hindley, Chair of the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership (HotSW LEP) said: “Genesis is a great example of development that benefits the local environment as well as the community by providing much-needed employment space with and original and eye-catching architectural design. The project is an exemplar of the LEP’s Growing Places Fund, which is designed to unlock growth and create new jobs.

“As Chair of Midas – the contractor for the project – as well as being Chair of the LEP – which has the strategic mission to generate funding – I am doubly proud to be part of this new asset to Plymouth’s city-scape.”

http://www.midasgroup.co.uk/news/?id=658

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Developers/ Development, Ottery St Mary, Sustainability

Ottery over-55s homes rejected by planning inspector

“A ‘highly unpopular’ and ‘damaging’ 52-home development plan in Ottery has reached the end of the road as an appeal against its refusal was dismissed.

An application by Blue Cedar Homes to build at Slade Farm received 410 formal objections and was rejected by East Devon District Council last year in a move hailed a ‘victory for people power and common sense’. …

… Blue Cedar specialises in providing homes for over-55s and its plans included provision of ‘age-restricted’, open market and ‘affordable’ properties at Slade Farm. …

… In his report, planning inspector Jonathan Manning cited several reasons for dismissal, including the harm it would cause to the character of the area, loss of the most versatile agricultural land and the fact it does not represent sustainable development.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/end_of_the_road_for_highly_unpopular_52_home_development_plan_in_ottery_st_mary_1_4553438

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Local Plan

Short inquiry into Local Plans Expert Group recommendations

The Communities and Local Government Committee has launched a short inquiry into the recommendations put forward by the Local Plans Expert Group (LPEG) to improve the local plan-making process:

Accepting written submissions; the deadline is 27 June 2016

The Committee invites written evidence on the following areas:

The Local Plans Expert Group’s recommendations
The next steps for the local plan-making process
The deadline for written submissions is Monday 27 June 2016.

Send a written submission via the Local Plans Expert Group recommendations inquiry page

Chair’s comments

Clive Betts, Chair of the Communities and Local Government Committee, said:

“The Local Plans Expert Group concluded that substantial reform of the local plan-making process was required and made detailed recommendations for improving the effectiveness and efficiency of local plan making.

The Committee will consider these recommendations and look at how DCLG plans to act on them.”

Background to the inquiry
The LPEG report highlighted difficulties assessing and meeting housing needs through local plans as a central issue, the dominance of which was sometimes to the detriment of other local plan elements. Other issues raised by the report included insufficient engagement with local communities.

In April 2016, the Committee reported on DCLG’s consultation on changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). In the previous parliament the Committee held an inquiry into the NPPF and an inquiry into the operation of the NPPF.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/communities-and-local-government-committee/inquiries/parliament-2015/local-plans-expert-group-recommendations-16-17/

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Developers/ Development, EDDC, Sidmouth/ Sidford/ Sidbury

Sidford Industrial Estate Planning Considerations

“Dear Residents

Planning ref:16/0669/MOUT

I hope these notes will help you to make comments about the above planning application. The more people who write in, the better. Please send your observations and ask your friends to do likewise to:

planning@eastdevon.gov.uk or
Write to Planning Dept, EDDC, Knowle, Sidmouth, EX10 8HL

Please remember the following:

Closing date: 8th June 2016
Quote ref:16/0669/MOUT

Note you can ONLY make comments relating to ‘planning considerations’. These, for example, include matters such as:

The impact of a proposal on your property;
The proposed design and materials;
Issues relating to vehicular access and parking;
Impact on trees;
Noise issues,
Concerns about flooding.

Matters which are not classed as ‘planning considerations’ include:

Loss of value to your property; Loss of a view; Boundary and neighbour disputes, or The impact of a proposal on private drainage systems.

Planning policies which relate to this development can be found at:

east devon.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/local-plan-2013-2031/
(Click on The Local Plan 2013-2031 to access this document)

Strategy 46 p.144
Landscape Conservation and Enhancement and AONBs:

‘Development will only be permitted where it:
1. Conserves and enhances the landscape character of the area;
2. Does not undermine landscape quality; and
3. Is appropriate to the economic, social and well being of the area’

Non-compliance with the NPPF
The National Planning Policy Framework puts an emphasis on protecting AONB land, such as at Sidford. Para 116 of the NPPF states that planning permission should be refused for major developments on AONB land except in exceptional circumstances and where it can be demonstrated that the development is in the public interest.

Comments could include the fact that this is a tourist area, plus unemployment is low and the proposed development would require in-commuting to fill any jobs created.

ENVIRONMENT p.182

EN13 – development on high quality agricultural land
Development proposes warehousing which could be a 24/7 operation – noise, lighting, impact of pollution from artificial light on local amenity

EN14 – control of pollution – to residents or the wider environment
Pollution of the atmosphere – School St and pinch points in Sidbury – stationery traffic (especially as volumes will increase)
Noise and/or vibration
Light intrusion
Pollution of sites of wildlife value, especially European designated sites or species (eg otters and horseshoe bats)

EN21 – river and coastal flooding
‘Flood risk assessment demonstrates that the development will be safe, without increasing flood risk elsewhere and, where possible, will reduce flood risk overall.’
NB any increased flood risk would impact Sidbury, Sidford and Sidmouth – remember there were four flood warnings from The Environment Agency in 2012.

EMPLOYMENT p.199

E9 – town centre vitality and shopping areas – THIS NEEDS TO BE PROTECTED
NB. ‘Ancillary retail’ is part of Fords application
Planning application uses include B1 (office), B2 (general), B8 (distribution / warehousing)
…will be permitted provided:
1. ‘Use would not undermine the shopping character, visual amenity, vitality or viability of town centre
4. Amenity interest of occupiers of adjoining properties is not adversely affected by reason of noise, smell or litter
5. Would not cause traffic problems !!! (NB. Lorries already drive on the pavement in School St because they cannot pass oncoming traffic and there are traffic tailbacks during the tourism season)’

TRAFFIC p.221

TC3 – traffic management schemes
,,,’when considering development proposals in town centre, will seek the introduction of traffic management schemes when one or more of the following objectives can be achieved:
1. Safe and efficient movement of mobility impaired, pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles
6. Alleviation of congestion (see E9, 3. And EN14/pollution above)
7. Reduction of traffic conflict and accident potential
8. Reduction of delays to public transport
9. Reduction of environmental damage by traffic’

Please could you also write or email local papers:

Sidmouth Herald:stefan.gordon@archant.co.uk
Pulman’s (View from):pemedia@pemedia.co.uk
Express & Echo:letters@expressandecho.co.uk
Western Morning News:wmn@westernmorningnews.co.uk

Yours sincerely

Kim Scratchley
Two Bridges Road, Sidford”

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development

“Housing crisis: affordable homes vanish as developers outmanoeuvre councils”

“Private property developers are outmanoeuvring councils in housing negotiations and routinely delivering fewer affordable homes than town halls want, an industry analysis has revealed.

Amid growing anger at the sale to foreign buyers of almost two-thirds of London’s tallest residential skyscraper, which includes no affordable housing, it has emerged that not one London borough that set targets has met them in the last six years.

Councils sometimes secured as little as 13% affordable housing when their stated targets were as high as 50%, according to analysis commissioned by BNP Paribas Real Estate, which advises local authorities and housebuilders in negotiations. On average, the 34 boroughs achieved 22% affordable housing, on targets ranging from 30% to 50%.

A key factor has been the rising value of land for commercial use, which has made developers more willing to abandon housing schemes and turn sites over to more profitable office buildings, the research suggests.

The difficulty that councils have faced in persuading developers to meet their needs illustrates the scale of the challenge facing the new London mayor, Sadiq Khan, who has pledged to dramatically boost affordable housing. Khan revealed on Wednesday that only 13% of the homes given planning consent in London last year were affordable. He has said his “long-term strategic target” is half.

If Khan moves too fast to reintroduce that 50% target, he risks stalling housing development completely, experts have warned. Move too slowly and he will face anger from his electorate, who voted him in with a mandate to tackle the housing crisis.

“Planners are mindful of the need to avoid squeezing the pips so hard that developments stall,” said Dr Anthony Lee, a BNP Paribas adviser who has represented London boroughs in negotiations with developers. “They need to strike a balance between pushing too hard in their negotiations on the affordable housing level on schemes and the impact this could have on overall housing land supply.”

Councils and developers have long been engaged in what amounts to a grand haggle. Developers examine a council’s affordable housing target and then make an opening offer, which is likely to be much lower. It is up to the planning authority to determine whether the basis for the calculations is fair and correct and a battle of the experts often ensues.

Frequently, the developer has not yet bought the site from the landowner, which gives them a significant negotiating advantage because there is a constant threat that if the negotiation doesn’t go their way, they could back out of the deal and the landowner could sell the site for commercial use instead. The local council risks losing not only the affordable homes, but all the homes.

Furthermore, said Lee, council leaders “need developers to deliver their vision for their areas, including town centre regeneration schemes. Councils can’t do it themselves. Marrying the two competing objectives can be quite tough.” …

… So for Professor Danny Dorling, an Oxford University housing expert, haggling with developers to build cheap homes is “nasty planning” and should be abandoned. “We are losing social housing through right to buy at a far faster rate than section 106 agreements could ever replace it,” he said. “There is no reason a strong government can’t do this properly by raising money through tax and develop social housing itself with compulsory purchases if needed.” …

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

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Environment (local), Rural communities

“Literary Landscape Loss Lament”

“This week, leading contemporary writers and artists joined the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) in warning that our matchless and finite countryside is threatened by the Government’s relaxation of planning laws. The group came together to sign a letter to the Sunday Times (published on 29 September) warning that iconic English landscapes are under threat.

The writers support CPRE in saying that Government plans for new homes should prioritise brownfield sites in towns and cities, not the more profitable greenfield sites where housing developers would prefer to build.

In the letter poet Simon Armitage, novelist John le Carre, writer Jeanette Winterson and the sculptor Cornelia Parker and others argue that the Government’s policy of giving preference to greenfield sites over brownfield sites is threatening the “matchless beauty of England” and failing to provide affordable homes.

In support of the letter, Jeanette Winterson said:

‘Concreting the countryside isn’t the answer to Britain’s housing problems. This government is out of touch with real life and tries to cover up its privilege by making what it thinks are popular decisions. We need imaginative people, not policy wonks or developers with vested interests, to re-draw the UK housing strategy. I don’t know why politicians can’t think in colour. Especially the colour green. We can build enough homes. We don’t need to lose our fields for that.’

The letter said:

Dear Sir,

In the two months since the launch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England’s charter to save our countryside we have seen new research showing that over half a million houses are planned for open countryside, with a further 150,000 in the Green Belt.

The scale of this projected development is unprecedented. This needless sacrifice of our green spaces should not be tolerated when England currently has suitable brownfield land for 1.5m new homes which could help regenerate our towns and cities.

As artists and writers who have been inspired by the matchless beauty of England, we urge the Government to support the three basic principles set out in CPRE’s charter to save our countryside.

First, build on suitable brownfield land first, rather than unnecessarily sacrificing the countryside. Second, real localism: give people a proper say in shaping the places they love.

Finally, we must build more houses – not executive houses on green fields, as is too often the case now, but well-designed affordable homes in the right places.

We urge your readers to support CPRE’s charter atwww.saveourcountryside.org.uk
.

http://www.cpre.org.uk/media-centre/latest-news-releases/item/3437-literary-landscape-loss-lament?highlight=WyJsZSIsImNhcnJlIiwibGUgY2FycmUiXQ==

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Developers/ Development, EDDC, Knowle/Honiton/Exmouth relocation, PegasusLife, Spin

Comments

PegasusLife: don’t believe everything you hear …

Remark on Sidmouth Herald Streetlife:

“I’ve just started looking through the online plans and have already found some things that are not quite how they have been made public.

The inpression created, for me at least, was that the well-being facilities and restaurant would be open to non-residents. It is not quite as open as all that.

Visitors can use the restaurant, and I assume that means people who are visiting those living there as it clearly defines another category of people who can use the well-being facilities as Non-Residents.

Non-Residents are people living in Sidmouth and who are over 60 years of age, with priority give to those whose property borders the Knowle.

This only runs for 3 years from the time they achieve 50% occupation of the site.

Don’t be misled into thinking that they will be providing some sort of resource for the town.

Oh, and they say they expect to employ 14.5 people in total. If that covers the restaurant, well-being facilities, cleaners, gardeners and care assistant/nurses as well as management it doesn’t bode well for high standards in anything.”

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Devolution, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency, Transport (local)

Tim Jones and Andrew Ledbetter get the wrong end of the stick

“Frustration is mounting about the lack of Government support for Devon and Cornwall rail improvements, as ministers pledge billions of pounds for schemes in London.

Exeter MP Ben Bradshaw accused ministers of having “absolutely no intention” to keep its promises to invest “record” amounts in the region’s rail.

While businessman Tim Jones warns South West firms are losing confidence in the Government’s ability to deliver. …

… Chairman of Devon and Cornwall Business Council, Tim Jones, added that local businesses are growing “frustrated” with the Government’s “regurgitated” assurances. “Business people are saying: we’ve read this all before, we’re bored of this… we do not have confidence,” he said.

The Peninsula Rail Task Force, which is overseeing the region’s bid for rail investment, has now published its draft consultation outlining proposals for the network. Chairman Andrew Leadbetter said the group has have been “pressing the point” that the South West has the lowest investment per head of all regions.

“But that in itself is not a compelling reason to invest. We have to demonstrate investment in the rail network will yield a return,” he said. “We are competing against other regions so I would urge everyone to support the Task Force in making the case and securing our rightful share of funding.”

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Devon-Cornwall-losing-confidence-Government/story-29299207-detail/story.html

Er, actually Tim and Andrew it’s YOU and your pals of the Local Enterprise Partnership we don’t have confidence in. You are just as guilty – perhaps more so – for having your cosy jobs for you (development and nuclear) pals and keeping everything you do, spend and acquire secret.

Criticising your pals further up the greasy pole ( or the old excuse that it’s all the previous government’s fault) doesn’t absolve you – you are just a bit lower down on that same pole and just as responsible for the mess we are in.

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Cornwall, Developers/ Development, Local Plan, Local Plan Inspector

Cornwall Local Plan Inquiry starts in chaos

Police and security guards were in evidence on the first day of the Cornwall Local Plan inquiry yesterday with vocal protesters inside and outside the meeting room giving vent to their anger.

PA systems were turned odd when the chairman of “Kernow Matters to Us” made a very long public speech ( where he said the Inspector was running the inquiry like it was in old East Germany. The only non-developer allowed at the table at the meeting when it finally kicked off had this to say about the experience”

“INSULT IS BEING PILED UPON INJURY BY THE MINUTE.

A mail from Armorel Carlyon today.

Dear All, I have been relegated to the bottom of the table. On the right hand side, 14 developers, and 7 more on my left. I did have Mr David Pollard sitting next to me, and he was allowed to speak on two occasions. I have NOT BEEN ALLOWED TO SPEAK ALL DAY!! I felt the Inspector was extremely disparaging towards me in front of all these people – I feel totally humilated – probably due to my outspoken contributions yesterday.

The housing figures for Truro were 3900 and the developers were trying to increase this figure. The Inspector said that I must find something in my responses to justify my speaking. I protested that I was the only person around the table that had any knowledge of Truro, but I was roundly refused.

I am the ONLY obvious Cornish person around the table. They are sitting here just carving up Cornwall in front of my eyes. I have just found a response I made in March 2013 on Policy 3 which stated that the allocations for Truro had been allocated and agreed to in the Neighbourhood Plan. I have written a note to the Inspector referring to my original response. I am feeling very sad and very angry.”

With best wishes
Armorel C.

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, NHS (local)

Comments

Over-development: is this why our local health services are in deficit?

From a correspondent – source not confirmed and views expressed are those of correspondent:

“.. North Devon District Councillor recently attended a meeting to discuss cuts to services at our North Devon District Hospital. Need to save £15M annually.

Those attending the meeting were told that the Northern Devon Healthcare NHS trust have to save money by cutting services. This has been forced on them due to the increasing demand on existing services, given rate of major planning approvals.

So there we have it, those that administer a crucial part of our health infrastructure have admitted that cuts are being proposed due to the increased demand that will be created by the recent volume of housing approvals, and the resultant influx of people coming to live in North Devon.”

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Developers/ Development, Neighbourhood Plans, NPPF, Planning System

Queen’s speech: planning changes

“The main elements of the Neighbourhood Planning and Infrastructure Bill are to be:

Neighbourhood Planning: the Bill will “further strengthen neighbourhood planning and give even more power to local people”; it will also strengthen neighbourhood planning by making the local government duty to support groups more transparent and by improving the process for reviewing and updating plans.

Planning Conditions: the Bill will ensure that pre-commencement planning conditions are only imposed by local planning authorities where they are absolutely necessary –

“excessive pre-commencement planning conditions can slow down or stop the construction of homes after they have been given planning permission”; the legislation will “tackle the overuse, and in some cases, misuse of certain planning conditions, and thereby ensure that development, including new housing, can get underway without unnecessary delay”.

Compulsory Purchase: the legislation will make the compulsory purchase order process “clearer, fairer and faster” for all those involved; there will be reform of the context within which compensation is negotiated; the Government’s proposals, on which it has already consulted, would consolidate and clarify more than 100 years of conflicting statute and case law; “we would establish a clear, new statutory framework for agreeing compensation, based on the fundamental principle that compensation should be based on the market value of the land in the absence of the scheme underlying the compulsory purchase”.

National Infrastructure Commission: the Bill will establish the independent National Infrastructure Commission on a statutory basis; the Commission is to provide the Government with expert, independent advice on infrastructure issues “by setting out a clear, strategic vision on the future infrastructure that is needed to ensure the UK economy is fit for 2050”; measures will “unlock economic potential across the UK and ensure that growth and opportunities are distributed across the country, boosting productivity and competitiveness through high-quality infrastructure”.

Land Registry: The new legislation will enable the privatisation of Land Registry, which will “support the delivery of a modern, digitally-based land registration service that will benefit the Land Registry’s customers, such as people buying or selling their home”; it could also return a capital receipt to the Exchequer to help reduce national debt.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=26998%3Afurther-changes-to-planning-system-in-prospect-following-queens-speech&catid=59&Itemid=27

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Cornwall, Developers/ Development, Planning System

Something rotten in the state of Cornwall?

Another new Cornish protest group:

Cornwall for Change
Facebook Group

“A non politically aligned group looking for a change of local government in Cornwall so that we have well-informed elected members working in a system that allows them to stand up for all who live here (Ethical Governance for One and All).”

which joins

Your Kids Future Cornwall
Facebook page

“Highlighting the greed and political ineptitude that threatens our children’s Cornish Futures because of uncontrolled hyper-development.”

and It’s Our Cornwall
Facebook Page:

“It’s Our Cornwall is a site dedicated to safeguarding Cornwall’s environment and defending its Cornishness. It stems from the dismay and frustration felt at the suburbanisation of Cornwall that has steamrollered over us since the 1960s. Its aim is first to make people in Cornwall more aware of what’s happening to our land. Its second aim is to help campaigning groups see the bigger picture. Its third aim is to encourage communities to resist the future mapped out for us by the developers, aided and abetted by most of our elected ‘representatives’. Its fourth aim is to stimulate discussion on how best to organise this resistance.”

YOU NEED TO BE TALKING TO EACH OTHER PEOPLE! A CORNISH INDEPENDENT ALLIANCE COULD ACHIEVE EVEN MORE THAN INDIVIDUAL SMALL GROUPS. ALTHOUGH ITS ACRONYM WOULD BE CIA!

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

AONB, Developers/ Development

CPRE Court challenge to AONB development

The Court of Appeal has granted permission to appeal to campaigners seeking to challenge the grant of planning permission for a major development in an area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB).

Lord Justice Lewison gave the go-ahead to CPRE Kent to challenge the decision of Mr Justice Mitting in the High Court in R (CPRE Kent) v Dover DC [2015] EWHC 3808.
The Court of Appeal judge gave permission for the appellant to pursue its argument that Dover District Council did not properly apply national policy protecting the Kent Downs AONB when it granted planning permission for up to 521 residential units and a 90-apartment retirement village in the Farthingloe valley.

Dover’s planning committee resolved to grant permission for the development despite criticisms in the officers’ report of its density and layout.

CPRE’s case is that on the facts of the case this failed to afford adequate protection to the AONB and/or that inadequate reasons were given for departing from officers’ recommendation.

CPRE Kent Chairman Christine Drury said: “This is great news – we have been determined to save this beautiful area of countryside. The harm to the AONB cannot be justified and we are heartened that the judge has agreed to our appeal on this important point.”

The appellant had sought permission on a second ground, relating to the lawfulness of a substantial payment for heritage improvements closer to Dover town centre at the Western Heights.

CPRE Kent has decided to renew its application for permission on that ground for oral reconsideration.

A Dover District Council spokesman said: “We are aware the Court of Appeal has granted permission to appeal on one of the two grounds CPRE sought leave to appeal on, and we will continue to defend our decision through the Court process.”
Francis Taylor Building’s Ned Westaway, instructed by Richard Buxton, is acting for the appellant.

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=26976%3Acourt-of-appeal-agrees-to-hear-area-of-outstanding-natural-beauty-case&catid=63&Itemid=31

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Persimmon

Next time developers tell you they are too poor to build affordable housing …

… show them this article:

“FTSE 100 climbs nearly 1% with Taylor Wimpey leading the way
Housebuilder pleases investors with news of new special dividend

Leading shares are heading higher again, helped by the continuing strength in the oil price and positive moves in the US and Asian markets, and shrugging off weaker than expected UK inflation figures.

Taylor Wimpey is topping the risers, up 11p at 195.9p after the housebuilder announced a special dividend amid a strong property market. The move means it plans to pay investors £1.3bn by the end of 2018, higher than the expected figure of around £1.1bn. Analysts at Canaccord Genuity said:

Ahead of its capital markets day today, the group has announced a very positive update to its dividend policy as well as stretching its medium-term financial objectives.

It has increased its ordinary dividend to around 5% of net assets to be paid through the cycle from 2017 and announced a special dividend of £300m to be paid in July 2017 (it had already announced £300m to be paid in July 2016). The group has also increased its medium-term financial targets, covering the period 2016 to 2018, given the strength of the market and the group’s performance. It now expects an average return on net operating assets of 30%, an average operating margin of around 22%.

Included in its financial targets it also targets a total of £1.3bn of dividends to be paid to shareholders over the period 2016-18. This clearly signals another special dividend in 2018. Consensus unlikely to move significantly at this point, although the low end may move up but the news on dividends should be well received and consensus dividend expectations will likely rise. Over the next 14 months the shares offer dividends per share of around 22.5p – which implies a yield of around 12%.

On trading the company said:

The UK new build housing market remains very positive across most of our geographies, with a healthy and controlled lending environment providing good accessibility to mortgages at competitive rates. Consumer demand and confidence remain high. In central London, the market continues to be stable.

This confidence has helped other housebuilders, with Barratt Developments up 15.5p at 553.5p and Persimmon putting on 57p to £20.37. …”

http://gu.com/p/4j96k

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

AONB, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, EDDC, Newton Poppleford

Newton Poppleford: Will developer’s new plans avoid affordable homes ” ghetto”.

Cavanna Homes controversial full planning permission for 40 homes on AONB land in Newton Poppleford was agreed in principle by EDDC but held up because affordable homes were clustered together instead of being ” pepper potted” throughout the development.

New plans appear to show two homes on the western edge of the site, four to the north and nine in a cul-de-sac facing north towards the end of the estate road.

Is this “pepper potting”? The officers think so. Hhhmmmm … quite a lot of pepper in the remotest and possibly least attractive corner of the plate.