Category Archives: Development Management Committee

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

28 Nov 2019

Posted under

Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, East Devon economy, EDDC, Tourism

New hotel allowed on A3052 – convenient for Westpoint, Crealy and Greendale

Interesting that EDDC would have refused it but delayed too long so the decision was taken away from them.

“A new 130-bedroom hotel will be built on the site of a caravan and camping park just outside Exeter.

Hill Pond Caravan and Camping Park successfully appealed against the non-determination by East Devon District Council over their plans to build a new L-shaped hotel on the site of the existing park just off the A3052.

The site is adjacent to the Hill Barton Business Park, and is across the A3052 from Exeter City’s training ground and Crealy Adventure Park, and near to Westpoint.

Planning inspector Andrew Spencer-Peet in his report said that the economic benefits of the new hotel were evident, it would address the acknowledged current shortfall of holiday accommodation in the area, and the benefits of the proposal carry sufficient weight to justify allowing the appeal scheme. …” …

East Devon District Council had issued a report that said they would have resolved to refuse planning permission, had the decision not be taken away from them by the appeal against non-determination.

Issuing their ‘would have’ refused notice, council planners said there was an absence of robust evidence of need and demand for a hotel in the location and it hadn’t been demonstrated that there was such an un-met need for the hotel, there could be a departure from the local plan.

But Mr Spencer-Peet, announcing his decision last week, allowed the appeal, subject to 15 conditions being met.

https://www.devonlive.com/whats-on/whats-on-news/new-hotel-plans-approved-site-3583765

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 Oct 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, EDDC, Exmouth, Housing (local)

Exmouth developer wants to build private houses before affordable ones …

Yeah, right … and then somehow the houses don’t get sold (maybe because people don’t know where the affordable houses will go if ever they are built) and then the affordables disapear … and then all high-cost housing gets built … and then suddenly they all sell …

Developer behind 36-home Exmouth scheme asks for more time to deliver last affordable dwellings – so it can sell private properties

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

5 Sep 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Carter family, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, EDDC, Environment (local), Local Plan, Woodbury

Local “Experts” win the day in the battle of Woodbury Power Plant (but the war is not yet over)

From a correspondent – as positive as it is, Plutus Energy will almost certainly appeal so we must await a final outcome.

“East Devon District Council has rejected plans for the construction of 20 gas-fired electricity generators on grounds including that the scheme would be “inappropriate development in the open countryside”.

Acting against the recommendation of Planning officer EDDC`s Development Management committee, refused permission for the construction of “20 self-contained natural gas engine driven electricity generators”.

The scheme, proposed by applicant Plutus Energy, would have been built on land close to Woodbury Business Park, Woodbury.

The Key to the decision was Strategy 39 of the council’s local plan, which states the authority’s commitment to promoting the use of renewables and low carbon energy, as grounds for refusing the plans.

The planning report said that the proposed development “would be powered by natural gas and therefore it is important to recognise that this technology is a “facilitator of renewable energy” rather than a renewable technology or low carbon energy project itself and therefore there is little direct policy support within Strategy 39 for this proposal.”

However, it added that “whilst Strategy 39 of the local plan promotes renewable and low carbon energy, it does not in itself provide an “in principle” reason to refuse proposals for fossil fuel energy development.

Therefore, on balance, the Planning Officer considered that the adverse impacts from the scheme would “not significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits that would be derived from the scheme which would support the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy by providing back-up generation to help achieve the transition to a sustainable, low carbon future.”

However a team of local residents including an expert from commercial finance, a Professor who is recognised as a world expert of climate change, a solicitor, local councillors, planning experts spoke at the planning meeting with a very detailed forensic exposé of the proposed development that exposed that the far from “facilitating renewable energy it was would block any renewable energy being added to the National Grid, and rather than running at “only a few hours a day in winter time it would actually run over 3000 Hours a year, having a devastating effect on the area.

After a short debate, where the Legal Officer of the council recommended a referral because of the further information the committee voted against the proposal and the Legal Officers recommendation.

A statement from the council said the application had “proved controversial with the local community who raised a number of concerns regarding noise and pollution from the facility, as well as fears that a low carbon energy generation and storage facility was not being proposed, which would be consistent with addressing the climate change emergency declared by the council only a few weeks earlier.”

It added that the committee resolved to refuse the application on the basis that “it would be inappropriate development in the open countryside, with local plan policies only supporting renewable and low carbon energy projects in the open countryside” and a further reason for “related to concerns about the impact of the proposal on air quality in the locality.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 Aug 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Clinton Devon Estates, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, EDDC, TiggerTories

EDDC Development Management Committee makes another controversial planning decision

The planning application for the conversion of the South West Coast Path WW2 observation post into a holiday dwelling, covered by Owl here:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2019/07/07/a-poignant-planning-application-on-the-75th-anniversary-of-d-day-and-enthusiastically-supported-by-clinton-devon-estates/

has been agreed. The roof will be “reconstructed and roof lights, doors, windows and solar panels will be added, thus destroying its original function as a historical building.

The owners of the land are, of course, Clinton Devon Estates.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

13 Aug 2019

Posted under

Development Management Committee, EDDC, Greendale

A couple of interesting Development Management Committee decisions

Greendale – two applications:

Applicant:
Mr Terence Adams.
Location:
Greendale Farm, Greendale Lane, Clyst St Mary, EX5 1AW.

Development Management Committee 6 August 2019

Proposal:
Demolition of existing farmhouse and replacement with 3 cottages and associated car parking, landscaping, bin store and ancillary works.
RESOLVED:
Approved as per officer recommendation.

WOODBURY AND LYMPSTONE Applicant:
FWS Carter and Sons Ltd.
Location:
10 Hogsbrook Units, Woodbury Salterton, EX5 1PY.
Proposal:
Retention of extension to industrial unit (including change of use from agricultural to Class B8 (storage)).
RESOLVED:
Approved as per officer recommendation.

And this one, where the applicant appears to be a senior member of Stags Estate Agency (Head of Residential Lettings and Property Management)
https://www.stags.co.uk/staff/andrew-luxton-mrics-farla
and the application was approved contrary to officer recommendation:

DUNKESWELL AND OTTERHEAD Applicant:
Mr A Luxton.
Location:
Emmetts Farm, Beacon, Yarcombe, Honiton, EX14 9LU.
Proposal:
General purpose agricultural building.
RESOLVED:
Approved contrary to officer recommendation with delegated authority to officers to impose appropriate conditions.
Members considered that the proposal was of an appropriate scale and materials such that it would conserve and enhance the AONB. In addition, it was considered that the proposed building was a sufficient distance from the nearby listed building to not cause any harm to its setting.

https://democracy.eastdevon.gov.uk/documents/g273/Printed%20minutes%2006th-Aug-2019%2010.00%20Development%20Management%20Committee.pdf?T=1

https://www.stags.co.uk/staff/andrew-luxton-mrics-farla

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

7 Aug 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Clinton Devon Estates, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, EDDC, Newton Poppleford

Clinton Devon Estates: “‘Deceit and lies’ – Councillors speak out Newton Poppleford GP campaign looks to be over”

Wonder if EDDC’s CEO had any private advice for CDE?

“This has gone into the most spectacular orbit of deceit and betrayal in the planning system.”

Those are the words of one councillor as the district authority agreed at a meeting on Tuesday (August 6) not to fight a developer’s appeal over a Newton Poppleford site.

Clinton Devon Estates (CDE) lodged an appeal after East Devon District Council (EDDC) delayed a decision on an application to build two homes on land originally earmarked for a GP surgery.

A wider plan for a 40-home development at King Alfred Way, including a doctors’ surgery, was approved in 2013. CDE was unable to find a tenant, so instead applied to build two more homes.

At that stage the parish council expressed an interest in running the surgery.

EDDC twice delayed a decision – the second to allow the parish council to meet with the developer to find a solution.

The developer lodged an appeal with the planning inspector, who will now also decide whether the council should pay costs.

Planning officers recommended the authority should not fight the appeal arguing the surgery was not ‘legally justifiable’. Councillors voted by seven votes to five not to fight it.

Councillor Mike Howe, chairman of the development management committee, told the meeting CDE had acted ‘atrociously’ and could not be considered an ‘ethical or nice developer’.

Cllr Olly Davey said, unless ‘legally enforceable’, ‘any promise that a developer makes is not worth the paper it is written on’.

Councillor Paul Arnott put forward a motion to reject the application, on the grounds the developer had failed in its ‘commitment’ to deliver the surgery – but it was thrown out by seven votes to four.

Councillor Paul Arnott said the application was the most ‘spectacular orbit of deceit and betrayal’ and the council should mount a challenge despite the costs. He said: “It’s so mired in lies and deceit going back years, betrayal, treachery, accusations of wording.

“We cannot afford, as a rule, to be spending council taxpayers’ money on appeals we may not win, but on this occasion we have to. It is a notorious case and we have to draw a line.”

Cllr Eileen Wragg said the committee needed a ‘damn good reason’ not to agree with the officers’ report.

Council officer Henry Gordon-Lennox, strategic lead, said nothing in planning law could stop the developer applying for a different use of them land, despite the original plan for a surgery.

He said: “I do absolutely understand the frustration and the annoyance and the disappointment, but from our point of view as officers there is nothing to defend precluding them from doing this, unpalatable as that may be.”

CDE was represented at the meeting Amy Roberts, who said there has never been a planning justification for the surgery, within the original plan. She said CDE did not want to appeal, but that the developer’s ‘hands were somewhat forced’ by the non-determination, despite planners’ recommendations.”

https://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/clinton-devon-estates-slammed-for-newton-poppleford-homes-plan-1-6203178

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Aug 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Ben Ingham, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, EDDC, Fords of Sidmouth, Mark Williams CEO EDDC, Scrutiny, Sidford Business Park, Stuart Hughes

EDDC “Independent” Leader firmly nails his colours (blue?) to his CEOs mast

 

Owl sees no “misunderstanding”.

Another “TiggerTory” policy?

And what does Mr Marchant, the person accused of being “misunderstood” – and Ford’s QC who perpetuated the “misunderstanding” several times at the public inquiry – think about this?

And where’s Councillor Hughes’s explanation for not sharing information about the meeting with other councillors, particularly those on the Development Management Committee – or did he share it with only a select few of his colleagues?

Remember, the Development Management Committee is a STATUTORY committee with rules and regulations … and it must NOT be subjected to party whipping or interference, nor must they “avoid undue contact with interested parties”.

Click to access planning-committee-manage-1cd.pdf

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

25 Jul 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Axminster, Ben Ingham, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, East Devon Tories, EDDC, Knowle/Honiton/Exmouth relocation, PegasusLife

EDDC Tories appear in Private Eye’s “Rotten Boroughs” column

From the blog of DCC EDA Independent Councillor Martin Shaw:

Private Eye goes to town on EDDC Tories’ handout to developers of the Knowle

Oh dear – and now “The Independent Group” led by EDDC Leader Ben Ingham has chosen to cosy up to Tories, rather than East Devon Alliance independents, whom he has frozen out.

With current Councillor Ingham having the been a member of all 3 groups and Leader of 2 of them (former Tory, former Leader of East Devon Alliance and current leader of ‘The Independent Group’) he really has to decide which side of the fence and his cohort are on!

Or maybe he has already decided – given that he appointed a Tory as Chairman of the Development Management Committee, who then used his casting vote to push through a controversial planning applucation in Axminster, opposed by Axminster EDA councillors on safety and pollution grounds:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2019/07/19/eddc-tory-dmc-chairman-uses-his-casting-vote-in-controversial-planning-application/

Reality check needed for some of his colleagues, perhaps?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

19 Jul 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Air pollution, Axminster, Development Management Committee, EDDC, Health and Safety, TiggerTories, Transport (local)

Comments

2 Comments

EDDC Tory DMC Chairman uses his casting vote in controversial planning application

“Plans for 10 new homes in Axminster have been approved, despite fears children could be flattened by lorry drivers who wouldn’t notice them until ‘they heard the screams’.

East Devon District Council’s development management committee via the chairman’s casting vote gave the go-ahead last week for outline plans for 10 homes to be built on land adjacent to the co-op supermarket in Axminster.

Serious concerns about highways safety had been raised by councillors as the front doors of the houses would open almost onto the road delivery drivers heading to the Co-op use.

But the committee heard that Devon County Council’s highways department had no concerns over the plans and hadn’t objected, and committee chairman Cllr Mike Howe used his casting vote to approve the application, saying: “I have to vote in favour as I cannot see a reason for refusal that would stand up and would not cost this council money at an appeal.”

Cllr Paul Hayward had said that he was very concerned about the safety aspects of the plan. He said: “This is building family houses next to a car park and the front doors will open directly onto the path of a reversing HGV from the Co-op. The lorry driver would only be focused on reversing into his spot and he wouldn’t even notice if a child run out of the doors after a ball or a dog or if they saw a friend across the road.

“A child wouldn’t even be on the radar until he heard the screams. Safety is paramount and I cannot conceive a worse place to build family houses.”

Cllr Sarah Jackson added: “The development is situated opposite a car park and alongside the car park access road. Family properties are likely to be occupied by young children who lack road sense and can easily run out unexpectedly, particularly as they may not perceive this as a road in the traditional sense.

“Equally, articulated lorries have incredibly limited visibility and when turning may not see a child in time. The nearest playing field/recreation areas are at Foxhill and Jubilee field. Both would require children to cross several roads.

“It’s worth noting that the play park at Jubilee Field is currently out of action due to a legal dispute and it is unknown as to when this will be returned to proper use, so it is therefore likely that children will end up playing in the car park.

“I just question the logic of putting family homes right next to somewhere where lorries will be reversing in and out to make their deliveries.”

Cllr Tom Wright added his concerns about kids running out and being run over, and added: “I also have environmental concerns. Encouraging people to live in an area which is being heavily polluted and there will be lorries running with their diesel engines is unbelievable and an absolute nonsense.”

And Cllr Paul Arnott said the development was the kind of thing you may see in inner-city London, but that ‘even there it would be turned down on environmental grounds.”

Planning officers though had recommended that the scheme, which would consist of three blocks, be approved.

Six homes would be on a terrace row which fronts on to the car park, with two semi-detached properties situated adjacent to the supermarket building and two further properties fronting onto the proposed car park for the new three bedroom homes.

Development manager Chris Rose said: “The application seeks to address the two reasons for refusal on a previous application which related to the unsuitable access and conflict with the loading area to Co-op and the lack of affordable housing contribution.

“The development can be accommodated without harm in terms of amenity, highway safety, visual impact or loss of character. Although these types of development would usually result in an offsite contributions toward affordable housing, in this instance viability information has been submitted which has demonstrated that such a contribution would render the development unviable.

“The proposal adequately addresses the two previous reasons for refusal on the previous application and as such is considered to meet the social, economic and environmental and thus achieves sustainable development.

Cllr Helen Parr proposed that the application be approved in line with the recommendation, saying: “It is going to be difficult to refuse this on highways safety grounds as Devon County Council’s highways team are satisfied that there is appropriate separation. I don’t see how we can object on highways grounds if they won’t support us. The other reason why development was refused was on affordable housing but there is now evidence that it would be unviable.”

Cllr Eileen Wragg seconded the proposal to approve the plans, saying: “If we don’t, I think that this is one that we would fail to defend on appeal.”

The vote to approve the application saw seven councillors vote in favour and seven against, before Cllr Howe broke the deadlock with his casting vote in favour of approval.”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/homes-approved-despite-fears-reversing-3111980

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 Jul 2019

Posted under

Asset sweating, Development Management Committee, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Exmouth, Regeneration, TiggerTories

EDA Councillor helps out Exmouth with acceptable compromise on Queen’s Drive

Officers sought to get permission to use land it owns at Queen’s Drive, which previously housed recreation facilities, as a temporary overflow car park for 3 years. Exmouth councillors were appalled but could see no option but to agree. Colyton EDA Councillor proposed that the land should be so designated for 14 months only until September 2020.

Compromise achieved and agreed.

Lesson learned? Hhhmmm … let’s wait and see.

https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/queen-s-drive-seafront-car-park-plan-approved-1-6152147

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 Jun 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Development Management Committee, Health and Safety

Bellway homes: “Barking fire: residents claim safety fears about flats were downplayed”

” …Peter Mason, chair of the Barking Reach residents’ association, told the Guardian that in early May he contacted the builder Bellway Homes to ask for the fire risk to be investigated after BBC Watchdog broadcast claims of fire safety problems at two other developments by the same builder.

In an email seen by the Guardian from the firm’s fire safety helpline last month, Bellway told him not to worry. In a section headed Your Home it said the construction method used on the development in Scotland examined by Watchdog was different and so the Barking homes were not affected in the same way.

It concluded: “We understand that these news articles are highly alarming for all residents of new homes and I hope that the above statement has allayed any fears you may have over the safety and construction of your Bellway home.”

Mason said he felt “gut-wrenched” by the fire, adding that people had lost their homes and possessions and were in severe distress. The fire appeared to rip through the wooden cladding around the balconies of the building and may have been caused by a barbecue being lit on one of the balconies, Mason said.

Twenty flats were destroyed by the flames and a further 10 were damaged by heat and smoke. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/09/fire-flats-barking-east-london-de-pass-gardens?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

5 Jun 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Cranbrook, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, EDDC, Growth Strategy, Housing (local)

Now Tories are not in control Swire decides Cranbrook is a development problem!

Today’s Midweek Herald. SO odd that Hugo has JUST discovered that Cranbrook development is a problem … still TiggerTories involved in planning will be glad to know he is NOW onside! Such a pity he wasn’t so vocal when Tories alone were in charge!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

1 Jun 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Cranbrook, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, EDDC, Health and Social Care (local), Independent Councillors, Local Plan, NHS (local), Sustainability, TiggerTories

Comments

2 Comments

Cranbrook to get massively BIGGER – first planning test for no-overall-control council

The first test of The Independent Group on large-scale development. It got to make up the EDDC Cabinet and its Leader, Ben Ingham, has appointed several current and former Tories to positions of influence.

What will each group’s stand be on large-scale development? And what happens if the smaller parties have different views to that of the Independent Group and Tories if they agree? Interesting.

There are a few worrying words in this press release – potential, proposed, outlines, capable of, vision, could, opportunities. Lots of leeway for developet mund-changing at a later date.

And missing words: affordable and social housing.

Plus our local NHS Trust wants more than £1.3 million before it considers the proposal sustainable for health needs.

“Plans for 930 new homes as part of the western expansion of Cranbrook have been revealed.

The proposals for the Bluehayes site would also see a primary school, sport and recreational facilities, community uses, green infrastructure, as well as a mixed use area of shops, food and drink and professional services built.

The Bluehayes site, which lies between the existing Cranbrook development and Broadclyst Station, is one of four proposed expansion areas of Cranbrook.

A new link road that would run from the Cranbrook railway station to London Road and to Broadclyst Station, through the middle of the Bluehayes site, is also proposed in the scheme handed in recently to East Devon District Council planners.

And the plans also reveal that a footbridge over the London Road that would connect the Bluehayes site with the proposed Treasbeare site, south of the road, could be built.

The Cranbrook Plan was backed by East Devon District Council’s Strategic Planning Committee in February which outlines the land where a further 4,170 new homes will be built.

It allocates 40 hectares of land at the Bluehayes Expansion Area for around 960 new dwellings, land capable of accommodating a community building, formal open space recreational land, a 420 pupil place primary school, formal play space with facilities for children and youth and allotments totalling an area of 0.55 hectare of land

Details with a planning statement submitted with the planning application says: “The submission of the new outline application for the Western Expansion of Cranbrook and the change of use of agricultural land to the north of Cranny Brook to SANG land, is consistent with the planning policy and the longstanding policy to deliver new homes to meet the needs of the area.

“The submission of the application for the Western Expansion area and their progression delivers certainty required in the long term delivery of growth and of the delivery of the vision for Cranbrook.

“The proposals have been designed to be residential led with the potential for the delivery of a new primary school and formal outdoor sports pitches to provide complementary community and social infrastructure to meet the needs of new residents.

“The application demonstrates provision of the necessary infrastructure to include internal roads, public transport provision, formal and informal open space uses to support itself and to mitigate any impacts of development on existing communities and wider infrastructure.

“Cranbrook and its Western Expansion have been fully justified in the context of local planning policy and in the context of the growth agenda and the national and local need for housing.

“The proposals will result in substantial and demonstrable benefits in terms of meeting the need for new homes in a sustainable manner, fostering economic development and further underpinning the sustainability of Cranbrook.

“The proposals will also help deliver the vision for Cranbrook and underpin the planning and delivery of infrastructure and the town centre.”

A 1.14 hectare site for a one-form entry primary school could come forward as part of the plans. The primary school will be built in either the Bluehayes or the Treasbeare allocation, depending on which is constructed first.

Details with the scheme also outline that a new link road from the Cranbrook station to London Road and to Broadclyst Station will be built.

There will be a new frontage to London Road which will comprise a mixed use area, providing opportunities for a range of residential, retail and small scale employment uses, and in future, a crossing over London Road to the southern expansion area may be accommodated.

But the Royal and Devon Exeter NHS Foundation Trust have requested a contribution of £1,332,313 from the developers, cash which will be used directly to provide additional health care services to meet patient demand.

Commenting on the application, they say: “Without the contribution being paid, the development would not be acceptable in planning terms as the consequence would be inadequate health services available to support it.”

Having considered the cost projections, the Trust say that they will require the full figure to ensure the required level of service provision is delivered in a timely manner.

They add: “Failure to access this additional funding will put significant additional pressure on the current service capacity, leading to increase delays for patients and dissatisfaction with NHS services.

“The contribution will ensure that Health services are maintained for current and future generations and that way make the development sustainable.”

The Bluehayes expansion is one of four proposed expansion areas for Cranbrook, which development also proposed for Treasbeare and Grange, south of the existing town, and Cobdens, to the east of the town.

A reserved matters application has also been submitted for 80 homes, for which outline planning permission has already been granted, for land north-east of the Cranbrook Education Campus.

East Devon District Council planners will determine the fate of the applications at a later date.”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/cranbrook-getting-bigger-930-new-2923726

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

24 May 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Development Management Committee, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Greater Exeter, TiggerTories

Comments

1 Comment

TiggerTories – a voter’s view

Totally encapsulates Owl’s thinking.

“I am a long term resident of East Devon and drove to Heathrow on Friday, 3rd May as the results of the local election streamed in. I happily went away on holiday thinking the words of Cllr Allen were a thing of the past

“We will make sure the district council remains strongly orientated towards economic growth and good housing whilst protecting the environment.”

I came back from holiday to find that the conservatives held the positions of chair of the Council and the, oh so important, chair of the Development Management Committee. The right wing independents held the Asset Management portfolio and the Finance portfolio. EDA were consigned to the non-role of vice-chairman. And where were the liberals? Yet, the conservatives were able to take the Scrutiny Committee chair as the opposition!

Now I fear Cllr. Allen’s words may not be a thing of the past but will still be the abiding philosophy of this alliance of right wing independents and conservatives.

What will be EDDC’s stance on growth?

What will it be in relationship to Exeter and the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan?”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

22 May 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, TiggerTories

Comments

5 Comments

Could EDDC Tiggers not find ONE “independent” to chair the Development Management Committee?

OK, we now refer to the ruling group at EDDC as

“TiggerTories”

a coalition of a mix of western-side “Independents” with western-side Tories.

And the Tiggers couldn’t even find ONE of their “independents” to chair the Development Management Committee!

Tory Mike Howe now holds the casting vote if the committee splits 50/50 on anything …

Unbelievable!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

20 May 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Development Management Committee, East Devon Alliance, East Devon Tories, EDDC, Green (local), Independent Councillors, Lib Dem (local)

Correction! WEDNESDAY crunch day for Indies at EDDC … and us

Elections for various posts will take place at the Annual Council meeting on WEDNESDAY (Blackdown House, Honiton, 6pm) where Leader, Chairman etc will be revealed.

Then the interesting bit.

How representative will the new cabinet be of different types of independents?

Jobs for the boys/girls or best man/woman for the job?

Will Greens or Lib Dems get a seat at the table?

Will it be loaded geographically to one side of East Devon or spread out equally?

Who will lead the influential Development Management Committee?

Who will represent EDDC at Greater Exeter Strategic Plan meetings?

Who will the MINORITY Conservative leader be?

Who will chair the Scrutiny Committee?

So many questions!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

12 Apr 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, EDDC, Greendale, Independent Councillors

20 days to local elections: today’s picture

This image below shows current planning issues at Greendale Business Park – many of which have been allowed, or allowed to drag on, by EDDC Tory councillors who form the majority decision-makers in “planning” and planning “enforcement” (those inverted commas are there deliberately!). Many of Greendale’s planning applications have been approved retrospectively.

Independent Councillor Geoff Jung works tirelessly (in the face of great difficulty) to try to ensure that Greendale stays within its proper boundaries – but it is a never-ending task:

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

4 Mar 2019

Posted under

Accountability, Cranbrook, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, EDDC, Housing (local), Persimmon

“New homes in Devon are built so badly ‘children can remove cement with their fingernails’ “

Owl is confused. Isn’t EDDC’s Building Control department supposed to be passing or failing these new properties?

“The East Devon District Council meeting heard from Cllr Douglas Hull, who proposed the motion and said: “There are so many badly new built houses in East Devon and it is getting even worse”

The Government has been urged to prioritise a new property ombudsman to streamline complaints against shoddy builders as there are ‘so many badly new built houses in East Devon’.

Councillors on Wednesday unanimously voted to call on the government to fulfil its February 2018 pledge to provide the much needed remedy for homeowners as a matter of the highest priority.

The East Devon District Council meeting heard from Cllr Douglas Hull, who proposed the motion and said: “There are so many badly new built houses in East Devon and it is getting even worse.”

Cllr Hull added: “We have to have houses we can be proud of the region, and we have to say that enough is enough. We need to think about the people who end up buying second rate houses.”

He added that in some of the new houses, they are built so badly that small children with can rip out the cement with their fingernails, adding: “If you don’t believe me, try it yourself.”

Cllr Eleanor Rylance added: “We have a quality control issue with a lot of the houses, and then we have a problem with people are renting from a housing association who don’t feel that they can be complain as they will lose their house.

“Cranbrook is developer led but some developers are prone to get people to buy the property before everything is done.”

No developers were named during the meeting, but it has recently been confirmed that Persimmon Homes are carrying out fire safety barrier inspections in Cranbrook after it was found that some new build homes were missing them.

Cllr Ian Hall added: “Some of the building companies in this area just don’t care, and they have no shame.”

Cllr Geoff Pook, who has been involved in the building trade in East Devon, pledged his support for the motion.

The council unanimously agreed to urge the government to fulfil its pledge to introduce a new property ombudsman to streamline complaints against shoddy builders as soon as possible.”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/new-homes-devon-built-badly-2605646

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

22 Feb 2019

Posted under

Cranbrook, Development Management Committee, EDDC, Housing (local)

Cranbrook grows and grows and grows … with less affordable housing

“A plan for where the next 4,170 homes in Cranbrook will be built has been backed – and it will see homes built south of the old A30.

Planners have already given the go-ahead for a total of 3,580 new homes to be built in the new town of Cranbrook, with a total of 7,850 eventually set to be built.

East Devon District Council’s Strategic Planning Committee on Wednesday morning backed the Cranbrook Plan Development Plan Document (DPD) which outlines the land where a further 4,170 new homes will be built, and that it is expected that at least 100 new homes will be built in the town centre.

Four expansion areas, two of which are south of the A30, are allocated for development of the 4,170 new homes, as well as a neighbourhood centres, community buildings, open space, allotments, two primary schools, sports pitches, and land suitable for a place of worship and a cemetary. …

… Development would take place at Bluehayes, to the west of the existing development, and include 960, Treasbeare, south of the existing development and south of the old A30, and include 915 new homes, Cobdens, to the east of the existing development, and include 1,495 new homes, and Grange, to the south of Cobden and south of the old A30, and include 800 new homes …

… The plan also safeguards land for a second railway station in Cranbrook, but only 15 per cent of the residential developments within the built-up area boundary of Cranbrook will be affordable houses, compared to the 30 per cent for the first phase of development, in order to make the plan viable to developers.

A policy to ensure delivery of the town centre, which includes a new town square, a health and wellbeing hub, a leisure centre, a civic centre, a library, a children’s centre, a youth centre, plus retail uses, is included in the DPD.

A town centre is considered a priority as since the original outline planning permission for the first 2,900 homes back in October 2010 was granted, only The Cranberry Farm pub has been constructed on the land and residential development of the town has now taken place both east and west of the Town Centre, leaving it as a void.

Councillors did raise about the green wedge and that only 15 per cent of the houses would be affordable, but Mark Williams, the council’s chief executive said that it was due to the massive infrastructure build required to provide all that the Local Plan and this plan wants to see at Cranbrook.

He said: “The work that we have had commissioned looks at whether this is actually affordable and whether what we think is necessary is affordable. The only way if it is affordable is to reduce the percentage of affordable housing and to reduce the developers profit from 20 per cent to 17.5 per cent.” …

… The committee revised the recommendation to approve the Cranbrook Plan Development Plan Document for consultation and to recommend the Cranbrook Plan Development Plan Document to Full Council for submission to the Planning Inspectorate for Examination in public, subject to any necessary changes from the consultation being approved by the strategic planning committee first.”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/major-plans-change-cranbrook-forever-2572325