Reading between the lines: “Habitat Regulation Delivery Officer”

Anyone else think that this job description (EDDC Habitat Regulation Delivery Officer) may be the exact opposite of what it purports to be and may be, in fact, a way of helping developers to build even more houses in environmentally sensitive locations in East Devon – such as AONBs?

“Strategic in your thinking, you will be confident setting the direction – and budget – of various programmes to protect wildlife. Persuasive and credible, you are an exceptional communicator with good networking, negotiation and communication skills, and you are capable in sharing information with a wide variety of stakeholders.”

A tongue in cheek translation:

“Strategic in your thinking” – doing as you are told
“Confident in setting the direction and budget” – doing as you are told on the cheap
“Persuasive, credible, exceptional communicator” – doing as you are told whilst persuading others of the opposite
“A wide variety of stakeholders” – doing as you are told whilst keeping developers happy but also persuading the voters you are on their side!

http://www.countryside-jobs.com/Jobs/Dec14/Habitat-Regulation-Delivery-Officer-East-Devon-District-Council-2111_2.html

East Devon: the rural premium and lack of affordable housing

” …The latest Halifax rural housing review found that rural homeowners in Devon and Cornwall are paying an average of £56,000 more for their properties than an urban equivalent. …

… Figures also revealed that the South Hams and Eastern and Northern parts of Devon are among the ten least affordable rural districts in the country. …

… Social housing was found to account for just 8% of housing stock in Torridge, 9% in Teignbridge and East Devon and 10% in North Devon and the South Hams.

The national rural average for social housing is 12% and the typical urban rate is 19%.”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/56-000-premium-rural-lifestyle/story-24519038-detail/story.html

Why is regeneration in East Devon always secret?

The Exmouth and Seaton Regeneration Board meetings have always been secret. Many people have attempted to get their meetings, agendas and minbutes made public but no-one has succeeded, even with Freedom of Information requests.

And, when those meetings are discussed in Cabinet, they are again always secret.

Always the reason is “commercial confidentiality”. This has been the case for years and years.

So, all regeneration matters are kept secret between developers and the council – or rather a few councillors. We are not even allowed to know who exactly they meet with or why or what is discussed. Anything that gets into the public domain is sanitised “good news”. Any “consultation” is done against a backdrop of those few priviledged councillors and (presumabky) developers operating in the shadows until they decide what we can be told of decisions that have been made in secret.

By law, all items heard in secret must have reasons given in advance. The usual one (which EDDC uses for Knowle relocation and even the now-defunct Knowle Planning Application) is “commercial confidentiality”.

Who signs off these confidential items? None other than Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Councillor Tim Woods.

East Devon District Council – working for …. well, who are they working for?

What’s another word for secret?

Answer: at EDDC – think tank, forum, meeting, group, working party, board

All these words mean secret

as in

Economy think tank
Asset Management Forum
Parishes and town councils meeting
Capital Strategy and Allocation Group
Relocation Working Party
Exmouth and Seaton Regeneration Board

As stated in the post below, most of EDDC’s work now seems to be done this way. You can’t see agendas or minutes and Freedom of Information requests for information on these meetings are routinely refused.

Recall that, in its first incarnation, even discussions about the (failed) Local Plan (called Local Development Framework in those days and chaired by expelled-ex-Tory Councillor Graham Brown) were secret until an Independent Councillor (Claire Wright) forced publication.

How can you know who or what to vote for if you don’t know what they say or do?

Click to access 211114-the-knowledge-issue-28.pdf

EDDC Deputy Leader rails against failure to provide details of finances, and about secrecy.

Cllr Andrew Moulding has said not a word about the same issues regarding Knowle office relocation.
But in his other role as a Devon County Councillor for Axminster, he seems greatly exercised by them. See him in action at this webcam link to DCC’s recent debate on the NHS failure to provide details of the finances for the community health provision rationalisation while maintaining secrecy.http://www.devoncc.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/118538 ( Just click on Cllr Moulding’s name, for his speech near the beginning of the meeting.)

“Transparency”: a joke at our expense

This week’s EDDC “Knowledge” e-newspaper shows 12 forthcoming meetings at EDDC:

7 are being held in secret (including a new group “Capital Strategy and Allocation”

3 are open to the public – Cabinet (though some parts of the agenda may be secret), the Planning Inspections (which must be open to the public by law) and the “Value of Trees Task and Finish Forum” and

2 are cancelled as not being needed (Licensing and Enforcement).

So, the vast majority of council business is being conducted in secret, with no published agendas and no public minutes. We have no idea what they discuss. In theory, these “groups” and “think tanks” do not make decisions BUT they do decide what aspects of their discussions they take forward to (supposedly) open committees. So, how do they decide what goes forward and what gets dropped if they don’t make decisions.

Transparency? You (or rather they) are having a laugh – on us

Click to access 211114-the-knowledge-issue-28.pdf

“Grey” seaside towns in the southwest

And still we build Cranbrook and luxury housing.

“Torbay MP, Adrian Sanders, a member of the all-party group for coastal communities, said the findings highlighted the need to redress the age imbalance.

He warned that if action was not taken, some towns could struggle to cope with the pressures of an ageing population.

“These coastal locations strongly appeal to older residents looking to retire, but this comes with increased social costs,” he said. Over 65s are coming to these communities at a time when they are less economically active but have growing needs which must be met by local services. While they can be a fantastic asset to their local community, in the long term we have to look at creating a more mixed demographic in these communities. We need to attract and retain more of the skilled, working age population.”

The ONS report, which looked at 274 coastal towns in England and Wales with populations of more than 1,000, identified several South West communities as having particularly high concentrations of retirement age inhabitants.

These included Charmouth in Dorset and Newton Ferrers in Devon, where 42% of residents are 65 and over, and Sidmouth and Budleigh Salterton in south east Devon, where numbers were around 41%. This is compared to the national average of around 16%.

The study also found many seaside communities suffered from lower than average employment rates and higher economic inactivity rates, as well as higher numbers of workers in part-time employment.

Mr Sanders said that these towns were in desperate need of better housing, infrastructure and educational provisions.”

“You need good schools and colleges to ensure the local labour market can offer employers the right skills. Many businesses find they have to move out of smaller communities when they want to expand because they can’t find the right employees,” he said.

“You also need the best possible connectivity, both in terms of rail and road as well as digital and communication. But most important is the housing policy – you need to ensure that young people who can work locally can also live locally.

“We need more regulated rent, secure tenancy housing in order to create stronger, enduring communities. In my opinion, this kind of accommodation needs to account for half of all new developments.”

Westcountry coastal towns have some of the highest proportions of private sector rentals of any location in the UK, according to the ONS study, even outstripping areas of London and Manchester.

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Calls-economic-revival-South-West-s-grey-seaside/story-24569258-detail/story.html

Landbanking sites with planning permission to keep lack of 5 year land supply

A new wheeze on the part of developers which a Conservative MP is annoyed about and which explains a lot. Oddly, the government has never plugged this loophole:

“… I do not pretend Test Valley is unique in facing the challenge of a five year housing land supply which appears to be a somewhat movable target, and I have noticed how successive developers seek to demonstrate their rivals’ schemes are, for whatever reason, undeliverable, only to then appear to struggle to deliver their own when it is granted permission, usually on appeal. Of course, there will always be some planning reasons why schemes are not developed at the rate initially predicted, but these should not be commercial reasons, where sites are delayed or developed only painfully slowly. In many cases these tactics can simply be a ploy to prove the local authority does not have a five year supply, thus improving the chances of yet another speculative site being granted on appeal.

Test Valley currently has granted as much as seven years of planning permissions, yet slow build rates, or in some cases no building at all, mean that each and every speculative application can point to the rate of delivery and suggest there is not a 5 year supply. In some cases we have even seen developers arguing against themselves, that a site they previously had demonstrated would be more deliverable than a rival’s, now for whatever reason is not, so they need to bring forward yet another one.”

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/caroline-nokes-mp-getting-balance-between-house-building-000429054.html#7Z9Gx6u

Planning decision quashed because important information not released to the public

Today a wind turbine … tomorrow … ?

“…“Local authorities would do well to note the strictness of the test here: breaches of the access to information provisions of the 1972 Local Government Act, and of the undertakings in a Statement of Community Involvement, will mean decisions taken are liable to be quashed upon challenge, unless the decision would inevitably have been the same without the breaches. Inevitability is a hard thing to prove.” ..”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=20831:a-strict-test&catid=59&Itemid=27

New light on Knowle, thanks to Mark Williams

See today’s press release from Save Our Sidmouth http://saveoursidmouth.com/2014/11/20/chief-executive-sheds-new-light-on-knowle/

What questons will councillors have for Mr Cohen this afternoon?

At the Audit and Governance, 2.30 pm, there will be an oral update from Mr Cohen on relocation. So, it’s another opportunity for our representatives to ensure with their questioning that the office move project is not built on shifting sands.

Oddly, EDDC’s latest, and last, edition of their glossy propaganda brochure, ‘Connect’ , doesn’t mention the Knowle at all. Should it have been renamed, ‘Disconnect’ ? And will what Council Leader, Paul Diviani, calls ‘our ground-breaking East Devon app and our connectED e-magazine’, do any better?

Affordable homes? In your dreams!

But we have known this for a long time in East Devon where even enormous schemes are allowed to build without any affordable homes at all:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-30009901?

though coincidentally it appears to be the case in South Somerset too:

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/opinion-Catch-22-planning-rules-holds-councils/story-24570865-detail/story.html

Exmouth: yet another questionable “consultation”

It seems the word “consultation” has a different meaning in East Devon compared to other areas.

Yesterday, 18th November 2014, a ‘public consultation’ about a proposal to build 150 houses in land off Marley Road, took place in Brixington Community Church Exmouth.

We are told that anyone going there expecting to learn much about the proposals was likely to have been disappointed. The exhibition consisted of around six display boards and there were a number of representatves of Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners Ltd who had laid on the event.

Their event did not get off to a good start when it was learned that
an oak (?) tree situated at what is to be the site entrance had been felled very recently. None of the representatives present could offer any explanation, or say who was responsible. Local comment was to the effect that the tree, with a diameter of around seven feet, was in a healthy condition prior to felling. Many present felt that this showed contempt for local opinion and the local ecology.

Many residents raised the issue of flooding,and drainage. This is already a problem resulting in run off coming down from the area and across Dinan Way at times. We were told that this would be dealt with by the use of attenuation tanks, devices that collect water and then release it gradually. The suggestion was that EDDC would ensure that no flooding or drainage problems were generated. Comment was made that the same promises were made to the residents of Feniton but have proved pretty worthless.

It transpires that this site, and an adjacent one to the north, were put forward to EDDC a couple of years ago as land to be included in the Local Plan for housing. Neither made it to any form of the provisional local plan.

Many will be aware that because EDDC have failed so miserably to produce a local plan that the Inspector will approve, that this has left a gap in planning practice which has, and continues to be exploited by developers. Many at the exhibition were left in no doubt that this proposal sought to exploit the mess that local planning is in. It was suggested that one of the exhibition team admitted as much.

That another plot, north of the one subject to this plan, was seen as having development potential, leads one to suspect that if this is approved a further one may follow. This would mean that The Eagle development for 350 houses at Goodmore Farm might be followed by another 150 here, and then an unknown number above.

In answer to a question about the likely price of ‘affordable houses’, the agents could not give an answer.

The exhibition provided no information to take away and digest. The consultants have provided no website though comments can be submitted to marleyroad@nlpplanning.com

More development between Exeter and Cranbrook – when will it stop?

More development planned in the EDDC district:

The plans for 900 homes on fields north of Tithebarn Lane and west of Mosshayne Lane, have been submitted by land owners Mr and Mrs Gent and developers, Eagle One Homes Ltd.

The plans also include a primary school.

Building is already under way on a 450-home development, including shops, a primary school and a 250-space park-and-ride on fields at Old Park Farm, Pinn Hill, submitted by AE Stuart & Sons.

And in April, permission was granted for a 350-house development for phase two of Old Park Farm at Pinn Hill, submitted by AE Stuart & Sons.

Another 430-house development, including retail space of up to 240sqm and a 60-bed care home at Pinn Court Farm, Pinncourt Lane, submitted by Millwood Homes Devon Ltd, was also approved at the same meeting.

At the time, residents and councillors voiced concerns that the two developments were considered a few days before a Government inspector made his ruling on the Local Plan public.

But a spokesperson for the council previously explained that it “made sense” for the applications to be heard together.

He said that whereas before, the “limiting factor” on the sites has been the surrounding highway infrastructure, the applications have “overcome” that restraint and proposed alterations to the Pinhoe roundabouts “have freed up greater capacity on the highway network to accommodate additional dwellings”.

At the meeting Liberal Democrat East Devon district ward member for Broadclyst Councillor Derek Button said: “This land is the lungs of Exeter and should never be built on.”

Source: http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Plans-submitted-900-homes-outskirts-Exeter-add-1/story-24561037-detail/story.html

Rural broadband: another government inquiry asks for input

For those in rural areas struggling to understand why they are being left behind in the digital race, here is an explanation of the problem and a chance to tell the government what you think about the mess we are in:

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2014/11/defra-committee-launch-fresh-inquiry-uk-rural-broadband-provision.html

“Growth” in “non-metropolitan areas”

aka “Development in rural areas”

Needless to say, the Local Government Asdociation has its own view of localism and devolution:

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/6193395/How+the+Other+Half+Grows+(lo+res).pdf/b1556a61-b8c5-4676-8df7-e3ee3090eaef

And now Hugo Swire sorts out residents parking in Sidmouth …. er … not!

His press release starts out, somewhat strangely:

“Shoppers will lose out on 35 town-centre parking spaces under plans to appease elderly residents, who blasted a decision to treble their annual permits fee to £1,800.

[The dictionary defines “appease” as “to make or preserve peace with a nation, group, or person by giving in to their demands, or to relieve a problem”. Sounds like he thinks the residents are being somewhat unreasonable.]

This is Hugo’s solution (we assume he had some hand in this solution as he has said on his blog that he had words with EDDC before it came out):

“East Devon District Council (EDDC) is now proposing to offer current Mill Street users a special permit for 35 of the bays at the Ham East car park.

This would mean they would not be guaranteed a space, but they could stay as long as they wanted once they found one.

Another option would be to buy a regular permit, which allowed the holder to park for three hours at a time, but required the car to be moved three times a day. “

Only EDDC could come up with such a plan that will satisfy neither residents nor shoppers!

Keep up the good work Hugo!

Source: http://www.hugoswire.org.uk/news/ham-parking-spaces-go-residents

Scrutiny MUST be separated from Executive functions

because if it isn’t this sort of thing that can happen:

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=20870:ensure-scrutiny-separated-from-executive-post-rotherham-mps-tell-councils&catid=54&Itemid=22

‘Staying and improving’ : a Devon University shows the way of the future.

Could local authorities, such as EDDC, be inspired by what’s happening in Plymouth?  See http://carbonvisuals.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=f82d84d0259421d9d576de417&id=d97d6c0aca&e=a4b189be18