Category Archives: EDDC
Councils bleeding residents dry with residential parking permit prices
“UK councils have increased the cost of resident parking permits by an average of 51% since 2011, research has found.
An investigation by car insurance firm esure also revealed that more than half of local authorities have expanded the number of parking zones which require payment in the past two years.
The study revealed that the average cost of an annual permit is £64, but some motorists pay more than 10 times that amount. However the Local Government Association (LGA) insisted that councils are “on the side of motorists” and have to balance the requirements of residents and commuters.”
Cranbrook Development Plan, neighbourhood plans and fairy dust …
Owl rarely sleeps and decided accordingly to look at the DMC agenda for 31 May:
Click to access 310516-combined-eo-dmc-agenda.pdf
Owl was particularly interested to see what EDDC has planned for Cranbrook, and for its growth from its present 1250 houses to 8000 by 2031.
A few points came up on reading the “Cranbrook Development Plan: Issues and Options Report, May 2016”.
· Page 21 mentions the need to deliver confidence for stakeholders, which basically means developers. (DMC papers are open about Cranbrook needing to succeed if the Local Plan is not to fail; and at present EDDC is sitting on planning approaches from developers for 4260 houses. And yes, none of us can afford for either the town or the LP to fail – going back to the EDDC drawing board is not an option).
· Page 24 notes that “A number of Neighbourhood Plans are being prepared by the communities around Cranbrook. The District Council is working with these communities to ensure that they develop plans for their future that build on the opportunity presented by Cranbrook.”
No pressure, then – Owl would be very worried if Neighbourhood Plans had to be revised just to suit Cranbrook.
· Page 34: “People are excited by Cranbrook because they want to know what it means to be in a ‘Sustainable New Town’. Looking and feeling like any other new development is not enough”.
Really? The papers for DMC admit that 57% of Cranbrook residents don’t think they know enough about what is being planned! And, unfortunately, Cranbrook already looks and feels like every other similar development in the country. And as for sustainable – well, they had to drop the eco from eco-town, which says it all.
· Page 35: the section entitled ‘Vision’ confirms Owl’s long-held suspicion that Councillor Diviani, who has given his name to the Foreword, may have been overindulging in happy-making recreational substances – perhaps at the Deer Park hotel:
– “What is it like to live in a healthy, happy town? It is where you are able to socialise and know your neighbours, have ready access to a rewarding career on your doorstep, enjoy good health and feel safe … When you travel down your street to work you meet and chat with your neighbours along the way. Spaces along streets are welcoming, inviting you to pause on your journey …”
– … “It is where you live in complete peace and harmony with your fellow-man, in a Utopian dream and where where fairy-dust is sprinkled over the rooftops by flying unicorns and which also teach the world to sing in perfect harmony …”.
Actually Owl made that last bit up, but it could just as easily have been in this vacuous passage.
Incidentally, on page 23 it says that anyone can comment on the Plan. Many may wish to do so.
Ware Farm – back on the estate agent’s website
Although it was not found on Symonds and estate agent’s website after its brief appearance in one edition of the Midweek Herald, Ware Farm is now being given its appropriate exposure.
The farm, belonging to former disgraced District Councillor Graham Brown is advertised not only with details of its agricultural tie but also with the comment:
“Basic Payment Scheme
The vendors will endeavour to transfer the entitlements under the BPS, with the purchasers being
responsible for the agents costs involved.”
These are, of course, the Basic Payments received from the European Union for farming subsidies that ex-Councillor Brown neglected to mention when he applied to East Devon District Council to have his agricultural tie lifted saying that he had not practised farming on the land for many years. The council refused the application as “[it] was not satisfied as to the lawfulness at the date of application of the use specified in the application”.
see: Planning Application 14/2032/CPE
And just to be absolutely clear, the brochure says:
Planning
The house was built subject to an Agricultural Occupancy Condition. Planning Reference 00/
P0940/01309 which states that “The occupation of the dwelling shall be limited to a person solely or
mainly working, or last working, in the locality in agriculture as defined in Section 336 of the Town
and Country Planning Act 1990, or in forestry or a dependant of such a person residing with him or
her or a widow or widower of such a person”.
The Alternative East Devon calendar – July to September
The theme for this quarter is developmental creep …



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.”
“Sadiq Khan warns ‘greedy’ developers as he outlines housing plan”
So easy when you have the will. Alas, our councils and our Local Enterprise Partnership put developers well before local people and pay lip-service to affordable housing, mostly letting developers off-the-hook to build the most expensive homes in the most expensive (green) places.
“… At the start of his second week in office, the Labour mayor told the Guardian he wanted more than 50% of homes on some new housing developments to be affordable. He said that did not mean 80% of market rent, as affordable is defined by the government, but far lower social rents or “London living rent”, which is pitched at a third of average incomes.
Khan also announced he was considering making it a condition of planning permission that new homes were marketed locally for at least six months before they could go on sale to foreign investors.”
Sidbury Business Park plans – a test of sustainability
Possibly the most unsustainable development plans ever mooted for Sidford/Sidbury – and some very half hearted excuses about why it cannot be in Sidmouth (where, oddly, it was thought possible when Asda were interested).
“… Despite an eleventh-hour bid to remove it, the Sid Valley was allocated 12 acres of employment land north of the A3052.
Fords has its sights set on some 14 acres of agricultural land east of the A375, but the proposed ‘net development’ area is 9.3 acres. Its application argues that having no development of an employment site in Sidmouth over the Local Plan period is an ‘unacceptable conclusion’.
The company claims that developments that provide new employment opportunities are ‘well overdue’ in the area, as the disparity between wages and the cost of living is widening, particularly for young people.
According to the plans, the greenfield site is the ‘only available and deliverable’ option close to the urban edge of Sidmouth and there were no ‘realistic alternatives’.
This is despite the ‘adverse and direct, long-term effect of severe significance’ on the landscape character, according to the application. The impact will be mitigated by the planting of 3.7 acres of woodland, 400 metres of hedgerow and a ‘substantial buffer’ of trees around much of the site, say the plans.
The application states that the town centre cannot meet the demand because of the lack of parking and disabled access.
It also says it is unviable to create a new £1million access so the Alexandria Industrial Estate – home to Fords’ current HQ – can reach capacity as an employment site. The estate has been allocated Sidmouth’s remaining 1.2 acres of employment land in the Local Plan.
Fords’ application allocates 9,120 sqm for business use, 6,840 sqm for ‘general industrial’ use and 6,840 sqm for storage and distribution – a total area equivalent to three football pitches. …”
http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/business_park_plans_for_sidmouth_revealed_1_4533344
Let’s see where Councillor Stuart Hughes stands on this, having done the hokey-kokey so far.
“Britain’s seaside towns bouncing back”
But not because of high rise second homes or high-priced plastic entertainment – because of nostalgia for old-fashioned things such as piers and donkey rides mixed with modern attractions such as art galleries. THEY get Tracey Emin and Watne Hemmingway in to meld old and new – we get Moirai Capital Investments [very] Limited.
Typical EDDC – let the developers give them what they want rather than giving us what we want.
“Perhaps we have also arrived at a greater appreciation of the pleasures of the classic British break. A blend of familiarity, simplicity and beauty makes our coastal resorts comforting and exciting. The Proustian rush of candyfloss and donkey dung, yes, but also the thrill of experiencing towns reinventing themselves for the 21st century. Margate’s 1920s Dreamland amusement park, given a retro makeover by the Red Or Dead designer Wayne Hemingway, is one example – the schlock of the old meets the shock of the new. Think, too, of Banksy’s Dismaland in Weston-super-Mare, and Butlins marking its 80th anniversary by remodelling their Minehead family chalets in consultation with users of Mumsnet. Shakespeare would have a phrase for all this: once more on to the beach.”
Moulding new Chairman of Devon County Council
How ever will he find the time to regenerate Axminster?
And remember Stuart Hughes was sacked from an EDDC committee because he was deemed “too busy” with his EDDC and DCC jobs!
Still, he has got Cloakham Lawn sorted to his satisfaction.
Why is Exeter not represented at the LEP yet East Devon is?
As long ago as March 2011 Exeter City Council CEO Karime Hassan knew exactly how our LEP would be constituted and who would be on it and was making this complaint and prediction:
“The Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership, which is currently awaiting government approval, has come under fire at an Insider panel debate for failing to properly represent Exeter and its economy in its proposed form.
Speaking at an Insider breakfast debate held the University of Exeter’s Reed Hall, Exeter City Council’s economic development director Karim Hassan pointed out that his council does not have a seat at the table of the Heart of the South West LEP. “I don’t see how Exeter and its growth point can therefore get the messages out there to government that can make a difference,” said Hassan.
He went on: “LEPs need to work effectively, but the prospects aren’t necessarily good. The Heart of the South West LEP already looks like it holds tensions in it, because the needs of cities like Exeter are different from the needs of the rural market towns of Devon and Somerset. It is hard to tell one story to central government because there are so many different localised agendas built into an LEP like this.”
Hassan also said the South West had to work at getting better at arguing its case for a slice of the national cake. “We have lost out many times to others elsewhere, who have been better organised. But the region has not always worked well together, with too much internal competition and rivalry, so this new LEP structure is a real challenge. We have already seen the competitive element surface, with Cornwall’s decision to go it alone with its LEP.”
Others on the panel also saw gaps in the proposed LEP arrangements. Ben de Cruz, senior partner at accountancy firm Haines Watts, said: “It certainly looks like the Heart of the South West LEP proposal will be accepted by the government, but the biggest problem with LEPs is that the funding they will have is still unclear.”
And de Cruz said it would be harder to make strategic decisions in the basis of more local interests. “The South West RDA, for all its shortcomings, was able to look at the bigger picture when assessing projects or funding proposals. Once things are divided up – into Cornwall, Devon and Somerset combined, the West of England, and so on – the question is how wider issues will be tackled. It feels like co-operation will be required, but no-one knows quite how that will work.”
Hassan added that he wanted LEPs to work well but was unsure whether this would happen in practice. “Whitehall needs intelligence, and the LEPs could be that vehicle,” he said. “But equally I’m fearful that the LEP won’t deliver the information it needs to.
“A LEP should be able to prioritise investments, but it will need to work in a clear, transparent way. Potentially it could make a big difference. But first we need to grab the opportunity – partly by getting Exeter fully involved in the planning for the Heart of the South West LEP.”
https://www.insidermedia.com/insider/southwest/50007-
Now, it could be argued that Cranbrook (officially in East Devon and just getting off the ground) was the dealmaker – but, in fact, the town is much closer to Exeter than most other East Devon towns.
Why was there not a seat for Exeter as the county town?
Seaton Town Council on the warpath as EDDC attempts to slip no affordables on the Tesco (Bovis) site under the radar
As expected: EDDC will build more than the 17,100 houses in the Local Plan
Many, many more ….
“EDDC says a grand total of 18,391 net new dwellings are now projected to have been completed over the full plan period – well above the minimum figure for housing need.”
http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/east_devon_on_track_to_deliver_surplus_of_new_homes_1_4529154
So, if it is above the figure for housing need – who needs the extra ones?
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.
Cabinet v. Committee system of district council governance
For the person who just asked what the difference is between Cabinet governance and Committee governance at district council level, this comment has been bumped to a post:
“Both the cabinet system and the committee system have committees, which ultimately report to and are approved by the full council, but in the cabinet system a small subset of the full council makes the policies and decisions without the remainder of the full council having a vote or any real say. According to Wikipedia, in a Cabinet system the full council is responsible only for agreeing the council’s constitution, electing the Leader, giving them a budget, and adopting the Local Plan – the Cabinet is responsible for all other policies and decisions, and full council can only raise issues or in extremis hold a Vote of No Confidence.
They key difference is that in the committee system, committees are represented by different parties in proportion to the membership of the full council, but a Cabinet is appointed by the Leader / Mayor and is typically formed only or mostly by members of the majority party and minority parties have far less influence.
Prior to the Local Government Act of 2000, the committee model was the only one that existed. The LGA abolished the committee system (which was seen as inefficient) and introduced 3 alternative models:
Leader and Cabinet – where the Leader is elected by the members of the council who then appoints a cabinet of their choosing
Elected Mayor and Cabinet – where the Mayor is elected separately by the electorate and they then appoint a cabinet of their choosing
Elected Mayor and Council Manager – where the Mayor is elected by the electorate but there is no cabinet. This option only had referendums for adoption in two councils of which only one was selected – in 2007 the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act abolished this option.
The Localism Act 2011 reintroduced the Committee system – it should be noted that EDDC Leader Paul Diviani was wrong when he said at Annual Council in May 2015 that they were not allowed to return to the Committee system (but then he would say that as the Cabinet system gives him a great deal of power).”
See Wikipedia: Executive arrangements ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_arrangement)”
“The UK needs to rethink its approach to the upholding of standards in public life”
“Is it time to re-think the UK’s public integrity strategy? Alan Doig argues that a new approach should be considered to take over from successive iterations of an increasingly ineffectual Committee on Standards in Public Life”:
http://www.democraticaudit.com/?p=21687
“Pollution risk from over 1,000 old UK landfill sites due to coastal erosion”
This particularly affects Exmouth where, at the Imperial Rec ground, plastic bags and other landfill rubbish leaches into the Estuary. And where toxic chemicals could wash down to the pish new seafront development.
Wasn’t there money set aside for remediation? Anyone in Exmouth have an up-to-date assessment of the situation?
“Over 1,000 old landfill sites on the coasts of England and Wales are at increasing risk of being breached by erosion, according to a new study, posing a serious pollution danger to wildlife and bathing waters.
Landfill sites before the mid-1990s had few or no restrictions about what rubbish could be dumped in them and little is known about what they contain. But many were on the coast and some were used to raise land levels and even as part of flood defences. Climate change is bringing higher sea levels and stronger storms, putting the old dumps at greater risk of being broken up.
The new study, the first of its kind and funded by the Environment Agency, assessed two landfill sites in Essex to find out the level of toxic pollutants in the waste they contained. It found large quantities of harmful metals, such as lead, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which are carcinogenic.
“Our findings show, that in the event of erosion, there would be serious environmental consequences due to the level of contaminants,” said Kate Spencer, an environmental geochemist at Queen Mary University of London, who led the research. “You would be likely to see significant effects on local animals and plants, from mortality to reductions in fertility. There would also be consequences for bathing waters.”
There are 1,264 historic landfill sites in the coastal zone where the risk of flooding has been previously estimated at 1-in-200 years. Of these, 537 are in or near bathing water catchment areas and 406 are in or near sites of special scientific interest.
With the predicted increase in sea level, extreme weather events and coastal erosion due to climate change, a national survey of the old landfill sites is urgently needed, said Spencer: “Nationally we need a much better inventory of sites that have eroded or are at risk of eroding – that is the priority.”
The scientists dug pits to investigate the contents of two sites in Essex: Leigh Marshes landfill, used from 1955-1967, and Hadleigh Marsh Landfill, used from 1980-1987. In the latter, which is used as a flood embankment, the researchers estimated there is 9,250kg of lead, 985kg of PAHs and 125kg of cadmium, among the 77,000 tonnes of waste.
The analysis found that all of the Leigh Marsh waste samples and 63% of the Hadleigh Marsh samples contained contaminants at concentrations that are above marine sediment quality guidelines, meaning that damaging effects to wildlife could be expected if the waste were to erode into surrounding wetlands.
Spencer warned that conclusions about other sites are hard to draw from these examples: “Many landfills were in use when there were no rules about what went in [so] every landfill is essentially unique and some will prove more risky than others.”
Flooding by the sea would expose the dumps to salt water, which the research found was much more effective at leaching pollutants from the rubbish than freshwater. But the team expect this would be less damaging than the landfills being broken up by erosion as the pollutants would be filtered by sediments.
The assessment of the risk posed by old coastal landfills is made more urgent by the fact that some parts of the coast, including Hadleigh Marsh, are being considered for “managed retreat”. This is where maintaining defences is not seen as cost-effective and the sea is allowed to flood an area, as happened at Medmerry in West Sussex in 2014.
The study suggests relocating the waste would be ideal but the costs of this would be so enormous that managed retreat is unlikely where historic landfills are present.
An Environment Agency spokeswoman said: “The risk of these landfills being affected by coastal erosion and rising sea levels remains low for the foreseeable future. This research will ensure ourselves, and local authorities, continue to have robust shoreline plans in place to help tackle any potential risks from erosion in future years.”
Essex County Council is responsible for the management and monitoring of the two sites analysed in the new study. Councillor Mick Page said: “The council and partners have developed the Essex and Suffolk Shoreline Management Plan and, subject to adequate finances being secured, it is the intention to establish survey stations and undertake regular monitoring in the future to inform future management decisions.”
Some old landfills have already been breached by erosion, such as one at East Tilbury, which attracted amateur collectors. “They were rummaging through this 75-year-old waste,” said Spencer. “I exercise caution. I wouldn’t pick the waste up or handle it.”
Beer: officers recommend refusal of Clinton Devon estates development in AONB
So, Councillor Pook and Clinton Devon Estates v. a very persuasive argument from Officers then … which way will the DMC fall?
“The proposals will go before East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) development management committee on Tuesday. Planning officers have told members that the development could be ‘harmful’ to the village’s landscape, due to its location in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). They also say the proposal does not meet EDDC’s criteria for ‘exception’ sites outside the built-up area boundaries of villages, as it is too large. In a report to the committee, an officer said: “Given the harm to the character of Beer and harm to the AONB from further development, and given the difficulty in finding suitable development sites to meet the housing need, consideration has to be given to whether the affordable housing needs for Beer need to be met elsewhere, for example within Seaton, that is in close proximity.”
The application has received backing from the parish council and Beer’s district council ward member to help secure ‘affordable’ housing for people with a connection to Beer. Councillor Geoff Pook, ward member for Beer and Branscombe, said: “The one common issue has been the need to secure affordable housing for people with connections to Beer. More local children going to the school, less than 100 metres from the houses, will eliminate the ‘school drop-off’ car use required for children outside the local area. Beer has a good community spirit and the increase in full-time residents contributing to the shops, clubs, and general village life can only be positive.”
http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/proposals_for_30_homes_recommended_for_refusal_1_4525183
The gutter gets more clogged …
“Constitution-minded critics say that each year 12,000 pages of legislative detail are now introduced in ways that avoid scrutiny by either chamber of parliament.”
… and possibly about the same amount at East Devon District Council!
Exmouth: town council tells EDDC to listen to residents
Good luck with that!
“Exmouth town council has urged the East Devon district authority to listen to residents’ views on major plans to redevelop Queens Drive.
The call came after Tuesday’s unanimous town council decision to recommend East Devon District Council (EDDC) carry out an additional independent consultation as the £18m project reaches its third phase.
The consultation would be in addition to what is already required of the applicant and EDDC.
The decision was based on the wishes of residents who went to the polls last month.
94.9 per cent voted that, before any plans are approved, they want to see the plans for themselves.”
http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Listen-people-Exmouth-seafront-plans-urge-town/story-29245435-detail/story.html