Newton Poppleford: 26 home development refused by Inspector

” … In his decision report, published on December 23, planning inspector Jon Hockley said the appeal centred on whether the site was suitable for housing. He said positive aspects of the scheme were that it would generate economic and social benefits through the construction of the new houses.

And the proposed 10 ‘affordable’ homes, Mr Hockley said, would be a real benefit to the village, which suffers from a lack of such properties.

But he said national planning policy is clear that major developments can only take place on AONB land in ‘exceptional circumstances’ and where it can be demonstrated that they are in the public interest.

In conclusion, the inspector said: “I do not consider that the benefits of the scheme would reach the high bar required to constitute exceptional circumstances.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/26_home_scheme_on_aonb_land_is_refused_by_planning_inspector_1_4379784

Can we get it through to the Development Management Committee that AONB is precious … really precious … and even Planning Inspectors understand that.

Masterplans: EDDC’s new Achilles heels

Exmouth, Axminster and Cranbrook – all needing new Masterplans in our new Local Plan, according to the Inspector. And Sidmouth needing one at its eastern end according to EDDC.

Given the omnishambles EDDC has made of the new local plan – at least 8 years in the making, one false start wasting more than two years, and two rejected drafts plus the interference of the East Devon Business Forum – what are the odds of our current councillors and officers getting these new Masterplans right?

Below are the challenges they face. It will take more than crossed fingers to see these through … especially as, with so many of them, the councillors and officers are at odds with the electorate about what is acceptable and appropriate.

A new commuter town, a rural town massively expanding , and two seaside towns fighting to retain their identities … and all with AONBs, important wildlife sites and the World Heritage Coast to accommodate, not to mention thousands of homes and industries and their infrastructure to create under an “asset sweating” ruling party.

CRANBROOK

On Cranbrook, Diviani says this in a press release today:

“The Cranbrook masterplan, which is currently in production, will put some meat on the bones of these policies and will provide a strong vision and guide to future development at Cranbrook to ensure that it becomes an attractive, vibrant and sustainable modern town.”

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/inspector_recognises_importance_of_further_development_at_cranbrook_1_4385501

Remember that the first plan of Cranbrook neglected to plan for appropriate health facilities, it did not include enough shops, not enough green spaces and a football pitch that could not be used in the evenings because it was no-one’s responsibility to pay for or maintain floodlights and where roads are still unadopted.

The highly critical DCC report is here:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/09/14/what-mainstream-media-isnt-telling-you-about-that-dcc-cranbrook-report/

AXMINSTER

On Axminster, he says:

“a North South relief road for the town will be delivered as part of this development linking Chard Road (A358) to Lyme Road (B261). A Masterplan will be required for this site and development will be subject to improved public transport provision.”

and

Prior to the granting of planning permission for any major residential schemes at Axminster, the Council will agree, with the Environment Agency and Natural England, a timetable for the review or development of a Nutrient Management Plan for the River Axe.

This plan will set out detailed actions that allow for new growth at Axminster to progress with adequate mitigation in place to negate the additional phosphate load that would be caused. The Nutrient Management Plan will work in collaboration with the diffuse Water Pollution Plan, and will seek to restore water quality for the River Axe SAC to enable it to meet its conservation objectives within a specified timescale, and in accordance with commitments to European Directives.

Depending on the findings of the plan, growth will only proceed in accordance with the mitigation delivery set out within that plan. Growth at Axminster will also be informed by the current status of the relevant discharge consents for waste water treatment works, and any upgrade required to support new growth will be the subject of Habitats Regulations Assessment prior to planning permission being given. The determination of such development applications will be informed by Habitat Regulations Assessment that takes account of the consent requirements.”

EXMOUTH

Oh, where to start with Exmouth. Suffice to say the Inspector says:

The Exmouth Seafront is recognised as a key asset for the town and the Council is a key driver in its further enhancement. To this end, along with Devon County Council, the District Council appointed LDA Design to undertake a town centre and waterfront design study to identify opportunities for renewal and improvement in the physical, economic and environmental quality of the town.

The Final LDA study5 and recommendations and conclusion have been endorsed by the Council. The implementation of some projects in the Masterplan is underway but the Council also recognises that it is time to re-evaluate the Masterplan. The future intention is that a new or refreshed Masterplan will be produced with this becoming a Supplementary planning Document (SPD).”

Hard to see how this can be worked into what seems now to be a fait accompli with the developer (though the Inspector fired several warning shots about protecting the environs of the Exe Estuary.

SIDMOUTH

Mr Thickett says:

Land at Port Royal Site – Land for residential use is allocated for 30 homes (site ED03 (this site will incorporate mixed use redevelopment to include housing and community, commercial, recreation and other uses).”

Sidford Fields employment land: who knew what and when?

Leading up to the district council elections Councillor Stuart Hughes and (now ex) Councillor Troman made much of what they considered a successful effort to remove the Sidford Fields employment site from the Local Plan.

It was covered initially on this blog and here:

25 March 2015:

The Development Management Committee (DMC) rejected the amendment, but agreed to send a note to the Inspector advising him of the of the unprecedented number of representations that had been received about the Sidford Fields site, and pointing out the lack of need and environmental concerns, particularly flooding and traffic issues.

DMC refuses to amend Local Plan proposal for Sidford.

One day later, we read this:

“By a narrow margin of, we are told, 18 votes to 13, District Councillors at today’s Extra Ordinary meeting at Knowle, have decided to drop the controversial proposal for a 12 acre employment site at Sidford Fields.
Congratulations and thanks to Sidmouth Councillors Stuart Hughes and Graham Troman for proposing the amendment. As a recent commentator on this blog noted recently, Cllr Troman had already argued strongly at the Development Management Committee, that the Sidford site was not justified by the council’s own formulae.”

Proposed Sidford Business Park removed from Local Plan

However, CEO Mark Williams made his position clear here:

“The inspector has already heard everything we have said and is yet to tell us what his view is on that part of the application. He may recommend that this site is not suitable and should be removed. It’s his decision now, not yours.

“It’s your funeral if you want to take it out.”

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/04/11/sidford-business-park/

Hughes made this comment in his Devon Conservatives blog for 16 April 2015:

“There appears to be some excellent news for Sidmouth and Sidford in that the Sidford Business/Retail Park that Graham Troman and I were successful in getting removed from the draft plan on the 26th March isn’t included …”

http://www.devonconservative.org.uk/hughesreport.htm

On this basis – choosing to ignore the warning of Williams – people might have been prepared to vote for them on these comments alone.

QUESTIONS:

Did EDDC officers send (on behalf of the Development Management Committee) the extra information about the Sidford Fields site, pointing out the lack of need and environmental concerns, and flooding and traffic issue at the relevant time or at all?

As this is cited as a “main modification” can it still be challenged by EDDC before adoption of the Local Plan?

What would have been the outcome of elections if electors had realised that it was extremely unlikely that the site would actually be withdrawn, with or without additional information, in spite of the strong assurances put out by councillors Hughes and Troman?

Another push-me pull-you situation: Sidford Fields Industrial Estate

So, at the last minute, EDDC pulled the Sidford industrial estate from its local plan. The inspector refused to take it out saying that no alternative site was available in Sidmouth.

Yet does anyone recall that not long ago, the Alexandria estate was being mooted for an Asda with many solutions being mooted for access problems to make it viable. Much more viable than heavy industrial use of the minor Sidford/Sidbury road.

Oh, how the world changes when pound signs appear in people’s eyes!

Sidmouth Herald publishes Diviani’s attempt to explain the unexplainable.

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/inspector_includes_sidford_business_park_in_local_plan_1_4384071

Sites at Clyst St Mary and Hawkchurch put forward by landowners for Gypsies and Travellers

No declamatory press release was put out about this bit of information, on an EDDC link last updated on 13 January 2016:

Consultation on the following documents was carried out between 6 November and 5 pm on 4 January 2016.

Call for sites – landowners are invited to submit land which they feel is suitable for Gypsy and Traveller use using this Gypsy and Traveller site assessment form.
“Methodology for Site Assessment which will be used to assess the suitability of sites submitted in response to the call for sites.
Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Assessment Scoping Report, which is set out in the form of a letter asking what should be considered in the SA/SEA of the Gypsy and Traveller Plan.
The Call for Sites generated some interest and the following sites were submitted for consideration:”

Call for Sites Pro forma 1 (Hawkchurch – Hawkwell Mobile Home Park, 3 acres)

Click to access c-lee-site-proforma.pdf

Call for Sites Pro forma 2 (3 Greendale Lane (part) Clyst St Mary, one-third of its 2 acres)

Click to access t-smith-site-proforma.pdf

as linked to:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/emerging-plans-and-policies/gypsy-and-travellers/stage-2-call-for-sites-draft-methodology-and-sasea-scoping-report-consultation/#article-content

Newton Poppleford King Alfred’s Way development recommended for approval

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/approval_recommended_for_40_homes_proposal_1_4379446

Cloudy Transparency

10 EDDC meetings listed in this week’s Knowledge:

1 cancelled ( but would have been in private)
2 not needed (Licensing meetings, no licenses up for discussion)
3 meetings in public: Scrutiny, Housing Review and Development Management Committee, where it would be hard to justify secrecy

4 meetings in private:

Asset Management( in spite of assurances that this could be public with only commercially sensitive matters in Part B)

Recycling and Refuse Board Partnership

Community Fund Panel (ANOTHER group with no minutes and no agendas, save a passing reference in January 2015

Transparency gets more opaque.

10 EDDC meetings listed in this week’s Knowledge:

1 cancelled ( but would have been in private)
2 not needed (Licensing meetings, no licenses up for discussion)
3 meetings in public: Scrutiny, Housing Review and Development Management Committee, where it would be hard to justify secrecy

4 meetings in private:

1. Asset Management( in spite of assurances that this could be public with only commercially sensitive matters in Part B)

2. Recycling and Refuse Board Partnership

3. “Community Fund Panel” – which appears to meet in secret to decide whaT to spend money on. As its funds totals only about £22,500 per year it is hard to see why its deliberations are in private. Wouldn’t you want to know why your parish didn’t get funds yet another one did?

4. An intriguing meeting on “Work and Issues facing the Major Project Team in Development Management” ( another secret group with no agendas or minutes? Anyone seen anything about this group and its remit?). Presumably called to justify the hundreds of thousands of pounds being spent on more staff in Development Management. But we will never know!

Click to access the-knowledge-8-january-2016-issue-33.pdf

Sell everything before crash, says bank economist

“In a note to its clients the bank said: “Sell everything except high quality bonds. This is about return of capital, not return on capital. In a crowded hall, exit doors are small.” It said the current situation was reminiscent of 2008, when the collapse of the Lehman Brothers investment bank led to the global financial crisis. This time China could be the crisis point.”

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jan/12/sell-everything-ahead-of-stock-market-crash-say-rbs-economists

And still EDDC plumps for high growth and massive housing development.

Clyst St Mary Update

From the Save Clyst St Mary campaign

Firstly, on behalf of the Save Clyst St. Mary campaign, I would like to wish everyone a ‘Happy New Year’ and thank you all for your invaluable support during 2015. Believe it or not, it has been twelve month since we first got together and formed the group. During the year we have had many ups and downs, but so the balance has been in favour of the former; let’s hope that remains the case for 2016!

Local Plan

You may have read that the Local Plan (covering all of East Devon) has been inspected in great detail by HM Planning Inspectorate and is now deemed to be sound. It will now move to the Adoption phase which should protect the village from the onslaught of large scale, inappropriate planning applications on the extremities of of our village.

Neighbourhood Plan

The Neighbour Plan which will protect the village itself is now in its final pre-submission Consultation phase (16 Jan – 1 March 2016). A copy of the draft Plan can be found on the Bishops Clyst Planning website at:

http://www.planning.bishopsclyst.co.uk

or you can go along to one of the open sessions as listed below:

– Clyst St Mary Village Hall Saturday 6th February 1pm-6pm
– Sowton Village Hall Saturday 13th February 1pm-6pm
– Cat and Fiddle Inn Wednesday 10th February 10am – 1pm

Fibre-optic broadband

Our village has taken all of the capacity that has been provided so there are no fibre lines free at the moment. I have been in contact with Openreach and they are in the process of arranging for a second green cabinet to provide an additional one hundred lines. Apparently this is not as straightforward as it may seem, so there will be some delay before they are able to offer fibre-optic broadband to residents requesting an upgrade.

Flooding at Winslade Manor

Thank you to all the residents who got in contact to tell us about the water cascading out of the grounds of Winslade Manor (Friends Provident). We alerted the Authorities and action was taken by both the Police and the Environment Agency to resolve the problem. We have since submitted photographic evidence to East Devon District Council as obviously we would not want the proposed new houses to flood!

The following Planning applications have all either been withdrawn or refused:

Cat and Fiddle Retirement Village/ Cat and Fiddle housing development/ application by Plymouth Brethren for 40 houses/ Solar Farm off Oil Mill Lane

6 Applications for 296 houses on Friends Provident Site:
This continues to be assessed by East Devon District Council and we still await the outcome. We have worked hard with Charlie Hopkins to ensure we present as strong a case as possible.

Thank you, once again, for your continued support (and patience when it comes to signing letters); we desperately hope that 2016 is just as successful. Please remember: as an individual, it really difficult to win a battle, but as a united community we can be a powerful force for good.

Beware developer promises in East Devon: Donald Trump shows us why

Here in East Devon we have had our fair share of promises from developers – particularly promises about employment. The ” promised” jobs get built into ” economic growth” forecasts that fuel housing need predictions and then suddenly fail to materialise – though the housing figures never get adjusted to reflect the cuts.

Here we highlighted the difference between promised jobs and real jobs at the Exmouth Premier Inn – 50 promised, 25 delivered:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2014/12/10/jobs-at-premier-inn-exmouth-think-of-a-number-then-half-it/

And here with the relocation of the DPD depot from Sowton to Skypark 147 promised down to 35 delivered:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/12/07/skypark-jobs-now-you-see-them-now-you-dont/

and we note the promise that Lidl “will create 500 jobs” at the recently-sold Sainsbury’s depot site:

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Business-leaders-welcome-Lidl-s-plans-create-500/story-28474215-detail/story.html

A timely reminder not to believe everything you hear comes from no less than US presidential candidate Donald Trump, who promised to inject around £1 billion pounds and 6,000 jobs into the Scottish economy and now threatens to cancel most of that if the UK government causes any trouble after recent racial comments.

Best estimates are that he has so far spent around £30 million and created less than 100 jobs:

“…Councillor Martin Ford was chairman of Aberdeenshire Council’s infrastructure services committee when Trump’s planning application was received in 2006.

After using his casting vote to go against the plans, he was later sacked from the position.

Cllr Ford said: “Mr Trump promised everything under the sun and they were all ludicrous, ridiculous exaggerations which nobody should have believed. He said it was a £1billion investment but it was about £13million in 2011 – including buying the estate.

By the end of 2013, it had gone up to about £25million and, since then, he’s built a clubhouse and a few sheds. It’s pretty safe to say he’s spent under £30million.

“From the point where the plan was first announced, the amount of money and the number of jobs just kept getting bigger.

“Fewer than 100 jobs is a tiny fraction of what was pledged and promised. It is important to note that Trump has not built a golf resort – he’s built a golf course and clubhouse.

“He was going to build a 450-bed five-star hotel. He has instead converted Menie House into a small hotel.

“So you can see the pattern here – £1billion goes down to £30million, 6000 jobs go down to 95 and a 450-bed hotel which has something like six rooms.”

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/donald-trumps-700m-blowhard-economist-7150504

Will our little corner of Devon buck world trends?

Both the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have predicted that 2016 and beyond are expected to see low growth in the world economy:

http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/global-economic-prospects

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/30/imf-chief-christine-lagarde-disappointing-global-growth-economy-2016

Yet EDDC STILL promotes ” high growth” as its template for our district.

Why?

What does Diviani know that the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund don’t know?

Hats off to EDDC!

Yes, Owl does occasionally compliment EDDC!

Today, it is for the well-reasoned and well-explained response to proposed changes to the National Planning Policy Framework here (pages 17-30):

Click to access 190116-combined-dmc-agenda-compressed.pdf

Its responses on so-called starter homes and the unrealities of them being affordable, land supply in the case of under delivery where developers drag their heels, and the use of brownfield sites which are not always the most appropriate sites to bring forward is well thought out.

If only EDDC practised what it preaches!

An enforcable Local Plan “soon”: most definitely not there yet

Diviani’s press release says:

“… I can, however, say that the report concludes that both the Local Plan and CIL charging schedule are sound and can move to adoption subject to main modifications. …”

So, what are “main modifications”?

Here is an explanation:

“What if modifications are required to make a submitted Local Plan sound?”

The Inspector can recommend ‘main modifications’ (changes that materially affect the policies) to make a submitted Local Plan sound and legally compliant only if asked to do so by the local planning authority under section 20(7C) of the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act as amended). The council can also put forward ’additional modifications’ of its own to deal with more minor matters.

Where the changes recommended by the Inspector would be so extensive as to require a virtual re-writing of the Local Plan, the Inspector is likely to suggest that the local planning authority withdraws the plan. Exceptionally, under section 21 (9) (a) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the Secretary of State has the power to direct a local planning authority to withdraw its submitted plan.

Inspectors will require the local planning authority to consult upon all proposed main modifications. Depending on the scope of the modifications, further Sustainability Appraisal work may also be required. The Inspector’s report on the plan will only be issued once the local planning authority has consulted on the main modifications and the Inspector has had the opportunity to consider the representations on these.

Whether to advertise any ‘additional modifications’ is at the discretion of the local planning authority, but they may wish to do so at the same time as consulting on the main modifications..”

http://planningguidance.communities.gov.uk/blog/guidance/local-plans/publication-and-examination-of-the-draft-plan/

So, it seems these main modifications will have to be put to consultation – again and possibly Sustainability Appraisals will need to be prepared. And then the Inspector has to consider responses – again.

Will we see an adopted Local Plan “soon” as Diviani intimates? Well, it all depends on your definition of “soon”!

And, in the meantime, our developers will continue to run amok.

Does Councillor Stuart Hughes understand what “confidential” means?

Leader Diviani made it clear that the draft Local Plan is confidential until EDDC has formally responded to Mr Thickett and until facts have been checked and he disclosed nothing except that it allows for 17,000 new homes.

So, how come in today’s Sidmouth Herald (page 5), Councillor Stuart Hughes announced that Mr Thickett has decided that employment land at Sidford will not be included?

Will Councillor Hughes be reported to the Monitoring Officer?

If it had been an Independent Councillor making the announcement in the press, would he or she have engendered the ire of Councillor Twiss?

Sidmouth: a chance for EDDC to get regeneration right for once

Letter published in Sidmouth Herald:

Sir,

The seemingly heavy-handed ‘regeneration’ of nearby coastal towns does not bode well for Sidmouth. The sell-off in Seaton has left it dominated by Tesco, and it appears to me a loose agreement to build affordable homes has been broken since the supermarket giant fell on hard times.

I believe things are not looking good, either, in Exmouth. The plans presented to the public there, for a seafront leisure complex, bear little resemblance to the residential development now proposed. Long-established small businesses have apparently been swept aside.

This week, EDDC’s regeneration team have turned their attention to Sidmouth, with an agreement to do a £10,000 ‘scoping report’ for the eastern end of the town, with the Town Council contributing £2,000. This arrangement suggests who is likely to have the most say.

Fortunately, much of the ‘scoping’ has already been done, voluntarily, by local organisations. In 2006, the Vision Group for Sidmouth presented EDDC with a detailed study on behalf of the town’s “residents, visitors and businesses”. More recently, the Save the Drill Hall campaign produced
architect’s plans of how that building could be transformed.

And right now, in a new and timely initiative, an international architecture competition has been launched, based on what local people want, — and don’t want. The
simple questions in phase 1-public consultation , can be completed at this link:

http://www.easterntownpartnership.com

Find out more at a free public Information drop-in session, this Saturday , 9 Jan, 10-12noon, Leigh Browne Room, Old Meeting Dissenters’ Chapel (opposite High Street post office).

Best of all, the new Sidmouth Town Council are beginning work on a Neighbourhood Plan to establish what the town needs. If EDDC looks and listens, it could get the ‘regeneration’ right for THIS coastal town.

Jackie Green
Sidmouth

All you need is trust, says Diviani

Chairing Wednesday’s Cabinet meeting at Knowle (6 Jan 2016), the Leader was in ebullient mood, announcing that the Local Plan is likely to be adopted quite soon, and that Lidl is now taking what was to be Sainsbury distribution site on the so-called ‘intermodal hub’, creating 450 new jobs. It was not specified how many of the jobs would be well-paid.

He was still upbeat, when Cllr Ian Thomas (Con) emphasised the financial risks threatening EDDC’s Budget, and that in the coming years, the relationship with the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) would be crucial.

Cllr Phil Twiss agreed that you “can’t underestimate the impact of Devolution,” as he’d learned from the counterparts from northern powerhouse councils, whom he’d recently met at Warwick Business School. “There was much uncertainty”, he said.

The leader had the solution. “The most important thing you need is trust” he told his Cabinet colleagues – adding jocularly, “We don’t trust the government, and they don’t trust us”.

Local Plan declared sound-ish, sort of … 17,100 homes to be shoe-horned in to the district

Well, it’s sort-of sound except that it isn’t yet being published because EDDC has to “fact check” it and/or respond to it ….. or simply agree with it.  It appears that Mr Thickett, aware of EDDC’s foot-dragging in this area has said that he wants their response within two weeks.  The press release also mentions “main modifications.

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/eddc_s_local_plan_finally_judged_sound_by_inspector_1_4370685

So, don’t hold your breath – many a slip twixt cup and lip and every delay means that developers can whap in more pre-agreement planning applications …..

And EDDC will, of course, have to find time to accept it in their very busy meetings schedule, which might also take some time.

 

EDDC and DCC raise council taxes

EDDC by 1.9%
DCC by 2.00%

and both slash services as government help dries up and more services are privatised. 2% is maximum allowed by central government before triggering a referendum.

Here is what Claire Wright thinks about the DCC rise:

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/devon_county_council_hikes_council_tax_by_two_per_cent_as_govt_slashes_budg

EDDC budget: Financial black holes and how to fall into them

A correspondent writes (views expressed below are the personal views of the correspondent).

“At Cabinet on Wednesday this week (agenda here), and at joint Scrutiny & Overview Committee on Wednesday of next week (agenda here), EDDC will be discussing the proposed budget for the next financial year.

Comments:

a. EDDC has already had cuts in central government revenue of £2.3m between 2011 and 2014 and a further cut of £0.8m last year. They are facing a further cut of £0.8m this year – so a total reduction of almost £4m from c. £7.5m to £3.6m between 2011 and 2016. The government is phasing out the Revenue Support Grant by 2020, so there are c. £3.6m of cuts to come in the next 3 years. To put this in perspective, the total revenue income / expenditure is c.£15m so this is a very significant proportion.

b. The government has stated that in the future it expects councils to be funded from business rates, but it has also given business rates for the Enterprise Zones (where the majority of business growth is expected) to the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) for 25 years, presumably as a means of them raising capital loans to fund development of the Enterprise Zones in East Devon these are the East Devon Growth Point and Cranbrook). So growth in Business Rates is unlikely to replace the Revenue Support Grants.

c. EDDC is planning to increase Council tax for the first time in 6 years by 1.99% (para 2.14). No explanation is provided about why this particular level has been chosen, though it appears to have been decided upon as being as close to the 2% as they can get without triggering a referendum.

d. Despite increasing council tax, they state that the New Home Bonus will be used to cover a further revenue shortfall this year (see paragraph 2.9 in the budget report in the agenda papers) in addition to the same £1.5m needed again to make up last year’s revenue shortfall.

e. EDDC plans to run the Capital Reserve fund to zero (para 4.7) in order to provide the bridging funds required to build the Honiton Offices before receiving moneys from the sale of the Knowle. This does not seem to me to be financially prudent – and the figures are further risked by unknown capital projects and the reduction in New Homes Bonus.

f. As usual, it is essential to review these finance documents to see what is missing. Whilst I do not have either the time or the knowledge to do this, I have spotted that the Sidmouth Beach Management funding is disappearing from the budget!!!

The most worrying thing is the increasing reliance on capital receipts to plug increasing shortfalls in revenue income. This does not seem financially prudent, for several reasons:

  1. Revenue shortfalls continue every year and are cumulative, whilst capital receipts are one-off and not guaranteed in the future.
  2. The NHB is the current means of plugging this gap, but is under review by government and likely to fall substantially per home. It also seems fairly likely that EDDC will never get close to the number of homes they have committed to deliver in the draft Local Plan – so EDDC won’t make the money they expect either.
  3. On the other hand, EDDC will definitely be facing further cuts in central government funding of £3.6m per year – which is a lot more revenue shortfall to plug using a reducing NHB stream.

This is NOT a sound means of financing its ongoing costs. Put simply the council cannot afford to continue balancing its books by covering revenue shortfalls from capital receipts which are likely to decline substantially over the next few years.

This is the legacy of keeping Council Tax the same for 5 years running. The Tory leadership at EDDC did this because they accepted the Council Tax Freeze Grant, offered to councils (like EDDC) who kept their council tax the same year after year. The only problem with this is that a Council Tax increase (however unpopular) is a cumulative income increase (i.e. an increase this year creates additional revenue in each following year too) whilst the grant is a one-off payment. You would not decide that you could afford electricity by paying using one-off income like premium bond wins, so EDDC’s decisions appear to be both short-term and short-sighted.

Indeed, it appears that EDDC is addicted to one-off fixes from central government to the long-term detriment of the council’s finances.

However, continuing use of one-off capital payments to plug a widening gap in revenue is not a good direction for the future. If these capital receipts ever stop coming in, EDDC’s finances will be in real trouble.

With a current shortfall of £1.85m and a further reduction in government funding of £3.6m, EDDC will need to find £5.45m per year by 2020 (which is approximately 35%of expenditure) over the next 4 years – and it is difficult to see how EDDC can come even close to achieving these through efficiency savings or revenue increases or even both. EDDC’s plan appears to be too use the Transformation Strategy (pages 115-132) to fill this gap in funding through to 2020 – and whilst this does included a lot of small aspirational efficiency improvements, they all appear to be relatively minor in nature, with the bulk of the funding gap presumably covered by selling off assets (which again provide only one-off income boosts and failing to address the real issue of revenue shortfall). Of course, the detail of EDDC’s plans are deemed confidential – but is it any wonder that EDDC works so hard to keep the Agendas and Reports of its Asset Management Committee secret when it needs to sell assets in such quantities to plug this huge gap in its finances?

Eventually (presumably in 2020), there will be a £5m+ revenue funding gap, no more government Revenue Support Grant, no more New Homes Bonus and presumably no more assets remaining to sell – and then what happens?

It appears to me that this ongoing and increasing funding gap, temporarily bridged using first the Council Tax Freeze Grant and then the New Homes Bonus, is a direct consequence of Tory dogma to freeze council tax (which is a reduction in real terms). It also appears to explain why EDDC has been so set on having a Local Plan which includes huge numbers of new homes – because these new homes attract the New Homes Bonus and this appears to be their means of keeping the finances afloat.

I urge people to take an interest in what is happening at EDDC and to go and look at the budget and local plan documentation for themselves.

EDDC needs to start working towards being able to balance the revenue accounts without using NHB to cover the shortfall and to wean itself off one-off central government fixes to which it seems to be addicted.

The proposal to increase council tax by 1.99% is a start, but even with this proposal the revenue short-fall is still increasing compared to last year. And if increasing it by 2% or more triggers a referendum, all the better – as this will shine a light on the council’s finances and enable open debate about how the council’s services are best funded.

Whilst council tax rises will never be popular, to continue on this current slippery slope is to invite complete financial meltdown in 4 years time!!

EDDC’s New Year Resolutions

Diviani has put together the usual oleaginous press release about what wonderful things EDDC promises us this year.

Owl refuses to print it, discuss it or link to it – why waste precious breaths on weasel words.