Q. When is a Plan not a Plan? A. When it’s an EDDC fudge?

At the July Public Examination Inspector Thickett instructed EDDC to reach agreement with Natural England over outstanding issues regarding compliance with the European Habitat Directive. These are legally binding on EDDC and, therefore, potential show stoppers. (It is claimed the phrasing he used was “lock yourselves in a darkened room until you reach agreement” – but who would voluntarily do that with an EDDC planner?).

Not surprising then to find the amendments proposed to the Draft Plan by EDDC in August didn’t mention that agreement had been reached, only that there had been a “dialogue”. EDDC’s proposed solution is to duck the issue by removing any dependency between the Exmouth Master Plan and the Local Plan i.e. Exmouth regeneration is irrelevant to achieving the staggering economic growth assumed in the Local Plan.

So the Watch watchers were interested to read the following article by Becca Glidden in last Week’s Journal under the title “Setback for major regeneration sites”. Amongst all the nuanced phrasing we are left wondering when is a plan not a plan? Maybe our readers can enlighten us?

Here is the text of the article:

Major sites earmarked for regeneration have been struck out of a major new planning document – after objections from Natural England.

The sites include the seafront Splash Zone/ Queen’s Drive, the Imperial Road car park, the rugby ground, bus station, estuary car park, London Inn car park and town centre post office.

They have been removed from the proposed East Devon Local Plan, which is currently undergoing public consultation.
The regeneration works have been deleted from the proposed planning document because Natural England said the proposals were not `legally sound’.

Natural England, a group championing the preservation of the natural environment for future generations, said East Devon District Council (EDDC) had failed to carry out a full conservation assessment of the Exmouth sites earmarked for regeneration. [Comment from Owl: Natural England is the Government’s statutory advisory body on this – i.e. top dog].

In a letter to EDDC, Natural England said: “Because we advise that we are unable to agree that the Habitat Regulations Assessment is complete, we consider that the Local Plan is not legally sound, since the statutory requirements of the assessment process have not been followed.

This remains the case.”

The regeneration sites are contained in a document called the Exmouth Masterplan, a planning paper which forms part of the proposed East Devon Local Plan.

An EDDC spokesperson told the Journal: “The Exmouth Masterplan is one of a suite of planning documents that support the [proposed] Local Plan, however, the Exmouth Masterplan needs updating.

“The issue which Natural England has concerns about, is whether all of the Exmouth Masterplan can be acceptably delivered, bearing in mind the possibility of adverse impacts on the Exe Estuary wildlife site.

“Because of the concerns expressed by Natural England, the council has withdrawn the direct links/references between the Exmouth Masterplan and the Local Plan to enable the Local Plan to move forward.

“The sites in Exmouth can still come forward, but to show that they are acceptable, each site and the scheme on that site will need to be subject to its own detailed assessment under the habitat regulations – Natural England will take a keen interest in these assessments.”

The district council said the seafront Splash/ Queen’s Drive, the Imperial Road car park, the rugby ground, bus station, estuary car park, London Inn car park and town centre post office would be included in a refreshed Masterplan, a council document which sets out the future for Exmouth.

The council said its regeneration plans for Exmouth were ongoing and would be completed.

The spokesperson said plans would be submitted for the Splash/Queens Drive development before the end of the year.
“Projects in the Masterplan remain in place for delivery. The delivery of Masterplan projects will be aligned with the new Local Plan policies, as well as wider rules and regulations. In the mean-time, the existing Masterplan remains in force.

“The Queen’s Drive proposals are proceeding and a planning application for the enabling works – road and car park – has recently been submitted.

“An application for the second phase will be forthcoming before the end of the year.”

Our summary: Now you see it, now you don’t!

That could be EDDC’s new motto, perhaps!

Freedom of Information: government copies EDDC

Government says ” publicity is a pollutant”

A new report from the Information Tribunal on a case about the Government refusing to say how often a particular committee meets says:

“Last week the Information Rights Tribunal rejected the government appeal, in a strongly worded judgment which described the Cabinet Office’s approach as “irresponsible”, its key witness as “evasive and disingenuous”, and her evidence as “of no value whatsoever”.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34813936

Several months ago, this is what an Information Tribunal said about East Devon District Council’s obstruction of information about meetings concerning the future of The Knowle:

“… Correspondence on behalf of the Council, rather than ensuring the Tribunal was assisted in its function, was at times discourteous and unhelpful including the statement that we had the most legible copies possible. A statement, which was clearly inaccurate as subsequently, we have been
provided with perfectly legible documents. …”

Spooky!

“Broadband a question of haves and havenots”, Councillor Twiss told EDDC Scrutiny.

Report sent to East Devon Watch:

‘More ‘best practice’ was evident at EDDC Scrutiny Committee at Knowle yesterday evening (12/11/2015). From the start, Chair Roger Giles (Independent, Ottery St Mary) insisted that presentations should be brief and not include the reading out of information that had been circulated to councillors in advance. Using questions and answers was a more useful tool for this committee , he advised.
This proved correct straightaway, in the close examination of Devon’s broadband provision. Five stakeholders had been called to speak and answer questions. They were Andrew Moulding, Chair of Devon County Council’s (DCC) Place Scrutiny Committee and Deputy Leader of East Devon District Council (EDDC); Cllr Phil Twiss, EDDC Corporate Services portfolio holder; Paul Coles, BT Regional Manager, South West ; Phil Roberts, Programme Manager for superfast broadband delivery, Connecting Devon & Somerset (CDS) ; and Graham Long, Upottery Parish Councillor, with 20 years’ experience with Hewlett Packard, for whom he ran the EU support network.

Questions included one sent, in her absence, from Cllr Susie Bond (Independent, Feniton & Buckerell), asking why the broadband situation in parts of her constituency was “appalling”. Particularly intense questioning came from Cllrs Marianne Rixson (Independent, Sidmouth Sidford Ward ) , and Val Ranger (Independent, Newton Poppleford & Harpford),who had clearly done their homework, both closely referring to the document submitted by CDS, and finding some apparent inaccuracies (e.g. Could the audit done by EDDC’s internal auditors, SWAP, properly be described as ‘independent’?). Cllr Ranger wondered why, of 26 interested parties in 2014, only two had submitted a formal tender.
Phil Roberts (CDS) reported that CDS had decided not to sign a second contact with BT, and that there would now be a different approach to tendering . For the next phase, CDS were currently looking at other providers , as well as talking to BT, he said.

Much of the time, Cllrs Moulding and Twiss looked uncomfortably out of their depth, not least when it emerged that EDDC and DCC had not worked together to obtain maximum funding, thereby missing out on millions of pounds.

Graham Long, “astonished to find how slow broadband is in Devon”, explained that “Fibre is best for reliability, speed and bandwidth. But fibre-to-cabinet works as an urbancentric solution. It doesn’t work in rural areas”. Cllr Ben Ingham (Independent, Woodbury & Lympstone) told the Committee, “I’m really flabbergasted that BT are picking the poor relation of technology”.

The broadband issue is certain to continue. Next Monday DCC’s Place Scrutiny Committee will hear CDS feedback on its recommendations (14h00, County Hall, Exeter). More questions and answers are no doubt being prepared!’

How do you lose nearly £4 million in expenditure? Easy if you are EDDC!

Page 9 – Annual Audit Letter from Grant Thornton:

We identified two adjustments affecting the Council’s reported financial position. The draft financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2015 presented for audit recorded net expenditure of £13.757m. Following the agreed audit adjustments, the audited financial statements showed net expenditure of £17.641m. The changes related to:

• reversal of upward revaluation of £1.546m to assets under construction which actually related to additions which had already been accounted for; and

• reversal of upward revaluation of infrastructure assets of £2.338m in year as the Code states such assets should be carried at historical cost and not fair value.

Click to access 191115-combined-agenda-a-and-g.pdf

Well spotted Grant Thornton!

When is an advertisement not an advertisement?

Tighter rules on local authority publications state that

” the new rules would define ‘appropriate use of publicity’ in relation to council newspapers and use of lobbyists: Advertising should be balanced, factually accurate and not likely to be perceived by the public as a political statement or a commentary on contentious areas of public policy.”

In the current edition of its online newspaper for councillors, the Knowledge, there is an article about “The Earth Centre” at Bicton which states: “The Earth Centre at Bicton College offers a unique event, conferencing and meeting venue located in the
heart of the beautiful East Devon countryside but within a short distance of Exeter. The venue acts as an 80 seat auditorium, 50 seat seminar room with external breakout area, or an open space to use as you please. It also has an additional private meeting room for up to 12 people, free car parking facilities for 60 vehicles, catering facilities, WIFI, audio and projector screens”.

Did they pay for this puff job one wonders? Isn’t the Bicton area, much of it owned by Clinton Devon Estates which wants to see housing there, a “contentious area of public policy”?

Or is it a pre-emptive strike for another East Devon District Council satellite office!

Exmouth: re/de/generation

” … The legal procedures underway with tenants form part of this ongoing regeneration process.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Exmouth-action-group-criticise-new-EDDC-planning/story-28149375-detail/story.html

Regeneration: another word for “aren’t we clever – we call it “ongoing regeneration” and then we can do anything we like”.

You have only until tomorrow to (attempt to) shape EDDC services

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/consultation-and-surveys/moving-and-improving-consultation/

But best guess is Devon and Somerset devolution and “greater Exeter” trumps our wishes!

Local Government Department agrees 30% cuts over four years

“Four government departments have provisionally agreed to cut their spending by an average of 30% over the next four years, Chancellor George Osborne is to announce later.

The transport, local government and environment departments, plus the Treasury, have all agreed deals ahead of the spending review on 25 November.
The cuts will help the public finances back into surplus, he will say.

A Treasury source told BBC News the agreements were “really good progress”.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34763261

But no doubt our council taxes will remain the same or increase as costs are offloaded from county and district and loaded on to town and parish council precepts.

And there no doubt will still be money to build a new council HQ in Honiton, subsidise the Thelma Hulbert Gallery, pay consultants exorbitant fees and continue to offer free parking to councillors and officers at Knowle.

Some assets won’t sweat quite as much as others.

2,000 senior council officers get private medical treatment paid for by us

Figures obtained by the Mail show that over the past three years, £3.43million of public money has been spent on private health insurance for council staff in England and Wales.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3309667/The-NHS-Not-fund-private-health-Town-Hall-bosses-Taxpayers-1m-bill-fund-treatment-2-000-chiefs.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

What EDDC giveth, EDDC taketh away …

… East Devon District Council (EDDC) had called on ministers to reconsider a one per cent rent reduction for council and social tenants.

The authority says the change will leave it £7.9million out of pocket after four years …

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/rent_reduction_plans_will_have_a_devastating_impact_says_eddc_leader_1_4300546

SOUNDS GOOD DOESN’T IT? BUT HOLD ON …

“… East Devon is planning to raise rents for new tenants from the end of November, according to a proposal going to the Housing Review Board on 5th November. Rents will be raised to the ‘target/formula rent’ in one go, the average difference being £2.21 per week although obviously in many cases it will be more.

Giving with one hand, taking with the other

The reason for this change is given as: ‘The Government announced in the summer budget that from April 2016, social housing rents will reduce by 1% each year for a period of four years. By moving rents at tenancy changes to formula/target levels for new tenants, some of the loss of rental income will be offset and lessen the severity of the 1%, 4 year rent reduction.’

In other words, what tenants gained on the one hand, EDDC (which is losing income through the reductions) will take back with the other. Tenants will pay to keep services funded. …”

http://seatonmatters.org/2015/11/02/rent-rises-for-new-east-devon-tenants/

A rose by any other name …

Not content with one honorary title …?

https://www.streetlife.com/conversation/3bv76z7zi3rxc/c/6/?eid=bca3d7a2-ccee-4a9d-905a-7b1b23967f83&utm_source=immediate&uid=qiqdvzyguofa

Owl,
Hon Animal, Hogwarts
but I don’t boast about it

Devon/Somerset devolution: a democratic deficit black hole

How many people realise that Devon-Somerset devolution initiative is being led, not by its councils, but by its Local Enterprise Partnership – a sort- of mega East Devon Business Forum? And that it is pressing ahead with its plans without any public consultation?

Click to access Devolution%20Statement%20of%20Intent%20(low%20res).pdf

Members of its board are listed here:
http://www.heartofswlep.co.uk/chief-executive-and-non-executive-directors

How many people realise that power over development and housing for the whole of Devon and Somerset is to be potentially given to Karim Hassan (former Regeneration supremo at EDDC and now Chief Executive of Exeter) and EDDC Leader Paul Diviani – both masterminds of Cranbrook?

Click to access Issue1HeartoftheSouthWestPadbrookPark__436306.pdf

This is what the Electoral Reform Society has to say about devolution deals in the north of England:

“The public shouldn’t just be given a yes/no option on a pre-agreed deal – we can’t have a fait accompli approach to devolution. There should be proper and meaningful consultation on the deal itself – what powers the public want the Combined Authority to have, and what they want their councils to do and look like in the 21st century.

“A piecemeal approach to engaging the public in the devolution debate isn’t sustainable. If citizens in County Durham are to be given a vote, it’s only right that citizens across the region should too.

How many people realise that the potential devolution of powers to Devon and Somerset are being led by its Local Enterprise Partnership (a collection of business people?

How many people realise that this partnership is suggesting that development and housing matters in the hands of Karim Hassan ( formerly head of Regeneration in East Devon and now Chief Executive of Exeter City Council) and EDDC council leader and Cranbrook apologist Paul Diviani?

“The Combined Authority said the public across the North East would be consulted – and we’ve yet to see what this will look like. It can’t be a tick-box exercise – instead it must be a real process of deliberative democracy, with the ability for the public to change aspects of the deal which they want to be improved. Local ‘Citizens’ Assemblies,’ like the ones we are running in Sheffield and Southampton, could be a great start.

“Let’s have a real debate about devolution and decentralisation. The ERS and leading academics are currently holding Citizens Assemblies in North and South that offer a promising model to follow in terms of engaging local people in the devolution agenda. Politicians in the region and the UK government would do well to watch them and build on them as a way to open up these discussions about where power should lie in our regions.”

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/sites/default/files/press_release/file/Electoral%20Reform%20Society%20says%20devolution%20plans%20could%20%E2%80%98flounder%E2%80%99%20without%20real%20public%20involvement.pdf

“Beware Greeks bearing gifts” in Eastern Sidmouth

This phrase from Greek mythology can be paraphrased as “Do not trust enemies who bring you presents — they could very well be playing a trick.”

This might apply in Sidmouth where EDDC seems to be keen on (part?)-financing a “scoping study” with Sidmouth Town Council for “eastern Sidmouth”.

Why the caution? A scoping study would be EDDC-led and would mean they choose the terms of reference and the consultant(s).

A Neighbourhood Plan for Sidmouth would be citizen-led with EDDC involvement.

Get the difference?

As Councillor Cathy Gardner puts it so clearly:

The study, run by East Devon District Council (EDDC) and the town council, would look at what a potential project for the eastern town could involve – and how such a scheme should be planned and implemented.

But Councillor Cathy Gardner, an EDDC member for the Sidmouth Town ward, has voiced concern that any such consultation would be ‘premature’ – and suggested waiting until the fate of a Neighbourhood Plan is determined.

The town council will decide in December whether to draw up a Neighbourhood Plan for the whole Sid Valley. If it goes ahead, the community-led document will involve consultation on things like where new homes and shops should be built.

It would also ask for views on what should happen in the eastern town.

“Cllr Gardner said: “My fear is that [the scoping exercise] has the potential to shortcut or even derail the prospect of doing a Neighbourhood Plan. The big benefit of asking [about the eastern town] as part of a Neighbourhood Plan is the solid methodology – it is the best way to get feedback from members of the public.

“Why would you rush [doing the scoping exercise] when you can do a really good quality consultation as part of a Neighbourhood Plan?

“It seems a bit premature.”

Cllr Gardner also warned that by asking residents the same questions in two separate consultations, there was a danger of ‘consultation fatigue’ and receiving less responses.

But EDDC says it thinks Sidmouth residents will welcome having their views represented in any plans for the town.

A council spokeswoman said: “We appreciate that Sidmouth Town Council is also considering a Neighbourhood Plan and it seems to us that the town council’s desire to move forward with one should not preclude the other – otherwise there is a danger that good ideas are delayed or blighted by an overly controlled approach.

“A Neighbourhood Plan is a possible future opportunity that should not inhibit what seems to be a clear appetite from the town council to regenerate the eastern end of town.

“Cllr Gardner has raised the question of consultation fatigue, which is an issue worth recognising and one that we and the town council will of course seek to avoid.

“As a Neighbourhood Plan takes at least two years to be put in place, it would be a shame to use that as a reason not to do anything else in the meantime.”

http://www.devon24.co.uk/news/sidmouth_could_launch_seafront_regeneration_scoping_exercise_1_4291585

Rest easy in your beds … we are protected from Ebola and ready to welcome President Obama …

It is so reassuring to know that, even though it has taken 7-plus years to bring forward a (not yet agreed) Local Plan (see post below) our Head of Planning Strategy (Ed Freeman) and our Property and Assets Manager Amy Gilbert [who only joined EDDC in August 2015] have taken time from their extra-busy schedules to protect us all from the Ebola virus and have us all well sorted should President Obama pay us a visit. Thanks to today’s Sidmouth Herald (page 25) for this gem:

“Two senior officers from East Devon District Council successfully dealt with a potential Ebola outbreak and a visit from President Obama to bag top prize in a new competition for local authorities.

The pair were pitted against 22 other teams from across the region and challenged to deal with the hypothetical crises while saving money and delivering better local services for the customers of a fictional council. They were teamed up with colleagues from Teignbridge and Exeter.”

EDDC Chief Executive Mark Williams said:” I am extremely proud of Ed (our head of planning strategy) and Amy (our property and asset manager) for taking part and  roving successful partnerships are a winning formula”.

How much officer time did this exercise occupy?

But thank you Ed and Amy, we can all sleep much more peacefully in our beds tonight knowing that we are safe from Ebola and that President Obama will get the welcome he deserves.

Who know, he may have been booked to open the new EDDC HQ – or possibly the new Pegasus luxury retirement complex – or both!

 

 

The Local Plan, Knowle relocation, Sidmouth Mill Street – Hugo thinks it’s all a dog’s dinner

Members-of-ParliamentHugo-Swire-MP

Photo Source:  Daily Mirror

Fresh from his fine performance at the Houses of Parliament Dog Show, Hugo Swire has some harsh words for our local district council in this week’s Sidmouth Herald. What a pity that he didn’t make his views known before the local and national elections …..

 

 

Here is the article from today’s Sidmouth Herald:

Swire 30.10.15

His idea for a multi-storey car park-cum housing block over the Ham car park might raise more than a few eyebrows.

Amongst his comments are the following:

“… People are put off by multi-storey car parks, but we can do a clever design that incorporates multi-storey parking and residential homes with affordable housing – which is what we need to bring people into this part of the town. …”

Er, not sure the people in the apartments upstairs would welcome the intense vehicle particulate discharge of the multi-storey car park below them – or the noise  …

“ … You are solving the parking issue and if we do it as one, we are really invigorating the whole of the town. I think the one thing we lack is a marina and I don’t see why we could not have one in Sidmouth – it would bring people into town. “Again, the whole redesign of Alma Bridge and also the Drill Hall area needs to be done as one .”..

Owl can visualise now the wonderful image of Hugo drawing into Sidmouth Marina for his annual visit ….. and, yes, Hugo, your constituents in Sidmouth have been saying this for years, only your fellow Conservative councillors have disagreed.

…Mr Swire admitted the Government’s commitment to building more houses created a problem in Sidmouth, where much of the land is within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).  This, he says, is why there needs to be an established Local Plan, which would provide a blueprint to determine areas earmarked for future development for the next 15 years and beyond.
Speaking about the delays in drafting a plan, Mr Swire said: “It has been a nightmare.

Well, only a nightmare for your constituents, Hugo – a beautiful dream for our council and its developers.

“I have said this is an absolute priority and it has been extremely frustrating that we have not got here sooner.  If you live in a place, you do not want the field next door to be covered in houses, but if everybody said ‘not here’, there would be no more new houses. “We are determined to get more people on the housing ladder. If we build houses in the right area, then people will not complain.

Yes, Mr Swire, we have all been saying this for the whole 7 -plus years that the Local Plan has been under discussion by your fellow Conservatives.

“I would favour putting more at Cranbrook, but then what is the knock-on effect on our services? “The sooner we come up with the Local Plan, the sooner we can have a more rational discussion about it.” …”

Er, no Hugo, that’s not how it works.  Once the Local Plan is agreed the discussion is over.  The time for rational discussion has already passed.  It was done by many of your constituents in front of Planning Inspector, Mr Thickett – twice.  But, unfortunately, you were not there to give him the benefit of your wise words.

A bit of closing the kennel door after the dog has bolted, perhaps …

 

“Audit should be citizen led” – that grey area for “Devolution plc” again

As the article points out, devolution comes with dangers:

” … There is a risk that moves towards greater decentralisation of power to newly empowered spaces – institutions of local government – simply replicate on a smaller scale the weaknesses of the national system. With the focus on new models of governance – directly elected mayors and combined authorities – crafted to suit the accountability requirements of Whitehall, it is important that new opportunities to strengthen accountability of decisions to the public space are not missed.

At core, the challenge for democratic institutions is to blur the boundaries between the governed and the government, creating more space for the former to engage with the latter while ensuring equity of participation and access. In practice at a local level there are more opportunities for this interaction – not simply due to proximity enabling direct engagement but because shared space in communities creates a focus for deliberation. There are already examples of local authorities pioneering new approaches, such as Oldham’s Co-operative Borough (as opposed to council), which involves developing the community leadership skills of elected members. The devolution of the entire health budget to Greater Manchester will be an interesting chance to consider how aligning health resource and decision-making more effectively across a place can create greater individual engagement in healthy choices and outcomes. …”

http://www.democraticaudit.com/?p=17071

More Clinton Devon Estates houses recommended next to Plumb Park, Exmouth

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/planners_voice_support_for_new_avenues_homes_1_4288115

The carrot is, of course, “affordable” housing.

But with house prices climbing so steeply, simply selling some houses on a site for 20 percent less than others (e.g. a differential between best locations and worst locations on a site and/or luxury fittings v basic fittings) will still bring a hefty profit for any developer these days.

Habitat mitigation in “south-east Devon” will be a “Greater Exeter” issue and will not be scrutinised at district level

Cabinet agenda and paper are here:

Click to access 041115-combined-agenda-cabinet.pdf

Below is an interesting extract, where it notes that Habitat Regulation will no longer be dealt with at district level, instead being the responsibility of the “Greater Exeter” area (East Devon, Exeter, Teignbridge combined). Habitat Regulation will also not be scrutinised at each district but will have its own cross-district scrutiny committee and this worried officers, should districts disagree. It also says that EDDC will fully fund the committee and its Legal Department will be responsible for legal matters.

“Agenda Item 15

… Following the decision of Council on 29 July 2015 to agree to enter into joint arrangements with both Exeter City Council and Teignbridge District Council, it has been necessary to review and alter the governance arrangements to ensure clarity and consistency in terms of its operation going forward.

South East Devon Habitat Regulations Joint Committees …..

….. High Risk
It is essential to secure appropriate mitigation alongside granting of and implementation of planning permissions for development which impact upon sites of European importance. To not be able to ensure mitigation is delivered could cause problems in terms of being able to grant planning permissions and ensure delivery of development as set out in the Local Plan.

… That review has now been completed and it is considered that the Terms of Reference previously endorsed is not sufficient to enable the business of the committee to be properly conducted. There was some lack of clarity in terms of the remit for the committee, the procedures for meetings and a misunderstanding over how to deal with the powers between the Executive Committee and officers. Most crucially however, the scrutiny arrangements for the committee were left to the local level. This meant that each of the three authorities had the ability to scrutinise decisions and moreover that these would be in accordance with each authority’s own scrutiny arrangements. Aside from the difficulties imposed by having to deal with three different sets of scrutiny arrangements from a timing and administration point of view, the biggest difficulty, both operationally and politically, would be what happens if each authority’s scrutiny function resulted in different recommendations being made back to the Executive Committee. All of the above would be likely to cause problems in terms of trying to run the committee and ensure that effective habitat mitigation is delivered.”

Councillor Moulding appears already to have been confirmed as a member and three other EDDC councillors will be appointed (NOT elected).

On scrutiny, the document says:

The Councils have appointed the HMSC to scrutinize the operation and performance of the Habitats Mitigation Executive Committee and its governance arrangements.”

and

“The HMSC shall comprise three members of each of the Councils, to be appointed by the group leaders of the Councils. Each member of the HMSC shall have an equal vote.”

Chardstock: Chair of its Parish Council raises worrying questions

Mary de Souza Chairman, Chardstock Parish Council and Neighbourhood Plan Team writes:

“I am writing in response to the article in Axminster’s Pulman’s Weekly News, dated March 31st 2015.

The article headline ” Amended Local Plan on its way to inspector” refers to the amendments to the plan that East Devon Councillors agreed to at a special meeting on Thursday 26th March, which included granting a “built-up-area Boundary ” for Chardstock, in order to facilitate sustainable development.

For the benefit of your readers, I would like to put this statement in context and point out how the agreement to include this amendment would appear to have been reached. But firstly a bit of background information.

Chardstock has always had a Built up Area Boundary ( BUAB) and the previous draft Local Plan allocated a quota of ten houses, which have subsequently been built. Since then planning permission has been granted for a further four dwellings. However, in December 2014 and February 2015, three planning applications, two of which went before the Development Management Committee ( DMC) were refused permission on the grounds that Chardstock was not considered to be sustainable.

This is the Planning Officers report : “The proposed development by reason of its location on the edge of a village in the countryside which has limited services to support growth, fails to accord with the definition of sustainable development, specifically the environmental role, found within the National Planning Policy Framework. In this case, the Local Planning Authority considers that the adverse impacts of this development in terms of unsustainable location with the occupiers of the dwellings having limited access to essential services and infrastructure (including public transport and access to it) significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of providing these dwellings to meet the shortfall of housing within the district (5 year land supply) when assessed against the policies within the Framework as a whole.”

During this period a DMC “Think-tank” along with planning officers were making a careful study of all the villages in East Devon, looking at their services and facilities as well as public transport and access to it.

Chardstock is fortunate that it has an excellent local shop and Post Office, as well as a church, pub and primary school, but access to other essential services only found in Chard or Axminster necessitate a journey by car and are not realistically accessible by public transport, as the nearest bus stop is best part of a mile down a single track lane, with no lighting or pavements from the centre of the village.

These facts therefore meant that under the latest draft of the Local Plan, Chardstock was one of the villages recommended to not have a BUAB. This recommendation was upheld by the DMC at their special meeting on Monday 23rd March.

But at the full Council meeting on 26th March, a member of the public, who isn’t actually a resident of East Devon, but happens to own a plot of land in Chardstock on which he has applied to build 5 houses, spoke and asked that Members also consider the inclusion of Chardstock in the list of sustainable villages.

Is it just coincidence, that what followed was a proposal from Cllr Andrew Moulding that Chardstock be added to the list of settlements to have a BUAB ? The minutes from this meeting also point out that,

• the village is not served by public transport,
• the views of the parish council had not been sought,
• it was more appropriate for the village to identify appropriate levels of development through a Neighbourhood Plan.

But the proposal was put to the vote and carried. This decision and the way in which it was reached also demonstrates the lack of support from the Council for the Parish Council, the local community agenda and an apparent lack of engagement with Chardstock’s emerging Neighbourhood Plan, failing to consult with the Parish Council or local community over a major policy change, rather being led by the wishes of a local developer.

The issue of sustainability is one that the Parish Council and Neighbourhood Plan Team have been looking at very closely, and is an issue that has generated a lot of interest from the residents of Chardstock, who have been consulted on this and other subjects as part of the production of our Neighbourhood Plan.

It’s not just about not having a realistic bus service in the parish – less than 12% of the population have any sort of relatively easy access to the service, and the majority are anything from 1 to 4 miles from the nearest bus stop, as well as the fact that this is also a bus service that as of 12th April will be reduced from an hourly service to a 90 minute service, making access to Chard and Axminster even more difficult. It is also about other aspects of our infrastructure, including poor roads, which with the cuts to services from Devon County Council will be receiving even less attention than they were before.

So what is it that has made the Council decide that all of a sudden we are sustainable. Are there measures that are being put in place that we are unaware of ? Or is this indeed an example of the influence that developers have over the Council ?

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/council_s_decision_on_latest_draft_of_the_ed_local_plan_1_4024159

EDDC wants extra complaints officer – but only for a year

Do they know something we don’t know?

http://www.officerecruit.com/job/information-complaints-support-officer-954498471?src=search&tmpl=dis&sctr=

Oh, and it’s a busy job:

“It is essential that you have excellent communication, organisational and time management skills. You must also have the ability to work without supervision and use your own initiative, as you will be dealing with complaints and requests for information from members of the public on a daily basis.”