Category Archives: Environment (local)
“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.”
Fracking may recommence soon
“Fracking could take place in Britain this year for the first time since 2011, under plans that could get the green light from council officials this week.
Gas company Third Energy is seeking planning permission to frack a shale gas well it has drilled at Kirby Misperton in Ryedale, North Yorkshire.
If the company gets the go-ahead, gas from the site could be powering homes in Yorkshire before the end of this year, Rasik Valand, its chief executive, told the Telegraph.
After months of consultation, North Yorkshire County Council’s planning officer is this week expected to issue her recommendation on whether councillors should approve or reject the plans.
A recommendation of approval would take Britain to the verge of finally kicking off a shale gas industry that has been plagued by setbacks and delays despite the enthusiastic support of Government.
However, councillors could yet defy the officer’s recommendation on the application, which has proved highly contentious.
Ryedale district council has already lodged an objection to the plan, claiming it would mean “unacceptable development within a rural location” – despite the promise of £100,000 in benefits to the community if the well is fracked.
Third Energy says the fracking work would be quieter and involve fewer lorries going to and from the site than when it drilled the well in 2013.
Mr Valand said: “The 2013 operation was much bigger and brought more traffic but there were no issues raised. What we are doing is far less intrusive.
“We have been drilling for 20 years in the area, we have done it all safely without any environmental risk or concerns, so we hope it will be [approved]. …
…. No fracking has taken place in the UK since 2011 when another company, Cuadrilla, caused two earth tremors while attempting to explore for shale gas near Blackpool, leading to a temporary ban on the practice. …”
Sidmouth: mystery stream contamination – can you help?
“Environment Agency workers are trying to solve the mystery of a contaminated stream in Sidmouth that discharges to the beach.
Whilst staff have said the contamination could be caused by a misconnection at new build properties in the town, a definitive cause is yet to be determined.
Recently the stream seems to contain wipes, and Environment Agency Workers are concerned that the contamination could be affecting bath water quality.
In a bid to solve the mystery, the Environment Agency has posted pictures of their investigative work in the hope that members of the public might have some answers.”
“The planning and delivery potential of LEPs” – Royal Town Planning Institute briefing
…”LEPs need to keep their private sector representation under review, and strengthen their relationship with local business organisations and local authority economic development teams, to ensure that plans and priorities reflect local business and interests. …
… LEPs should assess the social and environmental implications of decisions as part of their project appraisal processes. …
… The Local Growth Deals that have been agreed focus on transport and infrastructure aimed at unlocking employment and housing development. These appear quite generic in nature, with only a relatively small proportion of projects directed towards supporting priority growth sectors. Funding is also focused on principal urban areas and main transportation corridors. The resources secured and allocated by LEPs are being directed more towards areas of opportunity rather than need. …
… The relationship between local authorities and LEPs appears to be led at a corporate level and is largely resourced from economic development teams of upper tier authorities. There is little direct involvement of local authority planners with the work of LEPs and their awareness of LEPs’ activities is typically low (the exception is the West of England LEP, where the West of England Partnership has helped to bring forward additional joint working). …
… From the perspective of local planning authorities, LEPs are not seen as having a significant role to play in sustainable development given their clear remit around local economic growth. This stands in contrast to the work of the former South West RDA, which had a significant focus on environmental and social dimensions. …”
Failed Green Deal scheme cost £17,000 for every household that signed up
“Taxpayers have been left with a £17,000 bill for every household that signed up to the Government’s failed flagship energy efficiency scheme, the Green Deal.
Ministers wasted a total of £240 million on the ill-fated programme, which was launched in 2013 with the intention of upgrading Britain’s entire housing stock, a damning National Audit Office report found.
The Green Deal was supposed to encourage households to take out loans to fund the cost of installing measures such as insulation or double glazing, with the cost paid back out of the resulting savings on their energy bills.
Yet the scheme was eventually abandoned in July last year after just 14,000 households signed up, taking out loans worth just £50 million – on average less than £3,600 each.”
Straitgate Quarry update
“Campaigners are calling for a public exhibition on revised proposals for a 100-acre quarry on Ottery’s outskirts that they say could impact thousands.
A controversial application from Aggregate Industries (AI) to extract sand and gravel at Straitgate Farm met with community opposition before it was withdrawn earlier this year.
AI confirmed this week it intends to resubmit plans in April, but will not be holding any further public exhibitions – choosing instead to distribute information leaflets to householders.
Straitgate Action Group was formed to fight the proposed quarry and says that if the company will not be using the narrow Birdcage Lane as its main exit under the revised proposals, HGVs are likely to come straight out on to Exeter Road.
Member Monica Mortimer said: “We have been writing to AI to ask when they will be holding a public exhibition. If they are planning on using the one and only main road in and out of Ottery then it will impact on thousands of people all day every day. It just seems a ludicrous proposal.”
The Straitgate plan relies on a linked application to retain Blackhill Quarry, on Woodbury Common, for processing material – a site that is due to be decommissioned this year. Delays in securing the Ottery site have led to AI submitting a new application for importing reserves from Houndaller (Hillhead) Quarry, near Uffculme, to be processed approximately 26 miles away at Blackhill.
Campaigner and county councillor Claire Wright questioned the sense of transporting sand and gravel so far for processing, with the resulting impact on roads and surrounds.
John Penny, South West estates manager for AI, said that following a review, the company will be resubmitting planning proposals for Straitgate and an extension to processing at Blackhill.
He said: “This is to address concerns raised about the transport of materials. Instead of using the more rural Birdcage Lane to exit the Straitgate site, we will be proposing an alternative site entrance.
“We feel this will provide a safer way for vehicles to enter and exit the site and it shows that we are acting on feedback from the community.”
Mr Penny said the Hillhead Quarry plan would be a temporary measure that the company has applied for ‘to allow the business to maintain aggregate supplies to the Exeter and East Devon construction markets during 2016’.
The plan for Hillhead Quarry is open to consultation until April 7.”
Inquiry: Environmental impact of micro plastics- call for evidence
Anyone interested in the role of micro-plastics in the marine environment may wish to provide evidence to this government inquiry:
Eradicating “ecoside” – new web resource
A new international web resource:
“Eradicatingecocide.com is an information portal about the law of Ecocide. It is intended to be open to all, lawyers and non-lawyers, and to be as user-friendly to as many people as possible.”
Yet another battle to fight: more, many more, sneaky changes to planning
The devil is in the detail here – so many “minor” changes, never seen before – all gearing up to give our LEP total control of the planning system:
“This consultation seeks views on the proposed approach to implementing the planning provisions in the Housing and Planning Bill, and some other planning measures. It covers the following areas:
Changes to planning application fees
Permission in principle
Brownfield register
Small sites register
Neighbourhood planning
Local plans
Expanding the planning performance regime
Testing competition in the processing of planning applications
Information about financial benefits
Section 106 dispute resolution
Permitted development rights for state-funded schools
Changes to statutory consultation on planning applications”
Click to access Planning_consultation.pdf
WE HAVE UNTIL 15 APRIL 2016 TO RESPOND
Beware developers (in this case Persimmon) bearing “gifts”
Would our council have stood its ground the way Plymouth did?
“A LEADING house builder has lost its appeal against councils chiefs who insisted the firm carry out the work it promised on the Plympton homes five years ago.
A planning inspector told Persimmon Homes it had to carry out the work it was initially agreed to – the installation of solar panels on 12 executive homes it had built in Cundy Close, Woodford.
In March last year the firm narrowly avoided being taken to court by Plymouth City Council after residents and the council complained that only three of the houses received the solar panels.
Residents also pointed out the company never installed footpath lighting as agreed with the planning chiefs.
As the council prepared to take Persimmon Homes to court for breach of conditions the hearing was vacated as on the day of trial the building firm submitted an application to vary the condition.
Persimmon Homes applied to amend the energy strategy for the site, claiming the panels were not needed as the homes were energy efficient.
One angry resident wrote to the council’s planning chiefs saying ““Persimmon should have fulfilled their obligation under the original planning permission when these houses were built.”
At the time the council’s joint planning chairs Cllr Bill Stevens and Cllr Patrick Nicholson refused the application as it “does not with the council’s policy on Renewable Energy or deliver the proposals outlined in the applicant’s own energy strategy, approved as part of the planning permission.
“The development should incorporate enough renewable energy equipment to offset at least 15 percent of predicted carbon emissions for the period up to 2016.”
Rather than carry out the work Persimmon Homes chose to appeal the decision.
After months of deliberation, the planning inspector agreed with the residents and Plymouth City Council, telling Persimmon Homes its new energy saving assessment did not mean it could avoid finishing the work it initially proposed to do.
The inspectors report notes how the photovoltaic PV cells “so far installed achieve 6 percent reductions in predicted carbon emissions through on-site renewable energy production”, which was not disputed by Persimmon Homes.
However, the inspector also noted how the council had “two relevant objectives; to reduce energy consumption and thereby carbon emissions, through the use of insulation and good design, and to require the production of on-site renewable energy”
As such, the firm’s proposed measures “would not comply” with the council’s policies.
The inspector said the firm’s proposal fell “considerably short of the 15 percent target for offsetting predicted carbon emissions through on-site energy production by renewable sources” and it would “unacceptably conflict” with the council’s policy.
The inspector also noted how the firm admitted how retrofitting the PV cells “would be technically feasible” and dismissed their appeal.
Cllr Bill Stevens said the planning inspector “quite rightly” backed the council’s planning decision which showed “the benefit of locally appointed people taking these decisions – we know our area better.”
He said the ball was now in Persimmon Homes’ court and he would be meeting with the council’s enforcement officers be updated on the firm’s response.
He said: “It’s the same for every application. The planning process is there to make sure that you can allow appropriate development and we take a robust stance with every applicant, whether they are a multi-million company or a small local builder.
“Everybody has to comply with the rules and to my mind there’s no exception to that.”
Cllr Patrick Nicholson also urged residents of Cundy Close to consult their solicitors, suggesting Persimmon Homes procrastination over the installing of the solar panels may have caused residents to lose out on cheaper energy bills since 2012.
A spokesman for Persimmon refused to rule out yet further action. Daniel Heathcote, director in charge at Persimmon Homes Cornwall said: “We are reviewing the inspector’s findings before making a decision on what action to take.”
In September 2011 the council’s planning committee granted Persimmon Homes permission to build a 1,684 home development at the former Plymstock Quarry site – now named Saltram Meadows – after a £26m package was agreed. The agreement saw the company promise contributions to the local infrastructure, including £1.5m towards sports provision, of which £420,000 will go towards a swimming pool in Plymstock.”
Devolution – the “Northern Powerhouse”: “pie-in-the sky” with our money
Isn’t it interesting that all devolution projects include at least one mega-billion pound project that comes off the government’s books and on to those of devolved areas – presumably allowing government to manipulate the national debt to show that the deficit is coming down … when costs have simply moved. And all of them include the word “regeneration” to make them look inviting. Not that the word is an inviting one in East Devon!
“There is no guarantee that investing billions in infrastructure will help the North of England, the man leading the “Northern Powerhouse” project says.
But former CBI chief John Cridland told the BBC that people should take a “leap of faith” on new roads and railways. He said he believed reducing journey times between northern cities would improve the economy.
But critics say the money might be better spent on training and skills – or on transport within cities.
Mr Cridland’s quango Transport for the North is due to publish its first report soon.
The chancellor’s advisory National Infrastructure Commission also will make recommendations on Northern transport.
‘Pie in the sky’
The bodies have been considering transport options such as a motorway running under the Peak District from Sheffield to Manchester, or an HS3 rail link between Leeds and Manchester.
But Anne Robinson, from Friends of the Peak District, told BBC News: “These are just pie-in-the-sky schemes. We haven’t been given the slightest shred of evidence that they will do any good.”
She warned that the motorway scheme – running more than 30 miles underground – would cost a fortune, as well as creating congestion in roads at either end of the tunnel and potentially disrupting the ecology of the Peaks National Park.
Mr Cridland said ambitious infrastructure should be on the agenda: “I’m not claiming there is perfect science here. “But I am convinced that after decades of under-investment, it’s now time to close that investment gap – and it will lead to better travelling experiences and economic growth.
“Transport economics can’t always prove this: sometimes, like the Victorian engineers, you have to take a leap of faith.”
Ms Robinson said it was foolish to take a leap of faith with billions of public money.
It is likely, though, that both quangos reporting on transport in the north will concentrate their efforts on solutions which bring quick improvement for travellers – like electrifying the Leeds-Manchester route and putting on extra carriages.
Regeneration
Another likely favourite option will be to introduce hard-shoulder running by making all of the M62 a “smart” motorway.
The two bodies may also be anxious to keep hope alive for heroic inter-city infrastructure in the north so people have faith in the regeneration of the region.
There is already a degree of cynicism about ambitious words from Westminster. One Manchester business leader disparaged the term “Northern Powerhouse”.
“It’s a bit embarrassing isn’t it? Frankly it looks like a brand in search of a product,” he told me.
Mr Cridland maintains that already the Powerhouse slogan itself has created a sense of excitement and purpose.
The team making key decisions on train operation in the north has been shifted from the south to Leeds, he says – and this is making planners more responsive to local needs.
The big cities of the north are talking to each other, making plans, dreaming they can really breathe new life into the region, Mr Cridland says.
Now, he confesses, some infrastructure has to follow.
Kerp those pictures of “the other East Devon” rolling in
Entries already in for our alternative “destruction of East Devon” photo competition – and what a tale they tell.
Keep them coming:
send to
eastdevonwatch@gmail.com
They can be anonymous, just let us know where and when taken
Entries close on 30 April 2016.
Shock, horror: planning problems hit the Home Counties!
It’s a pity that Christopher Booker can’t tell his NPPF from his SPPS and that it is only when planning problems hit the Home Counties that people suddenly take notice and get press coverage.
“It’s a pity that David Cameron could not, 10 days ago, have taken time from traipsing round Europe to visit the pretty Thames-side Oxfordshire village of Sutton Courtenay, not many miles from his constituency. He would have seen the main street flooded with sewage – just one consequence of his wish to see hundreds of thousands of new homes built across southern England, many of them in villages like Sutton Courtenay with its 1,000 homes (and where George Orwell, rather appropriately it seems, is buried in the churchyard).
Under Mr Cameron’s policy, which gives a cash incentive to councils to build as many new homes as possible under their own “Local Plans”, the Vale of the White Horse district council wants to see an additional 20,000 going up in the next few years. Those proposed for Sutton Courtenay, some already built, could be as many as 1,835, thus trebling the village’s population almost overnight to more than 7,000 (one of six current schemes may alone add 800 houses).
One of many glaring problems all this poses to residents is that, while the council seems only too eager to hand out planning permission to big developers, the local planners seem far less concerned about the colossal strain this will place on the village’s “infrastructure”, of which the recent tide of filth overflowing from its creaking Victorian sewerage system was only an early warning sign.
The village has just three shops, a small primary school and its surrounding roads are already under strain from a growing weight of traffic, not least a narrow bridge over the Thames which at busy times can already create long tailbacks. But when the villagers ask what plans there are to provide new infrastructure to support this avalanche of development, one document they are directed to is the government’s Strategic Planning Policy Statement (SPPS), which in 2012 boasted it would slash thousands of pages of planning rules to little more than 50.
The SPPS opens ominously with a claim that “national and international bodies have set out broad principles of sustainable development”, beginning with UN “Resolution 42/187”. The word “sustainable” is repeated 107 times. There are 18 mentions of “climate change”. But although there are 46 references to “infrastructure” there seems remarkably little to suggest that, to ensure genuinely “sustainable” development, it might be an idea for the planners to pay rather more attention to the need for new roads, shops and even an adequate sewerage system.
When Orwell wrote of how, in his world of the future, “Peace” meant war and “Truth” meant lies, he did not foresee how “Sustainable” would likewise come to mean its very opposite. In Sutton Courtenay churchyard he must be smiling wryly in his grave.”
Colyton public footpaths: research
Bumped up from a comment so people have the chance to see how a current commentator views it:
“A quick search suggests that you can find a background summary at http://www.devon.gov.uk/cma_report.htm?cmadoc=report_hcw1371.html and further documents relating to the appeal at http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/countryside/rightsofway/onlinerow/onlinerowd
The bad news is that this process seems to be well advanced – the good news is that it doesn’t appear to be completed yet.
It appears that DCC made an order on 20 November 2013 to delete these footpaths, but that this requires review by the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and a Public Local Inquiry.
The Notice of review by SecState and Public Local Inquiry was dated 1 September 2014 (more than 17 months ago), with an implication that representations and objections preceded that date, and a deadline of 8 December 2014 for representers and objectors to submit their legal case. The good news is that the Public Local Inquiry has been postponed at least twice first from 11 February 2015 and then from August 2015, with no revised date appearing – and no indication why there is a delay or whether the process has stalled permanently.
I would imagine that the proposals can still be viewed at Colyton Parish Council offices on Tuesdays and Thursdays 10:30am-noon, and at Devon County Hall weekdays 9am-4pm.”
“Cornwall for change” (70 town and parish councils) campaigns to protect countryside
“A group of town and parish councils has launched a campaign to protect “the green fields of Cornwall”.
The group Cornwall for Change, representing 70 town and parish councils, said there was great concern about the way planning was being executed in the Duchy.
And their fight won support from the House of Lords late last week.
Campaigners said that Cornwall Council has already given permission for nearly 30,000 new homes, most of which are to be built on green fields around existing towns.
“This will increase traffic, have a big (bad) visual impact and make little or no benefit to locals who need genuinely affordable homes,” the organisers said.
“We need to make much smarter use of existing sites in and around Cornwall’s town centres so they can flourish once again.”
Orlando Kimber, spokesman for the umbrella group, said: “We are seeing 52,000 new homes planned, and all over the place they are being built on the green fields of Cornwall.
“Using brownfield sites would reduce the pressure on transport, and increase housing density in towns, which Cornwall Chamber of Commerce is in favour of.
“We recognise that Cornwall Council is under pressure with its budget, and we feel that whatever money it does have, it should spend wisely.”
He has previously called for an audit of brownfield sites in the Duchy, and gave the example of two suitable brownfield sites in Bodmin – the Walker Lines industrial estate and the MPG book factory, which is now acquired by Ocean Housing. …”
SAVE CLYST ST MARY – FEBRUARY UPDATE
“Apologies for the length of this update. There have recently been a number of significant developments with regard to planning applications of which we feel you should be aware. You are therefore strongly urged to read the whole document.
As always, thank you for your continued support; we remain committed to protecting Clyst St Mary from inappropriate developments.
1. Local Plan
The most significant event since the last update has been the formal adoption of the Local Plan by EDDC. In theory this should protect the village from further large scale development other than the 150 houses on the brown field areas of the former Friends Provident site.
At the meeting of the Parish Council on 8th February, which was attended by members of our Campaign Group, Councillor Howe gave a very warm and upbeat welcome to the Plan and emphasised that it would give EDDC the clout it needed to prevent inappropriate development of green field sites. He also said that the Planning Committee had already refused several planning applications in East Devon on the basis they were not in accordance with the Plan.
We hope that this robust approach will be sustained when the planning applications for the Friends Provident site are eventually scrutinised by the Planning Committee. We are very fortunate that our District Councillor lives in the village and has been such a strong supporter of our Campaign against inappropriate development over the past 12 months. We are particularly grateful for his input to the draft of the Local Plan last March which resulted in the house numbers for the Friends Provident site being reduced from some around 300 to 150.
Within the Plan we have our own map! This clearly shows the playing fields of the Friends Provident site and the Plymouth Brethren field as remaining green and where building will not be permitted.
Interestingly it also shows the areas that become flooded when Grindle Brook bursts the banks, as it has several times this winter. You can view the map in the online version of this update on our website http://www.saveclyststmary.org.uk
2. Future of the Friends Provident Playing Fields
The Save Clyst St Mary Campaign Group has consistently taken a robust line that the green areas in and around Clyst House should remain green and, as already mentioned, we have been successful by having this included in the Local Plan.
We do not see it as being in our remit to get involved in deciding what these green spaces would be used for in future or how they should be administered. We feel this is a matter for the Parish Council. Our assumption and hope has always been that the existing sports pitches would remain and continue to be used by local sports teams to the benefit of the village and wider community.
At the Public Meeting held at the Village Hall on 16th November we listened with interest as Mr Peter Cain, who has a role in the administration of Clyst Valley Football Club, outlined his vision for the future of the sports fields. Our understanding that he has consulted with various sports related bodies and the agents for the Friends Provident Site.
We are also aware that the Parish Council has formed a Sport and Recreation Committee which will eventually be responsible for the administration of the sports fields and hold the land in some form of trusteeship.
Mr Cain also made some suggestions regards agreeing the release of some parts of the green field for house building in order to give something back to Friends Provident for allowing the sports pitches to remain as such. This is something we would strongly oppose because it would be against the Local Plan.
At the Parish Council Meeting on 8th February further details of these plans came to light and these are now causing us concern.
The Parish Council have been briefed by a representative of the agents, JLL, about a plan to build around 100-150 extra houses on the Plymouth Brethren field and in a line running from the Brethren field eastwards towards Clyst House.
The Parish Council has been sounded out by JLL about the possibility of a three way land swap. This would involve swapping the current Clyst Valley Football field for a new pitch on the Friends Site. The Plymouth Brethren land would swopped be for the Clyst Valley Football Pitch. An application would then be made to build a Plymouth Brethren meeting hall and large car park on the pitch.
These are proposals in principle and until a formal application is submitted the Parish Council cannot comment.
At this time we do not know the exact status of the football field land beyond that it is held in some sort of trust and from hearsay that it may have been given to the football club and/or village many years ago. If you can help us in any way with more information please get in touch.
It was confirmed at the Parish Council meeting by Councillor Howe that the trustees of the Football Club had agreed in principle with JLL to a land swap.
Obviously this is very disturbing news because it runs contrary to the aims of our Campaign Group, the Local Plan and the soon to adopted Neighbourhood Plan. We must now await the submission of fresh planning applications by JLL and the Plymouth Brethren. In the meantime we will keep you updated on further developments by email and on the website at http://www.saveclyststmary.org.uk.
When and if appropriate we will ask the Parish Council to call another Public Meeting in the Village Hall.
Over the past 12 months we have, with your invaluable support, achieved a great deal. Providing we stick together as residents and remain strong we will succeed in blocking further appropriate development from whatever quarter. As a village we are now in a far stronger position with the full backing of a Local Plan and very soon the Neighbourhood Plan.
3. Neighbourhood Plan
This is currently in the final consultation phase and is expected to be published in May. Once in place this will provide a further level of protection against the onslaught of the property developers. It can be seen at http://www.planning.bishopsclyst.co.uk/
For those that would prefer to look at a printed copy, it can be seen, until 1st March, at the following locations:
Cat & Fiddle Inn
Clyst St Mary Church
Clyst St Mary Post Office (Mills)
Clyst St Mary School
Clyst St Mary Village Hall
Half Moon Inn
Sowton Church
Sowton Village.
4. Foul smell coming from the Digester (pink ‘bubble’ situated in Oil Mill Lane)
Should you smell a strong odour which you believe is coming from the digester, remember that this needs to be reported to the Environmental Agency on an individual basis (they will not accept a group complaint). It is simple to do this: telephone (free) 0800 80 70 60.
5. Traffic Action Group
(distributed on behalf of the Parish Council)
As a member of our Parish Council, I am aware that there are any number of concerns relating to traffic, speeding, and general pedestrian and driver safety within the village and around the Parish.
One thing has become very apparent when pursuing any traffic related issue. Because Devon Highways are so cash strapped, and from experience difficult to communicate with, it has been suggested that a Traffic Action Group be formed.
If you have an issue you wish to raise, then so far as Devon Highways go, they require documented evidence of any problems. Therefore we are looking to local residents to write in to the Parish Council together with any photographic evidence highlighting their concerns.
It is no good grumbling to neighbours, or in the pub or shop, or even to your PC. Written documentation is what is needed, sent to your PC, so it can be collated and prioritised before approaching Devon Highways. As with so many local government departments, the more letters and pieces of evidence presented to them, the more likely they will take notice.
This is especially so if a safety issue plays an important role in any given concern. But it must be supported by as many individual missives as can be got together.
Therefore your Parish Council is encouraging you all to put pen to paper, or fingers to E-mail: bishopsclyst@gmail.com .If any of you wish to participate in helping to run an Action group you would be most welcome. You would not have to be a Parish Councillor as the group would gather information to present to the PC.
It seems that in the present climate of local and central government austerity, local lobbying as I have described is becoming an essential way of getting things done within a community like ours.
6. Flood insurance survey
(letter distributed on behalf of the Parish Council)
Dear Supporter
Please help Flood Re with research about the cost of flood insurance
The cost of flood insurance is high on the news agenda again following the flood damage caused by Storms Desmond, Eva and Frank. It is only two years since the previous significant flood event in the UK and experts predict that the risk of flooding is set to increase even further.
A new scheme called Flood Re has been set up by the insurance industry with the support of the Government to help those struggling to find affordable home insurance and will launch in April 2016.
In order to better understand what impact the new scheme will have, it is important for Flood Re to measure the availability and cost of home insurance now and then compare this with data collected after the launch in April.
National Flood Forum would like you to contribute to this research by taking part in an online survey. This study is being carried out by Consumer Intelligence http://www.consumerintelligence.com on behalf of Flood Re http://www.floodre.co.uk . It should take less than 10 minutes of your time to complete and as a thank you for helping Flood Re with this vital work, Consumer Intelligence will send you £5 via email to a registered PayPal account or if you prefer, they will donate £5 on your behalf to the National Flood Forum.
What do you need to do?
Simply complete the online response via the link below. Flood Re will use this information to obtain home insurance quotations at four points during 2016 and 2017. Your details will not be used for any other purpose without prior consent. https://consumerintelligence.fluidsurveys.com/s/flood_research/
National Flood Forum hopes that enough people will participate in the research to demonstrate how effective Flood Re is at making household insurance available to households in flood risk areas and that this can be used to shape and develop the scheme in the future.
N.B. There are still a few places left on the FloodRe roundtable discussions notably Reading (18th Feb), Wrexham (22nd Feb), York (25th Feb) and Gloucester (3rd March) for further details please contact Laura Furman on laura.furman@floodre.co.uk.
Flooding and sandstorm – Exmouth seafront road video
And take a look at the video of a drive on Exmouth seafront road this morning on the Facebook Exmouth Splash (in every sense of the word!) public discussion site.
And if anyone says the development doesn’t need an environmental impact assessment – show this to them!
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.”
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:
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).”
Clinton Devon attempts to reassure those who might be affected by its plans to ” restore” the lower River Otter
It definitely needs some careful reading between the lines – our compliments to the communications expert who drafted it! As always, what is NOT being said is probably much more important than what IS being said. Owl would not be at all happy if it lived in South Farm Road….
And the “reassurance” that it will conform to “guidance in force at the time of planning” doesn’t quite cut the mustard after Storm Frank.
East Devon Watch 