“Honiton for Sale” part 2 – some questions but very little chance of answers

This week’s Midweek Herald adds some interesting information to the story carried yesterday that former Chairman of East Devon District Council and town councillor, Peter Halse, believes that Honiton is being asset-stripped to pay for the vanity project EDDC HQ office relocation.

The Midweek Herald adds more comments from Councillor Halse:

… “In my personal view, Honiton is being put up for sale. Assets are being raised in order for the council to move to the outskirts of Exeter, which is not in the public interest”.

Mr Halse told the meeting that he had made strong protests to the district council regarding the move and added that he thought the district council had now realised “the Knowle is not quite the jewel in East Devon’s crown as it thought it was and that it was having to find other assets elsewhere.

An EDDC spokesperson said in response to this:

… “The question of succession to East Devon Business Centre has given us an opportunity to look again at how we can help meet the needs of business into the future in a words of enterprise and entrepreneurism very different from what existed when Heathpark Business Centre first opened its doors.

Lead members for business and officers carried out a tender exercise and interviewed four different consultancies. The chosen company, Carter Jonas, are in the process of gathering evidence and are expected to report back with their findings and recommendations within the next month or so”.

This raises several interesting questions:

If a respected and long-serving majority party Councillor has no real idea what is going on – how on earth do councillors not privy to the thoughts of those in the “inner sanctum” understand what they are voting for with the Skypark project?

The press release speaks only of something going out to tender – it does not say exactly what the tender was for and we will never know because the Asset Management Forum at EDDC has always met in secret and provides no agendas or minutes of its meetings for the public.

Councillor Halse’s comments seem to imply that EDDC is not going to get as much as it had wanted for Knowle. They have long said that the move will be “cost neutral” but that was when only Knowle and Manston Depot were mentioned. Is it still cost neutral when you add in the loss of the Heathpark site and the East Devon Business Centre? Again we will never know because the Relocation Working Party meetings are also held in secret and no agendas or minutes are produced.

We have a situation now where ALL decisions are now made in secret. Instead of information going to committees for discussion and decision they are being referred to creatively-named “Forums” and “Groups” so that the decision-making can all take place behind closed doors where even majority party councillors have no idea what is going on.

Let us hope that when the next council is convened it votes for a Committee system of decision-making rather than an Executive Board system which allows a very small number of people – hand-picked by the Leader – to take decisions on behalf of the majority.

Remember Leader Diviani’s last election promise: Clean, Green and Seen. Not Unclean, Ungreen and Unseen.

Developer allowed to chop protected trees because local authority did not mention them in search documents

One to watch out for, councillors – and to alert our council Arboriculturalist about:

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19702:trial-over-uprooting-of-tree-subject-to-preservation-order-collapses&catid=58&Itemid=26

We don’t want EDDC getting sloppy with our developers do we.

East Devon homes cost more than 12 times average annual salaries

http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/West-Country-expensive-home-buyers-London/story-22767121-detail/story.html

Persimmon profits up 57%, average house price now £265,000

Persimmon has a large number of sites locally. It has reported pre-tax profits for the half year up to £212.9 million. The Evening Standard website article also mentions that the average UK house price rose by 10.2% in the 12 months to June and reached a record high of £265,000 for the average house. However, the good news is that the Office of National Statistics had expected prices to rise 11.2% so we must be thankful for small mercies!

Fighting for Feniton – yet again; Wain Homes continues its onslaught

Rumours that Wainhomes is applying to extend its existing site by a further 31 houses are true: plans for these new houses have been on display at the sales office on site. Wainhomes claims that, as a ‘responsible developer’ it’s just to show prospective buyers what might happen, although it’s hard to read this as anything other than marketing houses for which permission has not even been granted. Fight for Feniton understands that one buyer who purchased one of the 50 houses to be built at Winchester Park, and who was assured solemnly that their countryside view would be protected, only discovered otherwise when Wainhomes cheerfully handed them the keys to their new property and said they’d be building 31 more houses, some of which would be blocking their view!

The history of this site is one of development by stealth. Wainhomes’ initial application in 2011 was for a staggering 170 properties stretching from Station Road across to Green Lane. Wainhomes then supposedly ‘listened’ to local opposition, and reduced its proposal to ‘just’ 50 houses, which were eventually allowed at appeal in 2012, despite massive opposition from the village, Parish and District Councils, owing to Feniton’s inadequate infrastructure, narrow roads, minimal employment opportunities and considerable flooding problems.

Wainhomes’ next attack on the village was for an application for 83 units, which was comprehensively thrown out at a ‘Super Inquiry’ of the Planning Inspectorate in January this year: roughly four months after that result was announced, Wainhomes has now come back with its proposal for 31 houses. Let there be no doubt that Wainhomes has no intention of stopping at 31, 83 or anything else until it has concreted over the entire site and built (at least) the 170 it always intended.

It’s the Wainhomes way: the village of Dobwalls, in Cornwall, is faced with a proposal by the same developer to build 62 houses, the local Parish Council being up in arms since their roads are narrow, the infrastructure can’t cope, and it’d increase the size of the village by 20%. Sound familiar? – see

http://www.cornishguardian.co.uk/Wainhomes-puts-forward-plans-62-new-houses/story-21741742-detail/story.html

As of writing Wainhomes has only announced its intention to build these extra houses: a formal application is likely to be made in September. Fight for Feniton will continue the battle against inappropriate development in the village. Keep up to date with the latest news by attending Feniton Parish Council meetings, and checking the following websites:

Fight for Feniton
http://theffff.wordpress.com/

blogs for District Councillor Susie Bond
http://www.susiebond.co.uk) and
County Councillor Claire Wright
http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/site/blog

the East Devon Alliance (http://eastdevonalliance.org/
and of course Feniton Parish Council http://fenitonparishcouncil.wordpress.com/

Exeter Airport gets busier and busier

Replace that triple glazing at EDDC vanity HQ with quadruple glazing perhaps:

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Good-news-Exeter-Airport-growth-continues/story-22762540-detail/story.html

Average British home now has one less bedroom and is almost half the size of homes in the 1920s

“The average home typically covered 1,647 sq ft and boasted four bedrooms in the 1920s, according to analysis by the Royal Institution of British Architects, but today’s versions have three bedrooms and are 925 sq ft.”

Wonder what the size of the average Cranbrook home is?

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/aug/17/housebuilders-price-bubble-

Cranbrook – Community Forum – some highlights

Cranbrook Community Forum Steering Group

Meeting July 2014 – some highlights

… A discussion was held around roads and parking after a resident asked if KS/EDDC is happy with the strategy as the roads are too narrow. CW advised that the Forum have reviewed the plans for Phase 2. The Planning Group (including AB and AN) spent a fair bit of time looking over the plans and provided comments to EDDC regarding car parking allocation and lack of open spaces. CW added that AN spent a weekend reviewing the parking allocation to each of the 580+ properties and even reported that a couple of properties didn’t have any form of parking allocated. Although nothing can be done with regards to the parking allocation in phase 1, the Forum has had some influence over phase 2.

… Future Planning Application

DS informed the Forum that EDDC have been advised by the Consortium to expect a planning application for the expansion of Cranbrook in October of this year. The Consortium has confirmed that this application will include areas to the East and West of the existing plans approved, along with an area to the South of the old A30.

DS advised that EDDC do not know the exact location that the application will cover, the likely number of homes, what facilities or infrastructure will be included, or what plans there may be for the Consortium to engage with
the Community on this matter. DS added that EDDC have no further information relating to the detail and can confirm that EDDC have not
been involved in any pre-application discussions or negotiations. East Devon and the Consortium agree that a thorough assessment of Cranbrook is required and that a comprehensive and joined up approach to planning the next phase is essential.

Q from the floor –

How many houses are meant to be built in Cranbrook?

AB – Not entirely sure how many homes were in the first application, however the second application is 587. Therefore we would assume that the first application was similar possibly around 700 homes.

The original plan was to have 2,800 homes , but then this increased to
3,500. There is also an eastern and western expansion area, which would take the number of homes to around 6,000. The 3,500 homes have got outline planning approval.

Click to access community_forum_meeting_minutes_8th_july_2014_-_final.pdf

Sidmouth beach management plan delay to amass more historical information

http://www.middevonstar.co.uk/news/devon_news/11405533.Beach_Management_project_delayed_to_ensure_vital_information_from_25_years_ago_is_tracked_down/?ref=rss

Green field housing estates in the South West – CPRE notes dismay

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Minister-want-fields-houses/story-22300866-detail/story.html

Green belt planning approvals double under coalition

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11022911/PIC-PLEASE-Doubling-in-new-homes-built-on-the-Greenbelt-since-Coalition-was-formed.html

However, Brandon Lewis, new planning minister says: …n“Local Plans are now at the heart of the planning system, so councils decide where development should go.

“There is enough brownfield land to deliver up to 200,000 new homes, and councils should be using their powers and the support that’s available from the Government to prioritise development on these sites, and defend our valuable countryside against urban sprawl.”

Er, perhaps he hasn’t yet been briefed on what happens when you haven’t got a Local Plan or a 5 or 6 year land supply.

More on those proposed planning changes

Warehouses to houses, nightclubs to houses, click and collect extensions – can we keep up!

http://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19550:warehouse-to-new-house-further-planning-reforms&catid=63&Itemid=31

The “Exeter and East Devon Growth Point”

Anyone who wants a lesson in the triumph of hype over reality should see this “fly over the Exeter and East Devon Growth Point” video here:

http://www.iviewer3d.co.uk/eed/flythrough.htm

and note:

how many times the commentary includes the word “sustainable”

and

how many times the benefits of the area mention Exeter rather than East Devon.

Oh, and someone needs to edit out the section on the ” inter modal freight terminal” as that has just been ditched by Sainsbury’s.

And maybe tone down the bit about how improvements to junctions 29 and 30 of the M5 will “improve traffic flow”!

District councillors can pull out all the stops when objecting to a planning application – albeit in another district!

http://www.trinitymatters.co.uk/index.php/uplyme-east-devon/item/960-dorset-cc-lyme-regis-landfill-site-can-anything-still-be-done

Would that EDDC AONB sites in other areas (within our own district) received such support.

Knowle relocation: interesting case law on disclosure

Recently we reported on a case where the London Borough of Southwark was forced to disclose contract information in a planning matter. Below is a lawyer’s summary of the points raised by the judgment.

Of great interest is the section where it states clearly that a viability forecast comes under Environmental Information Regulations and not Freedom of Information. This may have implications for the case of EDDC v Information Commissioner where EDDC is refusing to disclose information about Knowle relication. EIR requires far more disclosure than FOI. Note also the remarks about transparency

The ICO heard the challenge to LB Southwark’s decision to refuse disclosure last year:

It accepted that disclosure of redacted elements of the reports would be commercially harmful. Nonetheless, applying the public interest test under the EIR regime, it decided that the interest in disclosure outweighed the harm. LB Southwark appealed the decision to the First Tier Tribunal, which has now held that:

The viability assessment is “environmental information” under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.

The EIR regime operates with a presumption of disclosure, unlike the Freedom of Information Act 2000 regime.

Publication of viability forecast data relating to deals to be done with other businesses should not be disclosed, because the commercial harm was not in the public interest, but private sales and registered provider deals should be.

The ICO was wrong to refuse to treat Lend Lease’s development model as a “trade secret” and there was no need to show monetary loss arising from disclosure.

The Council’s suggestion of absolute confidentiality in relation to the activities of its staff was wrong. Likewise, there is not always a public interest in maintaining secrecy around public private partnership negotiations – the law on information disclosure is drawn to ensure transparency where it matters.

Disclosure of the starting point in negotiations (i.e. the initial viability reports) is not the same as the disclosure of the full continuum of those negotiations – the likelihood of a chilling effect on other deals should be viewed in that light. The public interest warranted disclosure of much of the information – given “the importance, in this particular project, of local people having access to information to allow them to participate in the planning process”. That factor was held to outweigh the public interest in maintaining the remaining rights of Lend Lease and those subcontractors who contributed to the document. –

See more at: http://www.planninglawblog.com/#sthash.UeaDHxAP.dpuf

MP Neil Parish gets controversial Gittisham decision “called in”

Good to see Honiton and Tiverton MP Neil Parish giving the same support to Gittisham that he gave to Feniton but also raises some questions:

… “Neil Parish MP wrote to the Minister on behalf of Gittisham Parish Council and the local residents on the 10th June to ask that the Department for Communities and Local Government review how the decision was made to grant planning permission and whether the correct procedures were carried out.”

Given the worryingly strange behaviour of the Development Management Committee in Newton Poppleford recently one wonders if a review should be much wider and more far-reaching. And definitely one for the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

http://www.neilparish.co.uk/news/neil-parish-mp-calls-minister-gittisham-development

Local Independent councillors share their views on “localism”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Housing-minister-s-survey-spin-angers-campaigners/story-22066840-detail/story.html

Eric Pickles seeks technical consultation on planning

Some of us may feel we know almost as much, or more, about the technical aspects of planning than do many of our officers and councillors!

It is worth reading just for the comments om town centre parking alone and is also useful about changes that could be made to Environmental Impact Assessments and improving the NPPF:

Click to access Technical_consultation_on_planning.pdf

Musings on the damage being done to the countryside by the National Planning Policy Framework

A thoughtful article in today’s Western Morning News:

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Region-threat-building-countryside-easier/story-22044503-detail/story.html

Perhaps if we re-designated our green fields as “green manufacturing industries” and our tourist industry as “coastal and rural economic growth generators” we might get some people to understand why they are so important.

As both our local MPs are “hunting, shooting, fishing” men perhaps they could weigh in on our behalf?