Rolle College, Exmouth: plans filed for 85 homes

” … The application states there was ‘overwhelming support’ at the consultation for community, education, employment and other uses, and that of the two options, the one with more community use was ‘largely preferred’, but says permission is being sought for both in case the second scheme ‘cannot be successfully implemented’. …

… The filing of the planning application follows the site being put up for sale last week – a move the university said was designed to establish market value, adding that it would run separately to the planning process.

REL is continuing its efforts to secure some or all of the site for community use, possibly in consortium with a developer.

The application – an outline application with all matters reserved except access – will be discussed by Exmouth Town Council’s planning committee on Monday. East Devon District Council will then make the final decision on planning permission.”

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/rolle_college_housing_plan_filed_with_council_1_4342201

Exmouth Town Council unhappy about Dinan Way Section 106 fait-accompli

Honestly, some of Exmouth’s town councillors are also majority party district councillors (including Councillor Maddie Chapman).  You would think that the left hand ought to know what the right hand is doing!  However, she IS on the EDDC Scrutiny Committee, so she might like to ask them to have a look at how this happened!

“Exmouth Town Council’s planning committee this week considered amended plans for 98 homes at Higher Marley Road.

But during the debate, councillors criticised a Devon County Highways statement saying that ‘Section 106’ money from the developers could be used to fund the completion of Dinan Way, between Hulham Road and the A376, and possible traffic calming works. Devon County Council later denied any wrongdoing.

During the town planning meeting, town mayor Councillor Maddy Chapman said: “I would like this council to object to the fact that a county council department is making deals with developers, behind the planning authority [East Devon District Council] and the town council’s back, by saying that Section 106 money can be used for traffic calming in Higher Marley.

“It’s not up to the county council to decide. [Section 106] is supposed to be community infrastructure, not spent on roads.”

Councillor Cherry Nicholas said: “What disturbs me is that they’ve already calculated, if they end up with 98 residential buildings, a contribution amounting to £5,000 per dwelling, ie £490,000, would be appropriate and consistent with the amounts required under a Section 106 agreement which can be applied to the Dinan Way extension.

“I just think that it is rather morally reprehensible that they’ve already jumped that far ahead.”

Town councillors voted to oppose the planning application – an outline application seeking approval for access only – with concerns also raised about overdevelopment, the loss of part of a Devon bank and a lack of community infrastructure. East Devon District Council will decide on planning permission.

A Devon County Council spokesman denied that the authority had gone behind the council’s back, and added: “Ultimately, Section 106s are a matter of negotiation between the county and district councils, because those authorities are responsible for highways and local planning, and the developer. But there’s no reason why the town council cannot suggest what it thinks the priorities for Section 106 contributions may be.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/homes_opposed_amid_dinan_way_funding_dispute_1_4335249

Fly tipping in Exmouth

Is this a reaction to new refuse collection changes in parts of Exmouth, or some other reason?

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/fly_tipping_blamed_for_tesco_recycling_issues_1_4327596

“95% reject Exmouth seafront plan”

Good luck with that, good people of Exmouth – EDDC’s default position in such cases is to go with the views of the 5%, which includes the views of their favourite people of all time – developers.

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Survey-shows-8216-95-reject-Exmouth-seafront-plan/story-28245099-detail/story.html

Exmouth ” phased development” – pull the other one!

Just love the last sentence in this article from Exmouth Journal website! Councillors now totally redundant ( see also post below on Knowle redevelopment).

Exmouth Fun Park, in Queen’s Drive, is in the area East Devon District Council (EDDC) wants to redevelop with new buildings and leisure facilities – the so-called Splash.

Redevelopment of the fun park was not scheduled to occur until ‘phase three’ of this plan, earmarked for a later date.

However, EDDC now says it needs to fill in the park’s two boating lakes sooner, in order to create a site compound for contractors working on phase one of the redevelopment – the realignment of Queen’s Drive.

The plan to move the road is in a separate planning application, which was backed by a majority of members of Exmouth Town Council’s planning committee – although some said it was premature with detailed plans for the whole area not yet revealed.

However, considering an application to fill in the lakes, councillors voted to defer until legal action regarding the site had been concluded, and a public consultation could be carried out.

Councillor Maddy Chapman said: “I ask this be deferred until after the court cases, and until we know what’s happening, and we can go out to public consultation and we all know what we’re doing.”

Councillor Steve Gazzard said: “The whole idea, as I understand it, was to see what the people of Exmouth would like to see on that site.

“If you are going to fill in two ponds, I take it, rightly or wrongly, that a decision has already been made. I don’t like that.”

An EDDC spokesman said: “The applications considered by Exmouth Town Council have been submitted to ensure that the relocation of the road and car park can move forward at the earliest opportunity. We are currently going through a legal process with the fun park tenant and it would be inappropriate to make any further comment at this stage.”

EDDC planners will decide on permission.

Breaking News: Exmouth Town Council supports seafront development

The front page headline of today’s East Devon Express and Echo says “Town Council backs seafront first phase – no objection to road changes paving way for redevelopment”.

The story goes on to say this means they support road realignment, parking areas, demolition of beach huts and DJs Diner, though reservations of some councillors led to deferral of plans for infilling of ponds at the Fun Park.

Campaigners for the Facebook Group “Save Exmouth Seafront” are incredulous that public opinion has not swayed the town councillors. They also point out that no planning application has received permission yet EDDC is committing at least £1.5m for the programme when no developer contribution has been offered towards the work.

Objections to the plans must be made by midday on 27 November 2015.

East Devon coastal sprawl could cost you a 27% drop in your house price if World Heritage status risked

” … the Jurassic Coast World Heritage Site is formed from a massive slice of East Devon and Dorset.

This includes towns already well known to attract premium price tags such as Beer, Lyme Regis, Seaton and Sidmouth and Budleigh Salterton, which earlier this year was named among the most expensive places to buy in the Westcountry with average prices of £342,442.

According to Zoopla, while the average residential property is valued at £284,000, those near a site that holds Unesco status are valued at £362,000 – a difference of 27%.”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/World-heritage-status-means-West-homes-attract-78/story-28184478-detail/story.html

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!

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”.

Exmouth: EDDC changes its mind about rugby club supermarket site

“East Devon District Council (EDDC) has viewed a store on the site in Royal Avenue as a priority since publishing its Exmouth Masterplan in 2011.

However, the latest draft of EDDC’s Local Plan deletes references to the store, and says a new or refreshed Masterplan will be drawn up.

Exmouth’s mayor has welcomed the rethink, but the chairman of the town’s chamber of commerce says a new large food store is still required, even if a proposed Marks and Spencer store, also in Royal Avenue, is built, as this would not be enough to meet the town’s needs.

When asked about the council’s policy shift, an EDDC spokesman said: “As a council, we need to be adaptable in our approach to our Masterplan and refresh our proposals when we need to.

“For example, we all agree that a large supermarket development on the estuary side is a challenge, so we need to take a look at the location and other town centre sites.”

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.”

Exmouth seafront trader sad about “regeneration” plans

“Earlier in the year it was announced that Exmouth seafront, where the café is situated, would be undergoing an £18m redevelopment. It is still unclear how long the Harbour View Café will continue trading.

Dawn said for 18 months the existing traders were excited about the redevelopment, until it became increasingly clear they wouldn’t be a part of it.

“I was absolutely gutted when I realised we were surplus to requirements,” she said.

“We suddenly realised that our time might be running out down there and for myself, I’ve spent my whole working life down there, I still don’t know what I’ll do next. I feel lost at the thought of losing it. We’re living on a day by day, hand to mouth situation until we know more. We say to our customers we are still here. The doors are still open at the moment. Whilst we are still here there is hope.”

Read more: http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Exmouth-business-owner-m-sad-prospect-losing/story-28046195-detail/story.html

Exmouth Save our Seafront Spotlight item

The protest at Full Council by Save Our Seafront campaigners, was aired on Spotlight tv yesterday, on the morning and the evening news.

See:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06j6pdv/spotlight-22102015

from 12:45-12:53.

Exmouth seafront “dangerous territory” says council leader

Mysterious words from EDDC Leader Paul Diviani at the latest Full Council apparently. They tumbled out in response to a barrage of questions from IEDA Councillors, following issues raised by representatives of the Save Exmouth Seafront (SES) campaign.

East Devon Watch has received this summary:

“Cllr Megan Armstrong quoted from Exmouth Regeneration Board minutes (7th Oct 2015) which state that the area was being regenerated “for the wider benefit of Exmouth” . Was this statement, and other justifications for the seafront development, “based on facts, assumptions, or wishful thinking by the Council”, she asked?

Cllr Ben Ingham picked up her point, saying that the Council should “tell the truth”, that their Exmouth seafront plans were to make money to fill an anticipated gap in their finances. It was “total rubbish” to pretend it was “for the wider benefit of Exmouth”.

Cllr Ingham also referred to concerns raised at public question time about EDDC’s choice of partnership company for the seafront development. SES had sent Councillors their research on the matter. But Cllr Cathy Gardner’s proposal that the Scrutiny Committee should check that due diligence had been properly done, was summarily dismissed by Leader Paul Diviani. “You are wandering into territory that is very dangerous”, he told her.

A (combined?) written reply to the Independent Cllrs was promised.”

More on the Save Exmouth Seafront campaign on BBC RADIO DEVON’s breakfast programme today and on RADIO EXE.

Some background here:

Independent EDA Exmouth Councillor’s speech to Cabinet

Is what is best for East Devon District Council best for East Devon?

It is now widely accepted that councils are no longer viewed as “public services”.  A council used to be elected to represent the interests of its area and its councillors were supposed to represent the views of their electors (though this was not always the case).  Council tax was seen as the price we paid for our public services.

Now councils are seen as businesses.  They exist to make a profit.  They are no longer guardians of public assets but are looking to sell off as many of their “unprofitable” assets as possible whilst retaining cash cows.  They do not see a responsibility to council tax payers or to future generations and now developers are what they call their real “customers” that they are there to serve.  Indeed, a few years ago, one of EDDC’s senior officers said that, yes, developers are their real customers as they pay large sums into council coffers, more than council tax and therefore they should be considered the council’s most important customers – far more important than council tax payers.

Now we have the situation where the “council businesses” no longer has the interests of electors at their heart and they are increasingly attempting to be simply profitable businesses.  But the problem then arises when what is best for the business is not best for electors.

Take the situation in Exmouth.  The district council does not want Marks and Spencers Food to be sited near the railway and bus stations (on land owned by Devon County Council) but on its own land which is currently designated as a rugby field.  Marks and Spencers knows what it wants and would have been aware of the choice of sites and they chose the one that suited their needs.

This now pitches council business against council business – EDDC against DCC.  Some might say this is a good thing as it stimulates competition.  However, there is a BIG stumbling block.  One of these businesses (EDDC) holds the right to allow or refuse the planning application on the other businesses’s land.  Today it is EDDC which holds the trump cards, tomorrow it may be DCC (for example, Straitgate Quarry, where DCC wants it to continue and EDDC does not).

In the past, the deal-breaker would have been:  what is best for the district?  Now the deal-breaker is:  what effect does this have on our income stream and our ability to sell off assets to the highest bidder?

Increasingly, councillors are playing no part in these decisions, except to follow government guidelines that services must be slashed and developers must be encouraged and they must toe the party line on this.

We, the electors, are not just marginalised but practically eradicated from the decision-making process, since our interests are not those of the businesses which our councillors now serve.

Is this what we should accept?  If not, how do we ensure that we get what is best for our district and not what is best for EDDC plc or DCC plc?

EDDC planners confirmed holiday accommodation at Queens Drive two years ago

Agenda Item 3 SW Region Planning Officers meeting, Cranbrook:

“Exmouth and Seaton Regeneration:

Presentation by Alison Hayward, Principal Regeneration Project Manager at East Devon District Council – Appendix 2
Exmouth noted signs of economic decline in earl y 2000’s.
Council – enabling role and significant landowner.

Masterplan adopted 2011 and delivery strategy. Public realm improvements £1m. Elizabeth Hall community venue to redevelop as Premier Inn. Indoor bowling alley, soft play, venue (all from private investment). Station area – aim to improve connectivity, discussions with stagecoach (depot). Rugby club to be relocated to enable supermarket development. Watersports facilities at Queens Drive – looking to relocate road for better linkage with sea – inc hotel / holiday accommodation. Outline planning application prior to selling some of the site to developer partner / operator. Mamhead slipway (deepwater) collapsed – engineering solutions to replace/enhance, up to £1.3m council costs. Town centre area also being examined – land ownership issues complex.

Seaton – special policy (regeneration) in 2006 local plan. Capital receipt of EDDC land sale (Tesco + 400 homes) reinvested. Coastal communities and HLF funding bids for fossil centre. Wetlands reserve (Devon Wildlife Trust). Other projects: Seaton Quay, workshops, tramway improvements.

Q&A – Tesco does not appear to have impacted on town centre. Ex estuary mitigation strategy for Premier Inn south.”

Planning Officers SW meeting October 2013

Click to access SW%20Region%20Notes%20181013.pdf

Exmouth regeneration: a resident writes

I spent my youth living in Ramsgate, and saw the town councillor’s over several years close down businesses and dither about making idiotic plans they could never keep. Usually big investors pulling of projects. I have lived in Exmouth for 2 years and would not like to see the same thing happen here.

My message to Richard Cohen is simple enough. If you force a business to close, you need to have something there to replace it. Big ideas cost big money. Have the council got all the funding they need.

So we hear of plans for a supermarket in the rugby grounds apparently going back a few years ago. It should already have happened. Now we hear of Marks and Spencer planning on opening a store in the bus depot. Then we hear the council yet again dithering about where they should have a store.

I have seen it all before, and know the outcome. Mr Richard Cohen needs to get his act together. Before this fine town ends up a ghost town.

Paul Meyer

Higher Marley Road Exmouth planning group news

From the Higher Marley Road action group:

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON HIGHER MARLEY ROAD

Dear Supporter,

This is just a brief note to update you on what is happening with regard to the planning application to build 98 houses on Higher Marley Road.

First and foremost we’re sorry to say that it has not gone away! Despite the fact that the application has not yet been considered by the EDDC Development Committee the developers are clearly still pushing it forward and we anticipate that if may well go to committee either on the meeting scheduled for 2nd November or 8th December.

What’s happening with the EDDC Local Plan?
The EDDC Local Plan is the overall planning document that guides the development of housing in the district. The latest version of this plan sets out the number of houses that are needed in the next 5 years and the sites that will be used to meet this need and the good news is that the site at Higher Marley Road is not among them. The bad news is that the Local Plan as submitted by EDDC needs to be approved by a central government inspector and he is yet to give his view (it is expected this will happen in the next 2-3 weeks). If he approves the plan then this will be very helpful and will make it much more likely that the site on Higher Marley Road will be refused permission. If not then it’s still possible to block the development but it will be tougher.

What have the developers been doing?
We cannot see everything that goes on but they have clearly had discussions with Devon County Highways Authority (CHA) and EDDC’s Tree officer in an attempt to have these bodies withdraw/reduce their earlier objections. As a result Devon CHA have now said that in principle they will not object to access being granted although we disagree with much of their logic (see below). The developers have also written to the government inspector who is reviewing the EDDC Local Plan saying they believe the area needs more sites to be made available and that Higher Marley Road should be one of them!

What are we doing?
We have been monitoring what has been happening and keeping our local councillors informed (who continue to be very supportive).

A number of our group met with a representative of Devon CHA and Devon Constabulary during a site visit in September to discuss the safety issues resulting from the Traffic on Higher Marley Road. Given the comments that were made during the visit we were very disappointed by the eventual submission that was made by Devon Highways and have written a response pointing out inconsistencies in the submission and suggesting other work that needs to be carried out before any access for the new development is granted
.

Whether the application goes before the November or December EDDC Development Committee we are geared up and ready to submit our final objection letter in the run up to the meeting and to speak on the day. We believe we have a very strong case why the Higher Marley Road site should not be developed (even if the Inspector says that more sites are needed) and we will make sure it is heard.

Due to the cost of printing and the lack of any dramatic news we will not be producing a “letter box drop” version on this occasion so do please pass on the contents of this email to anyone else you believe maybe interested.

We’ll continue to keep you posted of any developments but if you have any questions or comments in the meantime then please let us know.

The Marley Planning Group