Category Archives: Feniton/ Talaton

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

8 Jan 2016

Posted under

Feniton/ Talaton, Wainhomes

Wainhomes hit the headlines yet again: and not in a good way

Wainhomes certainly seems to know how to upset people, including the police, yet it just seems to be water off the duck’s back (or perhaps water anywhere but the right place!).

1 November 2015: Police in St Austell object to WAunhomes building houses on grounds that “the design of the development may encourage antisocial and criminal behaviour”:

http://www.cornishguardian.co.uk/Police-object-Wainhomes-St-Austell-development/story-28232371-detail/story.html

2 January 2016: Wainhomes being investigated by West Devon Borough Council for possible breach of Section 106 conditions, something the residents of Feniton will find familiar:

http://www.tavistock-today.co.uk/article.cfm?id=411530&headline=Possible%20breach%20%20in%20agreement%20on%20homes%20investigated&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2016

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

4 Jan 2016

Posted under

Feniton/ Talaton, Flooding, Wainhomes

You think Feniton is the only place where Wainhomes mucked up surface water drainage? Think again!

“Following heavy rain in November and December, local residents living at Hurst Meadows and Craiglands are in despair due to “dark brown” flood water that has been flowing towards their properties from a Broad Lane development.

At the beginning of November, it is understood that residents of Craiglands advised Rochdale Council that an attenuation pond at the top of Hurst Meadows was almost “full to the brim” and that that outflow pipe had “disappeared under the water and foliage that had not been removed”.

A resident reported to the council that surface water from the Wain Homes side of the development was “pouring onto the footpath and grass” around the attenuation pond and added that “the water was dark brown in colour” and that “so much of it had flowed into the pond that its contents were also dark brown.”

Neil Longsden from the Broad Lane Action Group (BLAG) said: “Rochdale Council has responded to the affected outflow pipe (which is owned by United Utilities) that had become defective and it was hoped the situation would be resolved quite quickly. Our member advised the council that when she walked over the land at 11am on Monday 16 November, the pipe was visible and the dark brown surface water only appeared between 11am and 12 noon that day. We question what is the ‘brown water’? Is it a danger to local residents and families? Where is it coming from? How will it be rectified?

“We do not hold our breath for an answer because we have been waiting almost 12 months for Rochdale Council to appoint an expert to identify the source of the water which has plagued Craiglands residents for 25 years and continues to do so. Councillor Kath Nickson requested this report at the beginning of 2015 and confirmed funds were available – the council say they cannot find an expert to carry out this research into an issue which has caused so much distress over the years.”

Plans to build a housing development on the site were approved by councillors in April 2014.

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/86525/broad-lane-housing-development-plans-approved

Mr Longsden added: “When BLAG was objecting to the then proposed developments one of the issues raised was the extremely wet conditions of Spring Hill (the area going to be developed). During the Planning Inspector’s hearing Taylor Wimpey and Wain Homes both agreed to install attenuation tanks that would retain almost all surface water and then slowly release it into the attenuation pond at Hurst Meadows before being again released into the culvert which runs towards Oldham Road.

“Towards the end of November 2015 Rochdale started to experience continuous rainfall and the pond soon reached critical levels. The open space at the top of Hurst Meadows was flooded and covered in silt and other concoctions, as were the public footpaths running through the area which are used by local residents extensively on a daily basis.”

It is understood that Wain Homes have commenced groundworks to clear up the silt and other debris and is working to reinstate the land to its former ‘grassed terrain’. They also plan to install an attenuation tank, which should help to control the previously rapid flow of water.

Taylor Wimpey are said to be installing their attenuation tank and other control devices in the next couple of weeks, with their part of the engineering to control the surface water on schedule.

Rochdale Council did not respond to our request for comment.”

http://rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/99902/hurst-meadows-and-craiglands-residents-in-despair

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

4 Jan 2016

Posted under

Feniton/ Talaton, Flooding, Wainhomes

Feniton: a tale of two flood relief systems where Wainhomes comes bottom

Feniton’s Independent Councillor Susie Bond report on Feniton’s most recent flooding challenges shows there were mixed results. Those of the Environment Agency’s Phase 1 works appear to be doing their job – but those of the controversial Wainhomes development are a very different story.

It is worth going to Councillor Bond’s web page (link below) to see the photographs.

EDDC’s negligent attitude to this problem must surely be a case for the Ombudsman.

“… Less successful was the works carried out by Wainhomes on the Winchester Park site.

Surface water poured around the attenuation tanks, straight into the Parish Council play area. The special surface under the swings is now full of silt and will have to be cleaned again (I’ve lost track of how many times this has had to be done and at what cost to the public purse). From there, it flooded the allotments (again) and poured under the gates into the drains. With a night of rain ahead, the flood wardens were out in force to slow the rate of flow such that the drains would be able to cope.

It was cold, miserable work.

The frustrating thing is that this is still happening at all, even after Wainhomes has built the 50 houses they were allowed. As is well known, Wainhomes failed initially to install attenuation tanks to help mitigate surface water run-off from their site. Another measure was for them to install swales – a system of ditches between the estate and the adjoining agricultural fields – to help store surface water.

When flood wardens and I looked at the swales over New Year to see how well they were coping, to our amazement they were virtually empty.

Were the swales built according to the specifications drawn up by Wainhomes’ consultants? Or is the design of the surface water drainage system substandard, as Feniton Parish Council suspects?

Either way we were amazed to see that the new bank between Station Road and the open space vacated by the temporary site office has been deliberately breached.

Why?

This irresponsible action has resulted in water being allowed to pour from the site down Station Road towards houses which have a long history of flooding.”

https://susiebond.wordpress.com/2016/01/04/water-water-everywhere-here-we-go-again/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

30 Dec 2015

Posted under

Feniton/ Talaton, Flooding, Misc

Many people don’t know they live on flood plains

“Two million households do not realise they are living on flood plains – while chronic underinvestment and climate change are increasing the risks of serious flooding, Government advisers have warned. …

… About 12,000 planning applications to build up to nine properties each on flood plains did not receive specific advice from the EA in 2013 due to staffing cuts, the report finds.

As a result, more than 100,000 homes could have been built without proper oversight to ensure that they are safe, resilient and do not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere.

More than 800 jobs – 20 per cent of staff – have been lost in the Environment Agency (EA)’s flood risk management team since September 2010, with more than half of those in roles specifically tasked with avoiding floods, despite ministers’ pledges to protect frontline jobs, the CCC warns.
Key pieces of legislation designed to reduce the risk of floods by improving drainage from new properties have not been properly implemented, despite being recommended by the 2008 Pitt review into the floods the previous year, which left 13 people dead and 45,000 homes flooded.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/10955112/Two-million-households-do-not-realise-they-are-living-on-flood-plains.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

18 Sep 2015

Posted under

EDDC, Feniton/ Talaton, Wainhomes

Comments

1 Comment

The perils of a developer-led district: EDDC v Wainhomes in Feniton

Full details of Wainhomes total arrogance here:

https://susiebond.wordpress.com/2015/09/18/eddc-takes-a-firm-stand-against-wainhomes/

EDDC’s last paragraph in their letter to Wainhomes states:

“Both myself and colleagues have in recent weeks offered to meet with representatives from Wainhomes either in the offices here or on site and I am disappointed that none of these offers have been taken up. In an attempt to resolve this situation I can confirm that those offers still remain and I would strongly encourage an early dialogue in respect of the matters identified.”

You see, that’s what happens when you have a developer-led district.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

3 Sep 2015

Posted under

EDDC, Environment (local), Exeter City Council, Exmouth, Feniton/ Talaton, Local Plan, Local Plan Inspector, Newton Poppleford, Teignbridge

The significance of Dawlish Warren, Exe Estuary and Pebblebed Heaths to Planning in East Devon

One of our correspondents writes again:

Another thing the Talaton appeal has thrown a spotlight on is the lack of progress EDDC has made turning a strategy into an action plan. In this case it concerns EDDC’s failure in the draft Local Plan to meet obligatory requirements to demonstrate that it has a plan to mitigate the pressure increased population will place on three very sensitive wildlife habitats: Dawlish Warren; the Exe estuary and the Pebblebed Heaths.

This is something that EDDC, Teignbridge and Exeter have been working on since around 2012/2013 when they commissioned the “South-east Devon European Mitigation Strategy” report. This study concluded that, without appropriate mitigation measures, further development within 10Km of these sites would have adverse effects.

One of the central mitigation measures is the identification and creation of Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) to replace specialised habitat and to provide additional recreation space to draw people away from these sites. Unfortunately, having identified one particular SANG, EDDC promptly granted planning permission for it, even before the report was published (see para 7.19 of the report)!

Since the beginning of August 2014, EDDC have been trousering between £749 and £626 per dwelling from developers to “make it easier for developers to ‘deliver’ such mitigation” but in the words of Natural England (submission to the Local Plan examination dated 11 June 2015):

“We are becoming increasingly concerned regarding the lack of progress on the delivery of mitigation measures which have not yet been implemented. We are aware that the Authority has been collecting funds for mitigation but delivery of such measures has not kept pace with its collection….. We are also concerned that recent planning applications and permissions may inhibit the delivery of proposed mitigation and that that mitigation may require modification to be delivered.”

Furthermore this letter from Natural England makes it clear that EDDC failed, prior to submitting the revised local plan for inspection, to update or consult further on the Habitat Regulation assessment section which Natural England, the statutory consultee, had stated in 2013: “does not meet the legal requirements as set out in Section 102 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) nor National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 166.”

The Talaton appeal gives us an up to date view of Planning Inspectorate thinking on this which looks unequivocal to me:

“60. No clear mechanism has been put forward that would ensure the delivery of the SANGs that form an essential element in the Council’s Mitigation Strategy. In the absence of appropriate mitigation, in line with the Mitigation Strategy, the effect of the proposed residential development, in combination with other planned development, is likely to give rise to adverse effects on the integrity of the SAC/SPA as a result of additional recreational pressure.
61. Regulation 61(5) of the Habitats Regulations identifies that the competent authority may only agree to a plan or project after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of a European site, subject to regulation 62, regarding considerations of over-riding public interest. That approach is reflected in paragraph 118 of the Framework which advises that planning permission should be refused where significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or compensated for.
62. In this case, there is little information before me to determine whether the proposed level of residential accommodation could be provided in another location, outside of the 10km zone surrounding the SPA. However, even if no alternative solution exists, the proposals are not put forward on the basis of any imperative reasons of over-riding public interest, of a social or economic nature, that would outweigh the harm to the SAC/SPA, having regard to Regulation 62 of the Habitat Regulations. As such, to grant planning permission for the proposed developments would be contrary to the aims of The Habitats Regulations and paragraph 118 of the Framework, both of which dictate that planning permission should be refused.”

Without resolution this matter looks like a showstopper for the Local Plan. But how easy is it going to be to agree a mitigation plan with a local authority that sets aside “Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace” one day then grants planning permission on it the next?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

31 Aug 2015

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, EDDC, Feniton/ Talaton, Land Supply, Local Plan, Local Plan Inspector, NPPF

All singing from the same hymn sheet?

A correspondent writes:

The Talaton appeal decision summarised on “the Watch” recently, intrigued me. It brought to mind another recent appeal, Down Close, Newton Poppleford, dated 29 May 2015, in which the Inspector similarly upheld EDDC’s decision to reject the application but also threw doubt on whether EDDC can demonstrate a 5 year land supply. Something crucial to adoption of the Local Plan.

Two different Inspectors are involved and they are clearly singing from the same hymn sheet. Inspector Thickett is due to produce his report on the Examination in Public of EDDC’s Local Plan fairly soon. If he comes from the same broad church as the Appeal Inspectors then we might expect EDDC to get a rough ride on its housing needs and numbers. Could they be so unconvincing as to return us to a developers’ free for all?

Here is an extract of what Inspector Ball wrote about Newton Poppleford at the end of March:

“Just before my site visit the Council submitted a housing monitoring update purporting to show that it can now demonstrate a 5.45 year supply, including a 20% buffer due to previous under-supply.

I have reservations about this. Following significant objections by the Local Plan Inspector, proposed modifications to the NEDLP are currently out to consultation; the new objective assessment of housing need has not been fully tested; and the appellants raise serious concerns about the development timescales of several major sites relied on by the Council, throwing doubt on their deliverability within the 5 year period. These are matters to be tested and resolved by the Local Plan Inspector. For this appeal, as things stand, I do not consider that it is possible to conclude with any confidence that the Council can demonstrate a 5-year supply of deliverable housing sites.”

And here is an extract of what Inspector Preston said at on 24 August:

“From the information in front of me, the Council has not demonstrated that previous under delivery has been accounted for within its five-year supply calculations. Even if the previous under-delivery has been accounted for within the estimated need of 17,100 identified within the SHMA, which is not certain, the way in which the Council have addressed the previous under-supply is not consistent with the aim of addressing it within the first five years, where possible. In the Council’s projection the 17,100 has been split evenly over the plan period, ‘the ‘Liverpool’ method. Whilst the PPG is not prescriptive in stating that any under-deliver must be recovered within the first five years it sets a clear preference for this approach, ‘where possible’. No evidence was presented by the Council to suggest that it would not be possible to recover any previous under-supply over the next five years and the Local Plan Inspector has previously written to the Council to advocate the ‘Sedgefield’ approach with the aim of boosting housing supply.

“Moreover, I have concerns that the projected delivery rates for the new settlement at Cranbrook are not supported by clear evidence. The predicted completion rate for the two phases of the development over each of the following five years is 467 dwellings per annum. However, the March 2015 HMU identifies that there had been 757 completions between ‘summer’ 2012 and August 2014. It is not clear when development commenced but the published completion rate suggests a figure in the region of 350 to 375 dwellings per year over the two year period.

The Council suggested orally at the Hearing that there is evidence to suggest that delivery rates are likely to increase but no firm evidence was submitted to show how the predicted delivery rates had been derived. In effect, those predictions show an increase of approximately 100 dwellings a year at the site, over and above the published rate of completion to date. That rate of delivery is not supported by the evidence presented to me.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

13 Aug 2015

Posted under

EDDC, Feniton/ Talaton

Feniton residents can quiz officers on new recycling arrangements

East Devon District Council has announced that Feniton will host a road show on Saturday, 22 August from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the Sports and Social club for residents to discuss the trial of the new recycling arrangements which will start in September.

For more information see:

https://susiebond.wordpress.com/2015/08/13/opportunity-for-feniton-residents-to-quiz-eddcs-recycling-officers/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

5 Aug 2015

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Beer, Blackdown Hills, Branscombe, Budleigh Salterton, Chardstock, Clyst St Mary, Dunkeswell, EDDC, Feniton/ Talaton, Lympstone, Newton Poppleford, Seaton/ Colyford / Colyton, Sidmouth/ Sidford/ Sidbury, Upottery

AND another consultation: Villages, small towns and their built-up boundaries – yep, another cart that went before horse!

Recall that, with no consultation whatsoever, built-up boundaries for Dunkeswell and Chardstock were changed and inserted into the latest draft of the Local Plan.

Dear Sir/Madam

East Devon Villages Plan – consultation on proposed criteria for defining built-up area boundaries for villages and small towns

The council is reviewing its approach to defining its ‘Built-up Area Boundaries’ and wants your input.

We have prepared a brief paper, which is attached, that sets out what we would like to do and how you can get involved. We have also included an update paper on the Villages Plan for information.

If you have any comments on the approach set out, please write to us on or before Monday 21 September 2015 so that we can consider them before we prepare the next stage of our ‘Villages Plan’.

You can submit your views by either writing to us at Planning Policy, East Devon District Council, Knowle, Sidmouth, EX10 8HL or sending an email to us at localplan@eastdevon.gov.uk. Please put ‘Villages Built-up Area Boundary Consultation’ in the subject box of the email or at the top of your letter. It would be helpful if you could respond to the 5 questions set out in the consultation paper.

Please contact the planning policy team on 01395 516551 if you have any queries.

Yours faithfully

Linda Renshaw (Mrs)
Senior Planning Officer

Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays
East Devon District Council

( 01395 571683
8 lrenshaw@eastdevon.gov.uk
” http://www.eastdevon.gov.uk
* Planning Policy Section, East Devon District Council, Knowle, Station Road, Sidmouth, EX10 8HL

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

30 Jun 2015

Posted under

Feniton/ Talaton, Local Plan, Local Plan Inspector

Local Plan hearings – full information

With thanks to Independent Councillor Susie Bond (Feniton) from whose blog this is taken:

← Who wants to be a millionaire?
Local Plan hearing sessions kick off next week
Posted on June 30, 2015 by susiebond
Entrance to the Council Chamber at the Knowle in Sidmouth
Entrance to the Council Chamber at the Knowle in Sidmouth

Anthony Thickett, the Planning Inspector charged with scrutinising EDDC’s Local Plan, re-opens the hearing sessions next week at the Council’s offices at the Knowle in Sidmouth. The programme for the sessions is below and is open to members of the public. There is, however, no right to public speaking:

Tuesday, 7 July: Gypsies and Travellers Plan, and allocation sites, including Cranbrook
Wednesday, 8 July: Housing (excluding Cranbrook)
Thursday, 9 July: Reserve day
Friday, 10 July: Community Infrastructure Levy
The Local Plan has been the subject of an 8-week public consultation exercise and submissions have been sent in by both Gittisham and Feniton Parish Councils.

In total, 145 organisations and individuals submitted comments and these have been forwarded to Mr Thickett for his consideration in advance of the hearing sessions. Every submission is available here (http://eastdevon.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/emerging-plans-and-policies/the-new-local-plan/examination-and-hearing-sessions-and-further-consultation-at-april-2015/responses-to-consultation-16-april-to-12-june-2015/)

modern housesThe Local Plan currently envisages 950 new homes every year for the next 18 years. This is a very high level of build and doesn’t take account of the likelihood (even certainty) that the country will go into recession at some point in that period, which will mean that the houses just won’t be built. This is exactly the position that was faced by East Devon following the crash of 2008. The easy availability of finance completely dried up, so there were no buyers in the market for new homes, and developers simply stopped building. This resulted in an undersupply of housing which has to be taken up in the first 5 years of the Local Plan.

This simple piece of logic hasn’t prevented the developers submitting extensive papers on the need to build even more houses over the plan period.

Residents in Feniton will be interested to read the submissions from Wainhomes (land behind Louvigny Close), Strategic Land Partnership (who hold an option on Camp Field on Ottery Road) and PCL Planning (who act for Strategic Land Partnership and who appear to think that Feniton’s sustainability credentials know no bounds).

Part of the emerging Local Plan to be scrutinised next week is Strategy 27. This lists 15 or so of the larger villages and smaller towns (and the list includes Feniton).

Neighbourhood Plan public consultation exercise in Feniton last year
Neighbourhood Plan public consultation exercise in Feniton last year

The Plan proposes that these settlements allow building only within their Built-Up Area Boundary and that development is in accord with a Neighbourhood Plan. Feniton is currently preparing a Neighbourhood Plan as enshrined in the Localism Act (2011). There have been a number of public consultation exercises in the village and residents have had the opportunity to voice their opinion on the future of their community.

Other villages in East Devon will not be developed unless they draw up a Neighbourhood Plan, and their Built-Up Area Boundaries have been removed which effectively means that any new development would be in open countryside, which is unacceptable.

I’ll be attending two of the sessions and will post a blog about the sessions as soon as I can.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

30 Jun 2015

Posted under

Feniton/ Talaton, Neighbourhood Plans

Feniton: Neighbourhood Plan event 5 July

Feniton Neighbourhood Plan committee will be at the Fun Day on Sunday 5 July to continue the extensive programme of public engagement in the NP process which started in November last year. Full details of the Neighbourhood Plan are available here https://susiebond.wordpress.com/2014/11/29/first-consultation-exercise-for-fenitons-neighbourhood-plan/ and https://susiebond.wordpress.com/2015/03/17/feniton-neighbourhood-plan-powers-ahead/.

Feniton village sign(3)The stand will be manned between 1 and 5 o’clock and the committee would welcome your thoughts on how Feniton should develop in the coming 15 years.

While you’re chatting to members of the committee why not have a go at the free raffle for a chance to become a millionaire?!

Neighbourhood Plans are taking on a renewed significance with a Planning Inspector scrutinising EDDC’s Local Plan next week to decide whether it can be adopted or whether East Devon will be slung back into a planning vacuum.

This will be the last major consultation exercise before the Neighbourhood Plan questionnaire is distributed to every household later in the summer. If you have been unable to attend any of the public consultation events and would like to make your voice heard in shaping your village, please email fenitonneighbourhoodplan@gmail.com.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

8 May 2015

Posted under

Axminster, Beer, Blackdown Hills, Budleigh Salterton, East Devon Alliance, East Devon Tories, EDDC, Exmouth, Feniton/ Talaton, Honiton/ Gittisham, Independent Councillors, Lympstone, Seaton/ Colyford / Colyton, Sidmouth/ Sidford/ Sidbury, Transparency, Voting, West End: WestClyst BroadClyst/ Pinhoe, Woodbury

Comments

2 Comments

Roger Giles (Ind) polls highest vote in District Council elections

We’ve had further feedback from today’s election of East Devon District Councillors, when Independents gained considerable ground. Here are some highlights:

– The voters’ favourite was Roger Giles, the seasoned Independent Councillor for Ottery St Mary Town Ward, with 2087 votes.
– Paul Diviani, Leader of the Council) retained his seat at Yarty. He received 776 votes. But votes against him totalled 795.
– Cabinet member, Ray Bloxham (525 votes) lost in Raleigh Ward to IEDA candidate, Geoff Jung (950 votes).
– IEDA Leader, Ben Ingham successfully held Woodbury & Lympstone, where he and IEDA colleague, Rob Longhurst, defeated David Atkins (Con).
– The most significant cull of Tory Councillors was in Sidmouth, with Independents now in control:
There was a surprise defeat for Graham Troman, who ironically has often stood up alone for Sidmouth, without the backing of the other local councillors.
Stuart Hughes is the sole remaining Conservative, sharing Sidmouth-Sidford with Dawn Manley and Marianne Rixson, both IEDA.
Sidmouth Town Ward is in the hands of Cathy Gardner (IEDA), Matt Booth(IEDA) and John Dyson (Independent).

The Sidmouth Herald reporters were quick to pick this up: http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/election/eddc_independents_oust_tories_in_sidmouth_town_1_4066681

For complete election result information, go to http://eastdevon.gov.uk/elections-and-registering-to-vote/elections-2015/2015-district-council-elections-results/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 May 2015

Posted under

EDDC, Feniton/ Talaton, Flooding, Graham Brown, Independent Councillors

Comments

1 Comment

Feniton, tanks, the stump and ex-Councillor Brown – oh, and voting!

The latest blog post of Independent Councillor Susie Bond:

It’s been a fascinating run up to the 2015 election.

I’ve enjoyed dropping off my leaflets to the houses in Feniton, Gittisham and Buckerell and chatting to those who were at home and had time to talk to me. People are really engaged with this election and want to talk about national issues as much as local ones … and there was a lot of interest in the ‘rise of the Independents’, as one resident described it.

There were several recurring themes which were of concern to everyone in my ward … planning inevitably being at the top of the list.

On the stump, Question 1:

What about the attenuation tanks?

This is a continuing issue in Feniton, where developer Wainhomes eventually succumbed to pressure from me, the Parish Council, EDDC and the media, and provided the attenuation tanks which were required of them following the planning inquiry in 2012. However, the Parish Council is not happy with the system the developer was forced to install and has grave concerns that the tanks will fail. This is an unresolved issue and a great worry to those who live ‘downstream’ of the site.

There is quite reasonably very little faith in developers and the promises they make to sweeten the offer of concreting over precious sites. Residents still bemoan the loss of the tennis courts which were such a feature of life in Feniton before the developer of the existing Acland Park site bulldozed them in pursuit of profit. Promises were made that they would be reinstated, but the tennis courts never reappeared.

On the stump, Question 2:

Whatever happened to the Graham Brown affair?

The police investigation into former Councillor Graham Brown was closed with no action taken in 2014 as there was insufficient evidence to take the case forward. End of story.

My concern is not with the individual, but what process allowed anyone whose main source of income was building and development to be put in a position of such authority (he was for some time Chairman of the Local Development Framework panel, the committee set up to steer the Council towards adoption of a Local Plan, identifying possible sites for development and deciding on strategic allocations for development within the district), and who must have found it extremely difficult not to confuse the two roles. I have called on a number of occasions for an internal inquiry at EDDC to look into the lapse in decision-making which allowed this to happen. Each time I posed the question, I was met with the response that the matter was in the hands of the police and therefore any internal investigation would be inappropriate.

At the full Council meeting in February, and given that the police investigation had concluded, I asked the question again.

I was surprised on this occasion when my request for an internal inquiry was met with the minimal response, ‘Why?’, with no further explanation. In other words, whether the former councillor was charged with any misdemeanour or not, EDDC never had any intention of conducting a full internal inquiry.

Something to think about for the next council.

On the stump, Question 3:

What is the East Devon Alliance?

There was lots of interest on the doorstep in this umbrella organisation formed to support independent candidates.

It’s a lonely business being an Independent.

I chose to stand as an Independent in 2013 so that I was not constrained by party politics which, to my mind, should have no business in local government. But standing alone means that you don’t have the backup of the party machine to write your leaflet for you and even pay for it to be printed, as well as the advice of those who have been councillors before.

Had it existed at that time, I would have welcomed the help and advice of the East Devon Alliance to steer me through the minefield of the election process. Two years on and EDA candidates have the support of their leader, Cllr Ben Ingham, whose 25 years of experience is invaluable to those who don’t know how the system works. Their excellent website (http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/) has given the candidates an on-line profile and their YouTube videos have reached a wide audience.

Once elected, every ‘Independent EDA’ candidate will work hard in their ward and represent that ward at Council. No Party Whip to ‘encourage’ them to vote in a particular way and no question of being lambasted by senior party figures if they fail to conform.

Final thoughts

Don’t forget to voteBut whatever the issues and whatever hue your politics, the main thing is to make your voice heard and Remember To Vote. The turnout at elections has fallen steadily from an all-time high of 83% in 1950 to just 65% in 2010, reflecting disillusionment and mistrust of party politics.

If you want to change the status quo, Thursday 7 May is the day to make a difference!

https://susiebond.wordpress.com/2015/05/02/on-the-stump/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

29 Apr 2015

Posted under

Development Management Committee, EDDC, Feniton/ Talaton

Comments

1 Comment

Now that’s how you do enforcement!

No pussyfooting or being nice to developers here!

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/developer-told-to-rebuild-maida-vale-pub-brick-by-brick-after-site-torn-down-without-notice-10211892.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

24 Apr 2015

Posted under

Feniton/ Talaton, Flooding, Wainhomes

Campaigners given second chance to challenge developer in court on drainage/flooding issues

Good news for Feniton?

http://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=22736:campaigners-get-appeal-judge-to-reinstate-ground-of-challenge-in-housing-battle&catid=63&Itemid=31

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

15 Apr 2015

Posted under

Feniton/ Talaton, Torridge, Wainhomes

Wainhomes at it again … and again … and again

EDW ran a story earlier in the year entitled – Wainhomes at it again – and indeed they are at it YET again, this time in North Devon – in Westward Ho!

http://www.northdevonjournal.co.uk/Westward-Ho-residents-angry-building-work-begins/story-25911886-detail/story.html#ixzz3PeoJg2rW

Update at http://www.northdevonjournal.co.uk/Fury-residents-feel-let-132-homes-development/story-26200403-detail/story.html

Residents still feel that planning restrictions being ignored, incl foul drainage system plans supposed to be submitted before work starts. It all sounds VERY familiar to Feniton residents – indeed if you just changed the location and name it would be pretty much the same.

Torridge is where our old Chief Planner Kate Little rules the roost – so even THAT’S familiar!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

9 Apr 2015

Posted under

Claire Wright, Feniton/ Talaton, Graham Brown, Independent Councillors

Susie Bond (Independent, Feniton) standing again and supports other independent candidates

See her latest blogpost here: https://susiebond.wordpress.com/2015/04/09/and-were-off/

You only have to look at the records of our Independent councillors such as Susie, Claire Wright, Roger Giles and Ben Ingham to see that independent councillors makes the biggest impact on scrutiny of our current majority Conservative council. Now we need them to be the decision-makers.

Recall that before Susie was elected Feniton was in the hands of ex- councillor Graham Brown …

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

25 Mar 2015

Posted under

Feniton/ Talaton, Wainhomes

Wainhomes: end of the road in Feniton – maybe …

From a local correspondent:

As Cllr Susie Bond has reported in her blog —

https://susiebond.wordpress.com/2015/03/25/wainhomes-kicked-into-the-long-grass/

— Wainhomes’ efforts to sneak in 31 more houses onto its estate in Feniton have been kicked into the long grass -at least for now and hopefully for ever.

Notwithstanding really compelling arguments by the developer – e.g. it was just filling in some gaps and it would help tidy up the boundary of the estate as a result.

Yeah, right etc — East Devon District Council threw out their most recent proposal on the wholly reasonable grounds that this latest unwanted addition to Feniton represented unsustainable development, and that further building would impact adversely on the landscape.

It will be remembered that in 2011 Wainhomes wanted to build 150 houses on arable land outside the village; that was reduced to 50 (for which permission was given in 2012); then they applied for another 83; that was turned down; and then they applied for another 31, which has now been turned down also.

Fight for Feniton confidently predicts that Wainhomes – memorably described as “morally bankrupt” by Cllr Bond on BBC TV when it was discovered that the developer had conveniently forgotten to install attenuation tanks, as it was required to do on its site, to prevent yet further flooding in the village – will return.

Time this developer accepted the inevitable and tried building somewhere else. Such as on brownfield sites in towns where the jobs are.

Wainhomes in Feniton. Not wanted, not needed, not trusted.