Category Archives: Greater Exeter

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

29 Aug 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Claire Wright, DCC, Democracy, East Devon Tories, EDDC, Greater Exeter, Paul Diviani, Sarah Randall Johnson

Anyone taking bets on Diviani and/or Randall-Johnson’s future plans?

Could our two most notorious local councillors Paul Diviani (Leader, EDDC but sitting as a co-optee on the controversial Devon County Council Health Scrutiny Committee) and/or its chairman, Sarah Randall-Johnson (see article below on secret DCC Standards Committee meeting on her conduct) perhaps be lining themselves up for lucrative and/or powerful jobs with our local Clinical Commissioning Group (or whatever its next incarnation will be)?

After all, they have ably demonstrated where their sympathy lies and there will no doubt be many opportunities over the coming months to put their sympathies into action.

Diviani already has form, being a councillor member of our Local Enterprise Partnership responsible for extra housing throughout Devon and Somerset and the many, many other pies in which he has his fingers. Including a leading role in “Greater Exeter” plans.

Randall-Johnson was Diviani’s predecessor as Leader of EDDC (until being ignominiously trounced by Claire Wright in local elections) but has failed to rise to such a dizzy height again at DCC (and may – or may not – have scuppered her chances of ever doing so with her recent behaviour).

Until her recent appointment as Chairman of the Health Scrutiny Committee she had to content herself with appointments to the DCC Pensions Board, East Devon Highways and Traffic Orders Committee, East Devon Locality (County) Committee and the Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Authority.

And few of us can forget that she was the unsuccessful “Cameron’s Cuties” competitor for the Tory Totnes seat won by Sarah Wollaston?

Where better for both of them to spread their wings than our CCG?

Or, is Owl hooting up the wrong tree? Is Randall-Johnson’s behaviour designed to show her Tory councillor colleagues what a “strong and stable” leader she might make for DCC?

Or, and here Owl’s eyes widen to bulging, might she be gearing up for yet another bid to become an MP and flexing her muscles for such a bid?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

28 Aug 2017

Posted under

Accountability, EDDC, Greater Exeter, Transport (local)

This month’s EDDC Cabinet meeting

Highlights

Councillors will not be subjected to “Disclosure and Barring Service” (DBS) checks. This is a service to employers to make safer recruitment decisions and prevent unsuitable people from working with vulnerable groups, including children. It replaces the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) and Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA). Councillors will receive safeguarding training instead.
page 77

The “Greater Exeter Strategic Plan” progresses so swiftly that Cabinet has had to ask for exemption from tendering procedures to appointment Footprint Ecology to undertake a Habitat Regulations Assessment of the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan.
page 118

Manor Pavilion Car Park will become a “Pay and Display” car park
On page 125 a number of exemptions to charges are offered – but Owl recalls that car parking income MUST only be used to improve traffic issues – so quite how the car park income can be used to aid the theatre is confusing.

Click to access 060917combinedcabinetagenda_opt.pdf

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

22 Aug 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Audit (EDDC), Austerity cuts, Democracy, Developers/ Development, Greater Exeter, Local Enterprise Partnership, Scrutiny, Transparency

Comments

1 Comment

The erosion of democracy to serve the cult of celebrity and business

From an article about how Boris Johnsom frittered away nearly a billion pounds on projects that came to nothing while he was London mayor – echoes of the East Devon Business Forum, the Local Enterprise Partnership, Greater Exeter …

“… Still, Johnson merely highlights a number of problems. He shows what happens when our celebrity culture, in which he has a starring role, fuses with an era of denuded press and desiccated politics. This is the age of the administrative monarch. We are encouraged to place power and trust in individuals of purported unparalleled wisdom, vision and probity. Mayors, metro mayors, police commissioners, superheads; we outsource to individuals, increasing their power in the belief they will get things done, unencumbered by faint hearts and red tape.

By this thinking, democratic checks and balances are a bother. There can, in this political calibration, be some light-touch monitoring, but the monarch must have all the power. True democracy can be such a millstone.

This is a philosophy tilted towards business in its many lucrative interactions with the public sector, for it sends a message that the special individual talents of the market do not need the democratic or collective checks and balances that might save us from folly. We saw this in the framing of the London mayoralty, where the initial hope was that a Richard Branson or a Greg Dyke would seize the sceptre. That didn’t work out. Instead of an industry titan, the befuddled lawmakers ended up with Ken Livingstone, the very antithesis of their hopes, and then Johnson.

But the thinking endures that true progress needs turbo-empowered individuals in whom we endow complete trust, as we might for a pilot or a brain surgeon, because their knowledge and drive and networking prowess surpasses our understanding. Theresa May sought that sort of unquestioning trust when she implored us not to worry our pretty little heads and to give her complete and personal authority to do as she pleased in Brussels. The country eventually called her out on that, but isn’t it time to question that philosophy everywhere?

Isn’t it time to reassess the extent to which we have loosened the regulatory structures? The Tory-led coalition scrapped the audit commission and with it a level of scrutiny that once gave the reckless pause. The Standards Board for England, responsible for monitoring ethical standards in local government, was doused in ministerial petrol and thrown on to the same so-called bonfire of the quangos.

At the same time, the right or expectation that local councillors, representing their communities, should sit on the boards of organisations in receipt of public funds – such as schools, housing associations and private firms delivering communal services – has been steadily eroded.

Our system is a largely a centralised one, but still the canny determined mayor can disengage the handbrake knowing that no one can, in real time, reapply it. Voters can assert their authority at some point on the journey, but it may be some way down the road. By that point the vehicle, recklessly driven, may have crashed. And by the time the authorities arrive, the driver may well have legged it.

So these leaders may never be held to account. Maybe they have already left office. The heat turns down, the world moves on. The protection of celebrity deflects the glare. Isn’t that what’s happened in the case of the garden bridge and all of the wasteful, ill-conceived Johnsonian follies?

But isn’t it also – in terms of the public’s apparent inability to bring poor and reckless administrators to account – what’s happened in universities up and down the country? Vice-chancellors on grotesquely bloated salaries charge £9,000-plus tuition fees without any improvement in the offer to students. And in notorious academy schools, deified super-heads have taken advantage of huge pay cheques and light public supervision to provide pupils with a substandard education.

We have grown scornful of the mundanities of democracy. The celebrity-as-saviour populist version excites. But the dull, traditional, sometimes tortuous structures – with checks and balances and inquests and punishments – existed for a reason. With them grand projects took longer, consensus was required, and foolhardy stewardship carried risks. But without them we spend millions on the dream of a flowery bridge while services atrophy, food banks flourish, and the designers of that outrage move onwards and upwards.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/22/boris-johnson-940-million-system-to-blame

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

20 Aug 2017

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, EDDC, Greater Exeter, Land Supply, Local Plan, NPPF

Is EDDC gearing up for even greater development for 5-year Local Plan review?

All Local Plans have to be reviewed every five years. Though it is likely that the next Local Plan won’t be very local as “Greater Exeter” will almost certainly be what is put forward, East Devon being only one part of it.

Now it seems the current Local Plan didn’t go to plan!

“The number of new homes being built in East Devon has dramatically dropped, government data has revealed.

In total, 620 new properties were completed by private developers and housing associations in 2016/17.

But this is more than 250 homes fewer than were built in 2013/14, 2014/15 and 2015/16 – where an average of 836 new properties were finished each year.

In the last decade, a total of 4,690 properties have been built and completed in the district and more than 12,600 new homes were finished across Devon. …”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/number-of-new-homes-being-built-in-east-devon-dramatically-drops-1-5155038

In fact 2013/14 and 2014/15 and 2015/16 were the result of the years during which the developer free-for-all took place when EDDC had no Local Plan and no 5 year land supply so we had a situation where, under government rules, developers could build any amount of houses practically anywhere. So it’s hardly surprising there was a boom.

So, it now appears that, in fact, the number of houses EDDC had expected to see built this year haven’t materialised.

That could mean that more will be front-loaded to a revised (probably Greater Exeter) plan. And/or the whole area might be back to not having a 5-year land supply so it will be a developer free-for-all – again.

What is VERY interesting is that around 37% of all new homes in the whole of Devon have been built in East Devon in the last decade.

Perhaps time for other parts of Greater Exeter to take the strain in the coming decade?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

18 Aug 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Economy, Greater Exeter, Transport (local)

Government ripping us off – again

From The Times (pay wall). It’s going to make commuting by rail to Exeter from Axminster, Honiton, Feniton, Whimple and Cranbrook a very expensive way of getting there – so more cars will be clogging up more roads in “Greater Exeter”.

“Nobody likes being ripped off. And there is something particularly distasteful about being fleeced by your own government.

But that is precisely what is happening. Rail fares are set to rise at a much faster rate than employee earnings, with annual season tickets of over £5,000 an increasingly common sight. And interest charges on student loans in England will rise to 6.1 per cent from the autumn.

From students to commuters, the cost of living in the UK is on the rise. And some of the biggest cost increases are in areas where the government sets the terms.

Both rail fares and student loans are linked, under government policy, to the retail price index measure of inflation, long ago discarded by economists as a flawed measure of price growth. It is widely known that RPI consistently overstates inflation in the UK, and that the alternative measures of inflation, consumer prices index (CPI) and CPIH (which includes owner-occupiers’ housing costs) are a far better reflection of what is actually going on.

Indeed, in the June 2010 budget George Osborne announced that, partly for these reasons, the government would start using CPI for the uprating of benefits and public sector pensions. The same budget mentioned “reviewing how CPI can be used for the indexation of taxes and duties while protecting revenues”, yet there has been near-silence on this issue ever since.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 Aug 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Consultation, Developers/ Development, Economy, EDDC, Greater Exeter

“Inclusive growth” or exclusive growth in East Devon (soon to be Greater Exeter?)

Greater Exeter or Greater East Devon?

A follow-on from the previous post.

“Inclusive growth is emerging as a key agenda in the UK. The general election was fought from both sides with a promise to create an economy that works for everyone.

City leaders across the country are pursuing inclusive growth as a means for addressing some of the big challenges facing their communities, from poor health and economic exclusion to high demand for services and spiralling financial pressures. Our report, Citizens and Inclusive Growth

Click to access rsa_citizens-and-inclusive-growth-report.pdf

explores how we can build on this agenda and support impactful next steps by engaging citizens as part of our strategy for inclusive growth.

The RSA Inclusive Growth Commission set out a bold vision for a new model of growth that truly moves on from the failed trickle down economics of the past. But it also identified a critical gap in current thinking and practice around alternative economic models: the role that citizens should play in shaping them. A “place based” economy is unlikely to succeed without active citizen and community participation. The RSA’s Citizens’ Economic Council has underlined the real value created by getting citizens involved in shaping economic thinking and policy, both in terms of the quality of decision making and the positive effect it has on people’s skills, as well as their sense of agency, self-efficacy and belonging to their place. …

So how can we take the agenda forward in the UK? It’s clear that citizens aren’t featuring enough in conversations and decisions about devolution and strategies for economic growth and development. The parameters of inclusive growth are largely being set by officials, which has meant that too often we are tinkering at the edges of existing growth models rather than transforming them. Evidence from the report suggests greater involvement of a broad range of citizens (especially those with lived experience of hardship and poverty) may have a transformative effect on priorities and policies for growth, encouraging greater equity and sustainability.

There are ways that government and cities could demonstrate their commitment to citizen engagement in pursuit of inclusive growth. One of our suggestions is that in future phases of devolution, localities should negotiate significant devolved funds that are controlled by their citizens through participatory budgeting. The same could apply to the programmes that ultimately replace EU structural and social funds after Brexit.

Inclusive growth should go hand in hand with an inclusive form of decision making. Towns and cities in the UK have a real opportunity to make this happen. “

https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/rsa-blogs/2017/07/give-citizens-real-power-for-inclusive-growth-to-succeed

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 Aug 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Coastal communities, Developers/ Development, EDDC, Greater Exeter, National Parks, Rural communities, Sustainability, Tourism

Comments

2 Comments

Is it time for some more rebellious towns?

Colyton proudly announces itself as “the most rebellious town in Devon” for its part in supporting the Duke of Monmouth against James the Second.

Is it now time for another rebellion?

EDDC is the largest District Council in Devon with a population of about 140,000. It is growing rapidly. All this is happening against the backdrop of relocating EDDC’s headquarters and possible mergers amongst councils, in particular the creation of Greater Exeter.

Does everyone in East Devon want to be part of this process of rapid population growth and incorporation into the Exeter conurbation?

Residents of Exmouth, Honiton and Cranbrook may well look towards Exeter and work in the city, but our more rural and coastal communities increasingly see crowded and congested Exeter as something of which they do not wish to be a part. They tend to look towards the slower population growth and protection of the environment that can be found across the border in Dorset.

Budleigh Salterton, Sidmouth, Beer, Colyton and Seaton, and perhaps Ottery, seem to see themselves more as operating in an economy linked primarily to tourism and agriculture. They have no wish or requirement to be absorbed into the Exeter behemoth. Cleaner and greener.

These communities also have little representation in the hierarchy at Knowle, (or even acknowledged by Greater Exeter) where the leadership is dominated by councillors from Exmouth, Honiton and Axminster.

In such circumstances, and with relocation offering a timely opportunity, is it not time to seriously consider splitting the District Council and introducing a healthy dose of localism?

We already see many functions and services involving cross-authority cooperation. Such sharing of services could and should continue were coastal East Devon to secede. But those coastal communities would have far greater control over their own affairs.

Is it time for Eastern East Devon, or perhaps “Jurassic Devon”, to secede from EDDC and withdraw from the Greater Exeter project?

And maybe join with Dorset’s idea of a Jurassic National Park?

All it takes is a few rebellious people to get it started!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jul 2017

Posted under

Developers/ Development, East Devon economy, Greater Exeter, Infrastructure, Sustainability

Exeter fourth largest growth rate in UK

Surely at this rate the Exeter area economy will become greatly overheated with an inevitable crash, especially as we are told that 70% of its exports currently go to the EU? Will East Devon, with Cranbrook’s creep towards the city just become a suburb of an ever-sprawling Greater Exeter but with no supporting infrastructure to speak of?

“Exeter is in the top five cities in the UK for job creation, new figures have revealed.

The UK Powerhouse report, produced by law firm Irwin Mitchell alongside the Centre for Business and Economic research, provides an estimate of the value of goods and services produced and annual job growth of 45 of the UK’s largest cities, 12 months ahead of the Government’s official figures.

Exeter sees an annual change of 1.5 per cent when it comes to employment, putting it as fourth in the UK.

It also revealed the growing importance that the banking, finance and insurance sector has on the city, revealing that 5,900 jobs were created between 2013 and 2016.

The report also predicts that Exeter’s city economy will grow by 18.1 per cent over the next 10 years whilst employment will grow by 9.4 per cent during the same period.

Jack Coy, economist at Cebr, said: “Despite the UK-level economic slowdown over the first quarter, it is good to see some bright sparks in local economies across the country.

“In particular, the best performing cities have benefitted from a combination of cutting-edge, productive industries and high-skilled workforces.”

http://www.devonlive.com/exeter-fourth-best-city-in-country-for-employment-growth/story-30444024-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

6 Jul 2017

Posted under

Accountability, EDDC, Exeter City Council, Golden Quadrangle LEP, Greater Exeter, Transparency

“Golden Triangle” and “Greater Exeter Strategic Partnership” – anyone had an update?

The “Golden Triangle LEP” comprising of Exeter, Plymouth and Torbay appears to have disappeared into a Bermuda Triangle – see here for some not-so-encouraging old information on it:

Politics South West: pigs ears, economy with the truth and foxes

However, word reaches Owl that someone, somewhere, has dredged it up from the deep again and it might be resurfacing some time later this month. Watch this very empty space.

As for the “Greater Exeter Strategic Plan”, in which East Devon is a partner, now that the initial “consultation” has ended, that seems to have returned to the bowels of the basement of Exeter City Council until “early 2018” (maybe):

https://www.gesp.org.uk/consultations/stage-2-draft-greater-exeter-strategic-plan-pending/

The initial consultation was on “Issues”. There is now an issue on if/when the issues feedback turns up.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

30 Jun 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Economy, EDDC, Greater Exeter, Local Enterprise Partnership, Post-Brexit Adjustments

UK has lowest economic growth of G7 countries – the implications for East Devon

Owl says: According to our Local Plan, the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan AND the plans of Local Enterprise Partnership, development in East Devon, Exeter, Devon and Somerset (economic and housing) was based on an expectation of constant, uninterrupted high growth. Now what?

“The consumer-driven momentum that has kept the British economy afloat since the Brexit vote is declining rapidly, with new data showing households in the grip of the most protracted squeeze on living standards since the economic crisis of the mid-1970s.

Against a backdrop of rising prices and stagnant wage growth, incomes adjusted for inflation have now fallen for three successive quarters, the first time this has occurred since the International Monetary Fund had to bail Britain out in 1976.

At the same time, the amount being set aside as savings has now slipped to just 1.7% of disposable income – the lowest level on record, and a fraction of the near-10% average for the last 50 years. Just a year ago, it was more than three times the current rate.

The new data from the Office for National Statistics shows that in the first three months of 2017, the mounting financial pressure on consumers brought the UK’s strong performance following last summer’s Brexit vote to an abrupt halt.

On Thursday, separate figures showed an unexpected jump in consumer credit. Households borrowed an extra £1.7bn in May – £300m more than had been expected – on credit cards, personal loans and car finance. A survey of consumer confidence also showed a steep decline.

Despite saving less and borrowing more, consumers still reined in their spending, contributing to economic growth confirmed today at just 0.2% – the lowest of any of the major G7 industrial nations.

Spending in the shops, new car sales and property transactions have all showed signs of weakness, and the Bank of England has expressed concern about rising levels of consumer debt. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/30/britons-savings-at-record-low-as-household-incomes-drop-says-ons

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

8 Apr 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Environment (local), Greater Exeter, Inequality, Infrastructure, Land banking, Land Supply, Local Enterprise Partnership, Planning System, Sustainability

“Greater Exeter Strategic Plan”: are we already shafted?

Time is running out to comment on the “Greater Exeter Strategic Plan” initial consultation on “Issues”. Comments must be in by

10 April 2017

and the document is here:

https://www.gesp.org.uk/consultations/issues/

and the full (12 page) document is here:

Click to access Greater-Exeter-Strategic-Plan-proof-v14.pdf

Owl thinks that there is precious little in the document that points either to a strategy or a plan! There are, however, many issues not covered such as:

– inequality ( how are the “just managing”, the “barely managing” and the “not managing at all going to access Greater Exeter’s resources (housing, transport, infrastructure, environment, health care, education) none of which is geared to them – only to the “managing very nicely thank you and ready to trade up to a bigger property or luxury retirement village” group

– the effect of Brexit, labour and skills shortages on the much-vaunted “economic growth”

– landbanking and housing supply – how they undermine all strategic planning projects

Owl also thinks this “plan” is shutting the door well after several horses have bolted, as already in the pipeline are massive developments planned to circle the city:

– west of Exeter: the 5,000-plus houses planned for “Culm Village” (Mid Devon)
– north/east of Exeter: the more than doubling in size of Cranbrook (East Devon) and the connected developments at Tithebarn Green, Pinn Brook Pinhoe and Monkerton (East Devon and Exeter City)
– south of Exeter: the massive development of Alphington and similar plans for doubling the size of Newton Abbott
– not to mention city developments such as St James’s Park and the thousands of student units in the city centre
– Local Enterprise Partnership plans to build extra houses just about everywhere else

Can anyone tell Owl which bits of “Greater Exeter” are left to consult on?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Apr 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Economy, Greater Exeter

Comments

1 Comment

Greater Exeter – BOOM, BOOM, BOOM

Quote from the Vice-Chancellor of Exeter University in this week’s Express and Echo:

“… Exeter powered through the recession with almost no unemployment. Two months ago there were 68 unemployed, 4,800 jobs” …

Yet our LEP and our councils push for more and more jobs.

Without the infrastructure (roads, affordable housing, schools, community hospitals, dentists, doctors) to support those jobs (anyone tried getting into or out of Exeter from East Devon at peak times these days?) how on earth can this be sustained, let alone sustainable?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

28 Mar 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Greater Exeter, Scrutiny, Transparency

A warning for “Greater Exeter” as London council backs out of 3- council agreement due to lack of transparency and conflicts of interest

“The high-profile Tri-borough shared service arrangements are to set to come to an end with Westminster City Council and the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea deciding to serve notice.

Westminster and Kensington & Chelsea said they had “reluctantly” taken the decision “in the face of uncertainty caused by.… Hammersmith & Fulham appearing to make alternative in-house plans without any formal engagement with the other two local authority partners about key services”.

The two authorities claimed this was causing anxiety to shared staff and placing potential risks to the joint services for vulnerable people in each borough.

In response the Leader of Hammersmith & Fulham, Cllr Stephen Cowan, said the council had had concerns about the value of Tri-borough and conflicts of interest.

Westminster and Kensington & Chelsea’s decisions will terminate the shared staffing arrangements in respect of Tri-borough Children’s Services, Tri-borough Adult Social Care and Tri-borough Public Health Services.

According to a paper on the Westminster website, the decision was urgent “because the tri-borough agreements require a year’s notice to terminate the shared arrangements; and ideally any new arrangements need to be in place before the next financial year beginning April 2018; and as soon as possible so that staff can be clearer about their future options”.

Westminster and Kensington & Chelsea said they were determined to continue to work together. They also maintained that the Tri-borough project, which was established in June 2011, had improved services and realised £43m in savings.

The two authorities stressed that Tri-borough’s legal agreements “set out that with any termination of the arrangements all parties are obliged to minimise disruption to delivery of services and to staff during the period of notice”. They called for a joint project team with Hammersmith & Fulham to oversee the transition.

The Leader of Westminster City Council, Cllr Nickie Aiken, said: “We would not have chosen to end the Tri-borough arrangements which we believe have been a great success. When it was established in 2011 it was quite rightly lauded as an innovation in local authority service delivery.

“However, both the Leader of Kensington and Chelsea and I feel we are unable to continue with tri-borough when we have a partner that we do not believe is committed to it as we are and appears to be making their own plans to leave, without any formal discussions. We can’t have that uncertainty for staff and these vital services which is why, with much regret, we have taken the very reluctant decision to terminate the joint arrangements for children’s services, adult social care and public health.”

Cllr Aiken added: “We are confident that the future remains stable and positive for the continued sharing of services between Westminster and Kensington and Chelsea and our door remains firmly open should Hammersmith & Fulham wish to come and discuss a review of the current arrangements and find alternative ways of working together.”

Hammersmith & Fulham’s Cowan said: “We’ve had concerns for some time about the value of the ‘Tri-borough’, its lack of transparency and its built-in conflicts of interest.

“In our last two budgets, Hammersmith & Fulham Council found £31m in savings but the ‘Tri-borough’ contributed no more than £200,000 of that, less than 1%.”

Cllr Cowan claimed that problems with Tri-borough contracts had cost Hammersmith & Fulham more than £5m, including a contract for special needs transport that he argued had put its disabled children at risk.

He added that “senior Tri-borough officers have had to balance Hammersmith & Fulham’s determination to keep Charing Cross Hospital open with Westminster and Kensington & Chelsea’s support for closing it.”

Cllr Cowan said: “Triggering withdrawal is evidently a long-planned move by the two councils. I look forward to having sensible discussions with them about how we can all move on in the best way for our residents.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30560%3Atri-borough-shared-service-set-to-end-as-two-councils-serve-notice&catid=59&Itemid=27

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

24 Mar 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Environment (local), Greater Exeter

Core strategy partly rescinded due to effect on forest – watch out Greater Exeter!

LOTS of forests, national parks and SSSI’s around Greater Exeter!

“A judge has resolved a dispute between two district councils and the South Downs National Park Authority by quashing parts of a joint core strategy.
Jay J, in the High Court, quashed parts of the joint core strategy of Lewes District Council and the park authority because of their effect on neighbouring Wealden District Council.

His judgment explained that Wealden had brought the case because of the status of the Ashdown Forest Special Area of Conservation (SAC), a 2,729 hectares area within Wealden of lowland heath vulnerable to nitrogen dioxide pollution from motor vehicles.

The judge said: “The principal point raised by this application…is whether [Lewes] and [the park authority] acted unlawfully in concluding, on advice, that the joint core strategy would not likely have a significant effect on the SAC in combination with the Wealden Core Strategy.”

He added: “The essential contention made is that if relevant data and findings are properly amalgamated, as they should be, the effects of increased traffic flows near the SAC would not have been ignored at the first screening or scoping stage of the process.”

The judge ruled that Wealden was out-of-time to challenge Lewes’s adoption of the joint core strategy, but not the park authority’s adoption of it. He said development plan documents were flawed because of a Habitats Regulations Assessment that relied on “advice from Natural England that was plainly incorrect”.

Jay J ordered that the secretary of state for communities and local government – whose inspector had found the disputed core strategy sound – and the park authority should each pay 50% of Wealden’s costs, while Wealden should pay Lewes’ costs. All applications for permission to appeal were refused.

Wealden has since the judgment revised its planned housing numbers such that after taking into account of the latest nitrogen deposition monitoring in Ashdown Forest the total number of home to be built by the end of 2028 will be 11,456 instead of the 14,101 originally proposed.

Ann Newton, cabinet member for planning and development, said: “The majority of housing will be distributed away from Ashdown Forest to the south of the district. “

New housing in the north of Wealden would be sited away from main roads that skirt the SAC. Wealden said three years of monitoring showed the amount of nitrogen deposition from motor vehicles in the forest already exceeded levels that can cause ecological damage to the heathland.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30512%3Ajudge-partially-quashes-core-strategy-after-appeal-by-neighbouring-authority&catid=63&Itemid=31

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

23 Mar 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Greater Exeter

“Fears Greater Exeter Plan is being ‘dumped on us’ raised at consultation event”

“Concern has been raised about whether a new strategic plan that will affect half a million people is being dumped on them against their wishes. Mid Devon, East Devon, Teignbridge and Exeter City Council, in partnership with Devon County Council, are teaming up to create a Greater Exeter Strategic Plan (GESP) which focuses on the creation of jobs and housing until 2040. …

… Peter Finch, chairman of Teignbridge Campaign to Protect Rural England, raised concerns that overdevelopment could diminish the area as a tourist attraction.

Mr Finch said: “I don’t see any evidence of the need for this amount of development in the Greater Exeter area. I think it is undermining the work that people have done in their communities in getting together their local plans.

“We need to protect the rural environment from overdevelopment, as that is what attracts people to come here. If we lose that rural environment then there is less of a reason for tourists to visit.

“There is also nothing about affordable housing here. There is a need for housing around Exeter but there are sites that could be developed already rather than building in the countryside around Exeter.”

Elaine Cawthaw, from the Bishopsteignton Residents Association, said: “Lots of people are concerned that there is already lots of development but the infrastructure is not in place, and I am concerned that this could be repeated with future development.” …

… However the plans have raised fears that councils are “sleepwalking” into becoming unitary authorities. Liberal Councillor Jenny Roach who represents Silverton said: “We’re looking like we could be ceding power to this planning partnership, and I know people will shake their heads and say no, but there are several points which worry me.

“Exeter needs land and you can imagine where I sit in my ward, Exeter City Council could be looking at developing the swathe of land that is between Silverton and Exeter and similarly between Thorverton and Newton St Cyres.. It worries me that it’s being done by degree and almost by stealth. When we went to the public to talk about the sort of governance the district wanted, they didn’t like the cabinet, but unfortunately we didn’t get the 3000 signatures we needed in that period of time.

“There are a tremendous amount of people who were not happy with the governance of this authority as it is now, they don’t like the cabinet system, and it is the cabinet system that is sleepwalking us into a unitary authority.” …

http://www.devonlive.com/greater-exeter-plan-is-being-dumped-on-residents/story-30224694-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

16 Mar 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Cranbrook, Developers/ Development, Greater Exeter, NPPF, Paul Diviani, Planning System, Sustainability, Transparency

“New Cranbrook” and creeping unitisation worry Greater Exeter councillors

Owl says: Read with the post below Owl thinks there will be more than one “New Cranbrook” in the Greater Exeter area!

“Consultation events held in Devon this week shed light on the creation of a major strategic blueprint, which could lead to new settlements on the same scale as Cranbrook.

Mid Devon, East Devon, Teignbridge and Exeter City Council, in partnership with Devon County Council, are teaming up to create a Greater Exeter Strategic Plan (GESP) which focuses on the creation of jobs and housing until 2040.

Hundreds visited Exeter’s Guildhall today to see early Greater Exeter plans between 2pm and 8pm. Similar consultations were held at Phoenix House, Tiverton yesterday and at Mackarness Hall, Honiton on Wednesday, March 8.

Andrew Robbins, city development manager for Exeter, said: “We need to provide more houses for the population and more jobs. What we’re looking to do is plan for the next 20 years, with Exeter City Council working with its neighbours because we see the influence of Exeter outside its boundaries. We’re looking at the best places for new housing and the best places for new jobs.

“For example, the new settlement at Cranbrook has been developed in recent years. One of the things we’re thinking of is ‘do we need another settlement outside of the city.'”

“What we want to do is get people involved in the process at what we call the issues stage. This is the absolute beginning of the process and its asking people for their ideas for how they see the region developing, before consulting on a draft plan at the beginning of 2018.”

Cllr Jeremy Christophers, Leader of Teignbridge said: “The creation of a strategic plan across a wider geography responds to how people actually live their lives. Combining housing options with job opportunities and providing the proper transport will support our ambition for local people to live the lives they wish for. As councils, we need to work together to deliver better results for the future – clearly, this is the way forward.”

Cllr Paul Diviani, Leader of East Devon said: “It has been clear for some time that there was a significant gap left with the demise of the Devon Structure Plan and without wishing to re-invent the wheel, we should be establishing a strategic plan for our Greater Exeter area which has input from Exeter, Mid Devon, Teignbridge and ourselves, alongside the County Council. We are the epi-centre of the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership and we need to ensure we have a central, aligned, significant role to play as we take our well-established partnership forward.”

Cllr Pete Edwards, Leader of Exeter City said: “Every weekday 37,000 people commute into Exeter and 11,000 people head out of Exeter. These volumes are second only to Cambridge and it is imperative that we address housing, transport and infrastructure in a joined-up way to respond to this reality.”

Cllr Clive Eginton, Leader of Mid Devon, said: “This is an excellent opportunity to reflect on how our residents and businesses live their lives across council administrative boundaries and to start embedding our shared aspiration for a successful future in plans for the Greater Exeter area.”

Cllr John Hart, Leader of Devon County Council, said: “The emerging relationship between the four local authorities in preparing a single Strategic Plan for the area is a very positive step and will help the planning system to work efficiently to boost the supply of housing and growth required. We are pleased and well-placed to be part of this collaborative way of working, which will improve and streamline our planning system.”

However the plans have raised fears that councils are “sleepwalking” into becoming unitary authorities. Liberal Councillor Jenny Roach who represents Silverton expressed fears that Mid Devon District Council would be ceding powers.

She said: “We’re looking like we could be ceding power to this planning partnership, and I know people will shake their heads and say no, but there are several points which worry me.

“Exeter needs land and you can imagine where I sit in my ward, Exeter City Council could be looking at developing the swathe of land that is between Silverton and Exeter and similarly between Thorverton and Newton St Cyres. If you look at the East Devon side there are huge estates marching across that land, so this worries me.

“It worries me that it’s being done by degree and almost by stealth. When we went to the public to talk about the sort of governance the district wanted, they didn’t like the cabinet, but unfortunately we didn’t get the 3000 signatures we needed in that period of time.

“There are a tremendous amount of people who were not happy with the governance of this authority as it is now, they don’t like the cabinet system, and it is the cabinet system that is sleepwalking us into a unitary authority. I’ve seen this happen before and I would really like to know that the very least we would do is have a state of the district debate on this Greater Strategic Exeter Plan.”

An online consultation form can be found at http://www.gesp.org.uk/issues”

http://www.devonlive.com/greater-exeter-plan-could-lead-to-a-new-cranbrook/story-30209261-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

15 Mar 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, East Devon Growth Point, Economy, Greater Exeter, Local Enterprise Partnership, Skypark, Sustainability

More MASSIVE speculative industrial development at Clyst Honiton with benefits to LEP

Owl says: watch the claims of “new” jobs – most companies are relocating from premises just outside the “Growth Point” to take advantage of subsidies such as business rate holidays and are NOT creating “new”jobs at all.

“It appears major development at Clyst Honiton on the edge of Exeter will not cease any time soon, with outline plans in for an 110,000sqm industrial park next to the Lidl depot. The massive development would create between 1,530 and 1,817 new jobs and contribute an extra £90 to £105m to the regional economy. [Owl says: pinch of salt needed here – Skypark made similar claims but has attracted few NEW jobs – mostly only locally relocated ones, see above].

It’s second phase of development at land at Hayes Farm on behalf of Church Commissioners For England. The huge chunk of land is earmarked for more storage and distribution warehouses, offices and business space as part of the Exeter and East Devon Growth Point.

It would also need associated parking, servicing, yard areas, landscaping and engineering works including demolition of existing building within the site. The development also sits near the Skypark, a similar development of a similar size [Owl:which is currently still mostly empty after several years of marketing and an abortive attempt to relocate the EDDC HQ from Sidmouth].

At the moment the future occupiers are unknown, but it’s possible a major company could take the entire site. Options for the land include space for 540 car parking spaces on a two unit scheme, and 530 for a multi-unit scheme. [Translation: speculative building].

Alongside news of the latest planning application, buildings at the nearby Skypark development are already taking shape. Built over 20 years, the 110-acre Skypark site will provide 1.4 million sq ft of warehouse, industrial and office space and deliver up to 6,500 new jobs.

When it completes this autumn, this new office building will create 17,142 sq ft of employment space.

The new offices will join the Ambulance Special Operations Centre (ASOC West) and DPD UK’s new 60,000 sq ft distribution centre on site [relocated from nearby Sowton]. They will benefit from the £3.5 million worth of investment in road and services infrastructure at Skypark and the five-acre public realm area, complete with trim trail exercise stations.

Ian Guy, Senior Development Manager for St. Modwen and Devon County Council’s development partner for the £210m Skypark development, said: “These speculative [Owl’s BOLD] offices are going up alongside the new headquarters for Devon and Cornwall Housing [relocating from central Exeter], which is also under construction on site. They represent the first major office development in Exeter for many years and are a strong sign of the improving occupier market in the local area.”

http://www.devonlive.com/massive-homes-plan-next-to-lidl-depot-near-exeter/story-30206010-detail/story.html

How can you say the market is improving when buildings are speculative, they have no confirmed interest and those which ARE occupied are taken by locally relocated businesses taking advantage of incentives such as no business rates for 5 years to move. And, of course, the Local Enterprise Partnership benefits!

“The current iteration of Enterprise Zones was established by the Government in 2012, as part of their long-term economic plan. They are geographically defined areas, which aim to support growth by encouraging businesses to locate within them, providing a number of incentives including:

Up to 100% business rate discount worth up to £275,000 over 5 years
Simplified local authority planning
Roll out of super-fast Broadband where necessary
For zones in Assisted Areas, 100% enhanced capital allowances (tax relief) to businesses making large investments in plant and machinery.

Any business rates growth generated by the Enterprise Zone (over the next 25 years) is retained by the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) to reinvest in local economic growth.”

Click to access CS1622%20Enterprise%20Zones.pdf

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

11 Mar 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Cornwall, DCC, Democracy, Devolution, Dorset, East Devon Growth Point, EDDC, Exeter City Council, Golden Triangle LEP, Greater Exeter, Local Enterprise Partnership

Some questions about the Heart of the South West LEP

If the Heart of the South West LEP is “dead in the water” and “there is no money left”

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/03/11/local-enterprise-partnership-version-2-devon-cornwall-and-dorset/

Where is the £25,000-plus coming from to pay someone to encourage a new threesome of Cornwall and Isles of Scilly, Devon and Dorset?

What’s happening about the divorce from Somerset and are we paying that county’s expenses still?

HOTSW LEP is the vehicle for taking business rates from Enterprise Zones such as the East Devon Growth Point – if it’s defunct what happens to that money?

Who pays Mr Garcia’s salary and those of the 3 or 4 other employees who presumably now have no jobs? Somerset or Devon?

What’s happening about the “Golden Triangle LEP”?

Where does “Greater Exeter” fit in and with whom?

East Devon – where do we fit in? Our Leader is a HOTSW board member and is responsible for HOTSW housing. Is he still responsible for housing in Somerset, Greater Exeter and/or the “Golden Triangle”?

What is DCC’s/EDDC’s role in this – where was it discussed, when and by whom?

Where are the minutes of the meeting where the current deal was dropped and a new deal thought up?

What does Somerset think about all this?

Do YOU recall being consulted on any of this?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

8 Mar 2017

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Democracy, EDDC, Greater Exeter

“Greater Exeter”: concerns voiced

With Cranbrook pretty much now considered an Exeter suburb maybe East Devon should be voicing its concerns.

” … speaking at a [Mid Devon] full council meeting on Wednesday, February 22, Liberal Councillor Jenny Roach who represents Silverton expressed fears that Mid Devon District Council would be ceding powers.

She said: “We’re looking like we could be ceding power to this planning partnership, and I know people will shake their heads and say no, but there are several points which worry me.

“Exeter needs land and you can imagine where I sit in my ward, Exeter City Council could be looking at developing the swathe of land that is between Silverton and Exeter and similarly between Thorverton and Newton St Cyres. If you look at the East Devon side there are huge estates marching across that land, so this worries me.

“It worries me that it’s being done by degree and almost by stealth. When we went to the public to talk about the sort of governance the district wanted, they didn’t like the cabinet, but unfortunately we didn’t get the 3000 signatures we needed in that period of time.

“There are a tremendous amount of people who were not happy with the governance of this authority as it is now, they don’t like the cabinet system, and it is the cabinet system that is sleepwalking us into a unitary authority.

“I’ve seen this happen before and I would really like to know that the very least we would do is have a state of the district debate on this Greater Strategic Exeter Plan.”

Councillor Nikki Woollatt, Independent for Cullompton North added: “Members of the public may well see this as a step towards unitary. To reassure everybody, I don’t think there’s any problem with having a consultation with the public prior to ceding any powers that we have held.

“People are going to start putting two and two together and if we’re open and say we will consult, I think that would be for the benefit of the public.”

Councillor Polly Colthorpe, Conservative for Way expressed concerns regarding the name.

She said: “The name of this outfit is misleading and I do think that it would be helpful it weren’t called the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan because it makes the whole of the rest of the districts which are involved, subordinate to Exeter.

“None of those districts will want that and they don’t see it like that and I think it would be helpful if you could perhaps consider giving it another title.”

http://www.devonlive.com/council-leaders-welcome-plans-to-work-together-for-greater-exeter-strategic-plan/story-30188639-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

28 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Consultation, Developers/ Development, EDDC, Greater Exeter, Land banking, Land Supply, Local Enterprise Partnership, Local Plan, NPPF, Planning System, Spin

Government response to petition – “Give communities back the right to decide where houses are built.”.

OWL SAYS: if you believe this, you will believe anything. Have we been consulted about where our Local Enterprise Partnership is going to build extra houses? No. What say do we have about extra houses for Greater Exeter? Almost none. Do (favoured) developers get just about anything and everything they ask for in East Devon? Yes, they do.

Truly we live in a parallel universe to the government!


“Local communities are not forced to accept large housing developments. Communities are consulted throughout the Local Plan process and on individual planning applications.

Read the response in full

The National Planning Policy Framework strongly encourages all local planning authorities to get up-to-date Local Plans in place as soon as possible, in consultation with the local community. Up-to-date Local Plans ensure that communities get the right development, in the right place, at the right time, reflecting the principles of sustainable development. Through the White Paper we are ensuring that every part of the country produces, maintains and implements an up-to-date plan, yet with the flexibility for local areas to decide how to plan in a way that best meets their needs.

A wide section of the community should be proactively engaged so that Local Plans, as far as possible, reflect a collective vision and a set of agreed priorities for the sustainable development of the area, including those contained in any neighbourhood plans that have been made.

The Framework recognises the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. That is why our proposals are focussed on development in built up areas.
We are also absolutely clear that Green Belt must be protected and that there are other areas that local authorities must pursue first, such as brownfield land and taking steps to increase density on urban sites. The Government is committed to maximising the use of brownfield land and has already embarked on an ambitious programme to bring brownfield land back into use.

We believe that developers should mitigate the impacts of development. This is vital to make it acceptable to the local community and to addresses the cumulative impact of development in an area. Both the Community Infrastructure Levy and Section 106 agreements can be used by local planning authorities to help fund supporting infrastructure and address the cumulative demand that development places on infrastructure. Through the White Paper, the Government announced that it will examine the options for reforming the existing system of developer contributions to see how this can be simplified, with further announcements at Autumn Budget 2017.

The £2.3billion Housing Infrastructure Fund will deliver up to 100,000 new homes by putting in the right infrastructure, in the right place, at the right time. We expect the fund to be able to deliver a variety of types of infrastructure necessary to unlock housing growth in high demand areas.

There is nothing automatic about grants of planning permission where there is not yet an up-to-date Local Plan. It is still up to local decision-makers to interpret and apply national policy to local circumstances, alongside the views of the local community. Applications should not be approved if the adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits; or if specific policies in the Framework indicate that development should be restricted.

Communities are also able to make representations on individual planning applications and in response to most appeals by the applicant against a local authority decision. Interested parties can raise all the issues that concern them during the planning process, in the knowledge that the decision maker will take their views into account, along with other material considerations, in reaching a decision.

We therefore do not believe a right of appeal against the grant of planning permission for communities is necessary. It is considered that communities already have plenty of opportunity to have their say on local planning issues, and it would be wrong for them to be able to delay a development at the last minute, through a community right of appeal, when any issues they would raise at that point could have been raised and should have been considered during the earlier planning application process.

Department for Communities and Local Government”

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/177333