Another public consultation, EDDC-style, is underway. Can anyone find the plans online? Unlike planning proposals, comments ‘must be made IN WRITING’ (no mention of website option).
Your friends and neighbours might like to know.
Another public consultation, EDDC-style, is underway. Can anyone find the plans online? Unlike planning proposals, comments ‘must be made IN WRITING’ (no mention of website option).
Your friends and neighbours might like to know.
Urgent reminder from Save Clyst St Mary Campaign:
‘Thank you to everyone who has paid their money that was previously pledged. Every penny is gratefully appreciated. Anyone can donate – you simply need to pay your money into the SaveClyst ST Mary account via the village Post Office or if you prefer to do it electronically, into Natwest Bank account: 56-00-49 32633181
Please be aware that there are only forty six letters of objection on the East Devon Council website. We desperately need to get that number over one hundred (at least – the Winslade Park proposal had over two hundred) so please do post or email your objections as soon as possible (remember, the closing date is now only three days away).
If you decide to input your comments directly on to EDDC’s site, do check that the comments actually appear! A number seem to have vanished into cyber world. EDDC is aware of the issue and has requested that anyone who has problems contacts them immediately.
Finally, don’t forget the meeting in the village hall Thursday 5th February at 7.30pm. Charlie Hopkins(Expert planning consultant) will be attending. This meeting will be focusing specifically on the proposal to demolish a house in Clyst Valley Road and build forty houses on the field, currently owned by the Plymouth Brethren, situated adjacent to Clyst Valley Football Club’s grounds.
A big thank you to you all for your continued support. As we have said previously, it’s a big challenge ahead of us – but together, we can do it!’
East Devon Watch has received a circular from the Marley Planning group who are objecting to a plan for 150 houses (on top of 350 from another developer in adjacent land) off Marley Road, Exmouth. The plan appears to have the hallmarks of a speculative application recognised as being able to take advantage of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) situation. An attempt to have the land included last time around was thrown out.
The planning application is 14/3022/MOUT and objections must be in no later that 10th February. Copies of objections should go to Exmouth Town Council.
For anyone wishing to add their voice to the objections,the Marley Planning Group Campaigners have prepared a draft letter of objection which can be used as it is, or modified as required. Details at this link Proforma Letter Marley Planning Group . For further information please e-mail marleyleyplanning@yahoo.co.uk .
EDW footnotes:
-Readers may be aware that the developer cut down a sizeable ancient oak before the community consultation.
-The applicant’s submitted documents claim there would be no impact on the local surgery, based solely on the fact that the surgery (Raleigh Surgery) still takes new patients. However, we are told that one of the partners has said in the press they could not absorb such numbers without significant resources.
From Gaeron Kayley of Save Clyst St Mary campaign group:
‘Please be aware that a number of people are having difficulties logging their comments onto the EDDC website. The website suggests your comments have been successfully submitted, yet they never appear. If this has happened to you too, please notify: icthelpdesk@eastdevon.gov.ukIt will help if you can include the application on which you were commenting, along with the approximate time and date you submitted your comments.’
The value of trees was a major theme at last night’s Sidmouth Arboretum AGM (held in the Annie Leigh Browne Room, Old Unitarian Church).
Guest speaker AONB Manager Chris Woodruff, gave an informal but very informative presentation on the aesthetic, social, environmental, and economic benefits of trees.. He spoke of the value to the local economy of modifying the woodland environment ((for example, the profitable provision of family attractions at Haldon Hills). Wood for fuel is in increasing demand, and local woodburning stove company, Stovax, saw sales rise by 50% last year. But England has a surprisingly low percentage of sustainably managed woodland, (barely half) compared with the other UK countries. Another surprise Chris Woodruff mentioned, is that hedges, i.e. “vertical woodland”, are not included in such surveys.
Meanwhile, Sidmouth Arboretum now has a Transatlantic link! It is working in partnership with the American organisation, Treeconomics, on a tree survey being specifically adapted for our local environment. Following Sidmouth’s lead, two other towns (Crawley,and Lewis, in Sussex) are currently establishing a civic arboretum.
The value of trees is increasingly being recognised….!
More info here http://www.treeconomics.co.uk/
East Devon Watch has been sent this update on what’s happening at Clyst St Mary:
‘A massive thank you to everyone who has supported our campaign to unite Clyst St Mary in opposing inappropriate development within our village. Our aim is to ensure any future building is sustainable and in accordance with the emerging Neighbourhood Plan so that the village’s unique identity can be maintained and its green sites preserved. We are incredibly grateful to the hundreds of residents who turned up at the Village Hall last Tuesday to voice their concerns regarding proposals for developments at Cat’s Copse, Winslade Park and Oil Mill Lane. Thanks in part to the generosity of residents, the Parish Council has now been able to hire a specialist planning consultant to help us fight these proposals. The next crucial meeting is on 5th February at 7.30pm in the Village Hall.
As you may already be aware, yet another planning application has now been received which, once again, threatens to destroy the character of our village with the development of not only 40 houses (which is in addition to the 93 village homes for which planning permission has already been granted) but also the demolition of an existing family home in the heart of Clyst Valley Road to provide road access into the existing well established, incredibly quiet residential estate. The proposed site, currently owned by the Plymouth Brethren, is the large field adjacent to our football ground.Although it has been labeled ‘Land off Clyst Valley Road, this is in fact misleading since there is no existing access from this road. Nor, at the time of writing, is there any sign of the plans on display in close proximity to the home the developers want to demolish; the only references are situated on the boundary fence between Winslade Park Avenue/A376 and our village football ground.
With the deadline for letters of objection only weeks away (4th February 2015) please can we strongly urge you to continue supporting the village by emailing/writing to East Devon District Council to voice your objections to this most recent proposal. Issues you may wish to consider with regard to this specific development include: an increase in population for which the village does not have the infra-structure; the loss of the existing residential estate’s unique, tranquil character; substantial loss of light and privacy to residents whose bungalows back onto the site (the proposed homes are 2 or 3 storeys in height); an enormous (and potentially dangerous) increase in traffic travelling through the estate – very few public facilities are available within walking distance; a potential increase in congestion both through the main village and onto the Exmouth and Sidmouth roads (the Church Lane entrance to the estate, the site of 21 road traffic incidents in recent years – one of which was fatal – will be particularly affected); an increase in already high levels of pollution, especially at the Clyst St Mary roundabout ; concerns regarding potential flooding which would be exacerbated by the loss of further green spaces; existing wildlife habitats would be destroyed; it would be setting a precedent – which village field, park or site, on either side of the A3052, would become the next target for destruction?
When drafting your objections, the planning reference you should quote is ‘Land Off Clyst Valley Road: 15/0072/MOUT’. A selection of sample letters are given below * and will be available to download from our website http://www.saveclsytstmary.org.uk within the next few days – please feel free to adapt these as required. They can be sent by post or email (planningwest@eastdevon.gov.uk)
Please do note the aforementioned meeting regarding this planning application on 5th February 2015 at 7.30pm in the Village Hall where, once again, your support is essential.
Finally, please can we remind local residents that they are still able to contribute towards the on-going costs of employing Charlie Hopkins, our planning consultant. Payment can be made via the website or at Clyst St Mary Post Office. Please be assured that money will be used for no other purpose than to help pay Mr Hopkins; anyone assisting this campaign is doing so voluntarily and all costs such as printing and banners have been paid for by those volunteers. Do visit our website regularly as we are endeavouring to keep it as up to date as possible. A series of rare historical maps of our area are one of the most recent features which may be of interest.Feel free to suggest any further features you would like to see added.
– As we have stated previously, the challenge ahead of us is not easy – but together, we really can do it!’
*15 0072 MOUT ( Land off Clyst Valley Road, Clyst St Mary
*Land off CVR letter
*** STOP PRESS: new planning application for another solar farm in the area – *** please see website for further details
At last night’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee senior Tory councillor Peter Halse lashed EDDC’s Relocation Project. He said it risked the Council’s reputation for financial prudence. “At the time (the relocation project) looked OK, but now, with hindsight, it looks pretty bad….Quite honestly we have fallen flat on our face!” He was sceptical about Deputy CEO Richard Cohen’s claimed energy savings, and said employees based in the newer 1970/1980s building, “can’t see any reason why they’d want to move”. He concluded “It’s not just the leadership who are responsible. We need to look this thing full in the face. We can get out of this”.
Sidmouth resident Richard Eley, had already mauled Richard Cohen’s assumptions on future energy cost savings which were “way out of line” with those predicted by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). Mr Cohen in response welcomed the fact that auditors would now be taking “a useful look under the bonnet, as it were”. In the meantime a preferred developer had now been selected for a mix of care home and residential properties at Knowle. The planning process would have to be gone through by the developer and further attempts to delay the Knowle sale have been factored in to the costs, he added.
When Independent Cllr Claire Wright expressed concern that EDDC’s planning committee would be under extreme pressure to grant permission to develop the Knowle because the whole relocation project depended on it, she was accused of casting doubt on the integrity of councillors.
Independent Councillor Roger Giles didn’t get a clear answer from Mr Cohen about where his 10% annual energy inflation figures came from, only that they were “conservative”! And there was no answer to Cllr Giles’ second question about how much extra the renovation of Exmouth Town Hall would cost.
Tory Cllr Graham Troman (Vice Chair of the OSC) said the Knowle site was an appreciating asset while refurbished offices or new-build on an industrial estate (e.g. Heathpark) would not recoup the money spent on them.
Tory Cllr Sheila Kerridge urged her colleagues to show transparency and “not to be seen to be doing things underhand….Put the matter on hold until we know the figures”. (echoing Cllr Claire Wright’s proposal voted down a few weeks earlier.
Chair Tim Wood concluded that all would be examined in great detail by the auditors so there was no cause for alarm.
The second burning issue was the suggested reform of Task and Finish Forums.
A proposal from a Democratic Services Officer (advised by CEO Mark Williams?) that the scope of TAFFs should be proposed by officers, seemed pretty well acceptable to the obedient majority – though it is going to be thought about first by one of Cllr Bloxham’s Think Tanks.
The controversial Business TAFF will continue with the same members as before, but without too much embarrassing looking back at relations with the East Devon Business Forum whose demise seemed to be lamented by Deputy Leader Andrew Moulding. He assured everyone that the TAFF will now have perfectly respectable relations with the new East Devon Business Group which genuinely represented the District’s entrepreneurs.It was time to turn the page, he said, and stop attacking the perceived influence of the EDBF on crucial planning decisions. The representative from Axminster concluded,fittingly, that he was not “trying to sweep anything under the carpet!”
Councillor Tim Wood, Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee (OSC), has been copied in to this e-mail just sent to EDDC from EDA Chair, Paul Arnott. (This evening’s OSC meeting begins at 6.30pm at Knowle.)
‘ I note that Tim (Wood) as Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in question, has removed the falsehood that Mr Williams had been “accused” by me of “meddling” with the police investigation. It is regrettable that EDDC published this in draft form online, and an apology from the council would be usual in the circumstances.
As you have already sent out the amendment, there is little point in my further commenting on its remaining inaccuracies. I will take the Chairman’s thanks for my taking time in transcribing the recording and pointing out the errors in the minutes as read.
However, it seems worth saying just a little more for the record, for Tim to consider in his role as Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny. As a former MP his experience in these matters carries much weight in the district.
Mr Mark Williams’ own published account and recorded statements in November disclose that very early in the timeline of the investigation – in the Spring of 2013 – he offered prejudicial opinions to the police in relation to the motivations of those who may have wished to give evidence in this matter.
Then, on the conclusion of the matter in November 2014, he repeated this course, and attempted to heap more blame on these same people, to their material disadvantage. It was an open effort by him to discredit councillors and public alike.
In summary, Mr Williams sought to do reputational damage both before and after the investigation. He then interfered with the course of any further internal investigation by attempting to eliminate a named councillor from the process.
In his November 2014 statement, sent to every councillor before your last meeting, he then falsely smeared the East Devon Alliance, of which I am chairman.
For your information, the EDA was not even constituted until some months after Mr Williams’ own colleague, Ms Denise Lyon, freely decided to report Mr Brown to the police, presumably with his knowledge and tacit approval.
If Mr Williams was keeping a cooler head he would understand that the East Devon Alliance was constituted after the event, and well after his own council had decided it must involve the police.
Many independent-minded, experienced council tax payers considered at the time that from that point on the whole process would require strong independent scrutiny. This is a function which the East Devon Alliance, amongst others, has performed valiantly, I’d suggest, on this and a range of other key district issues. They deserve greater respect than inaccurate and arrogant assertions from the man whose wage they pay.
On a personal note, just to be very clear indeed, I have never had any knowledge of Mr Brown, and had only ever heard his name mentioned, prior to the Telegraph report in March 2013, when local councillors, particularly my ward member Cllr Helen Parr, stated privately that they believed him to be one of a small number who had brought the planning system into disrepute over many years. Who could disagree with her?
These opinions were being freely offered years before Cllr Claire Wright, for example, was even a councillor. Perhaps they never came to Mr Williams’ ear.
I and many others consider that Mr William’s attack on Cllr Wright (and others) – both through the document he published before the November O&S, and indeed his disgraceful attack on Cllr Roger Giles during that meeting (which does not seem to have been seen as noteworthy enough to make the minutes) – were astonishingly ill-judged for one in his position. A matter for scrutiny, perhaps?
As to the police investigation into this matter, let it be recorded that it accomplished nothing other than to provide six hundred days political cover for EDDC to refuse to openly debate and make amends for its mistakes in Planning policy.
Any sincere and rigorous internal investigation carried out by councillors supposedly keen to get to the facts in Spring 2013 would have ranged from the inappropriate influence of the EDBF to the real narrative behind the catastrophic failure to implement a Local Plan in a timely fashion. This failure, predicted by many, leaves us without any protection for our district from opportunistic and unsustainable development. There is no gain in this for the residents of East Devon; the gain is plainly elsewhere.
With hindsight, it appears that the public interest in this matter would have been for Ms Lyon not to have made a report – not an allegation, it should be noted – to the police, but instead to have put extra impetus and urgency into the TAFF set up to look at matters in this area. Instead, this TAFF was put on ice. Tonight we shall learn of its refreshed remit, and precisely who the Chairman of O&S, and the officers he has consulted, deem helpful to sit on it.
As a layman, it would not be difficult to reach the conclusion that the police role as this story played allowed the council to keep this whole matter in the long grass. It can also be fairly commented that the police did not seem in any great haste to retrieve it.
all best wishes
Paul
‘
From EDDC to EDA Chair, Paul Arnott, this afternoon:
The Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny Committee has provided the following words for proposed amendment to the minutes of the 13 November 2014 meeting.
Minute 47 (page 4) second paragraph be replaced with:
‘Mr Paul Arnott spoke from the floor putting some critical questions regarding the work both of the police and the Council in the investigation of a former councillor. He claimed that “the chief executive of the compromised authority did what he could to meddle with the internal investigations” and also asked the police and crime commissioner, Mr Hogg, if he found it coincidental that something like six hundred days after a report was made from this authority to the police about the conduct of a former councillor, five hundred and ninety-nine days later, and one day before he appeared before the committee, the police finally announced that there would be no further action. Mr Hogg did not comment at the time but later, in response to questions to Mr Hogg and senior police officers, it was made clear by Superintendent Perkin that the police investigation had been long and complex and that they did not think the senior investigating officer would have been aware of this meeting.’
Minute 54 (page 12) 8th paragraph from the start of the minute be replaced with:
‘Councillor Claire Wright commented on the recent circulation of a letter of the East Devon Alliance. She went on to state that any attempt to eject her from the membership of the Business TaFF would send a message to the public that the Council had something to hide.’
These proposed amendments have been circulated to the Overview & Scrutiny Committee, for their meeting this evening (6.30pm, Knowle).
For EDA’s response, see next blogpost….
Lots of new rules being instigated at EDDC recently (a possible unseemly distraction from the focus of getting a new Local Plan in place?). Interesting that priority has been given to drawing up new rules for task forums (fora?). http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/changes_proposed_for_east_devon_council_task_forums_to_avoid_risk_of_hijack
Which makes us all wonder about the crippled Business Task and Finish Forum (Business TAFF). It was originally set up by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s then Chair, Cllr Stuart Hughes, who was rapidly replaced by Cllr Tim Wood. The latter seems to have no enthusiasm for the Business TAFF’s purpose which was to undertake “an in-depth” investigation into EDDC and business (inevitably including the group formerly known as the East Devon Business Forum, co-founded by Cllr Paul Diviani, and described by EDDC Chief Executive Mark Williams as a “joint body” with EDDC.). No “in-depth investigation” is known to have been done, and key players such as EDDC’s former Economic Development Manager, Nigel Harrison, who had a dual role as the EDBF’s Honorary Secretary, have not been available to answer questions.
If the Business TAFF does at last continue, will its scope have been altered, for what reasons, and by whom? One assumes that EDDC’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee Chair and Vice-Chair have complete and independent control of the matter, without any officer interference. This evening’s meeting may or may not confirm that.
For a timeline for the Business Forum, try the SIN archive: https://sidmouthindependentnews.wordpress.com/2013/09/02/the-business-taff-drags-on/
Further to yesterday’s East Devon Watch blogpost* about alleged misrepresentation in the Overview and Scrutiny draft minutes:
From EDDC to EDA Chair, Paul Arnott today, by e-mail:
The Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny has read your request and has decided that some small changes will be made but not exactly as you have requested. He has advised me that he is working on a rewording of that section of the minutes to take into account your request.
Paul Arnott’s e-mailed reply: ‘..it is unacceptable in law to place on the public record an endorsed minute wrongly stating that someone has spoken at a meeting and “accused” the Chief Executive (the implication in the wording being that this is the CEO of EDDC) of “meddling” in a police investigation.’
*https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/01/22/serious-misrepresentation-in-overview-and-scrutiny-committee-draft-minutes-eda-requests-amendment-at-todays-meeting-22012015/
Observers may have noticed that East Devon District Council predominantly answers Freedom of Information (FOI) requests with references to minutes of meetings.
But minutes may not always be reliable, as illustrated by the following e-mail just sent to EDDC by EDA Chair, Paul Arnott. The benefits of video and audio recording of council meetings are clearly demonstrated in this case.
Referring to the audio recording of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 13th November 2014 (link given below), Paul Arnott stated,
‘Many people wrote to me yesterday as they were preparing for this Thursday’s meeting to point out that the minute of what I said from the public seats that night is misrepresented in the draft minutes.
Given the potential implications of this particular misrepresentation I have now quickly transcribed what I actually said here:
Transcription of OSC131114Item8
Chairman welcomes Tony Hogg and invites Paul Arnott to speak from the floor
In at 0 m 36 sec
PA: Thank you, Chairman. Good evening ladies and gentlemen, and indeed can I perhaps on behalf of the public sitting behind me welcome Tony Hogg here tonight? The timing is interesting.
I think many people here tonight will share my sense of depression at the grim inevitability of a finding by the authorities announced yesterday. A half-hearted report, not allegation, was made by a compromised authority to another body with whom it shares many formal and informal connections. A robust and extensive investigation is then claimed to have been followed, although to most reasonable minded observers it looks in fact weak and perplexingly delayed.
We will, of course, never really be allowed to know who was spoken to in this enquiry, or what investigative lines were followed. Yet an announcement was made yesterday by the putative investigators and the compromised authority that it was all over, nothing to see here.
And almost immediately, the chief executive of the compromised authority did what he could to meddle with the internal investigations which in a normal, healthy establishment must now follow, and instead turned his fire back against his very best members, who have done nothing but fight in the open to protect the public interest.
Yes, chairman, I think we all know what I’m referring to here. Yesterday’s boast by FIFA’s Sepp Blatter that Qatar’s astonishingly successful bid for the World Cup in 2018 was in fact the model of probity (Laughter) And moreover that after an extensive and robust investigation the unpleasant English Football Association is itself at fault for complaining in the first place. Thank heavens, Chairman, under your watchful gaze there is no danger of anything like that happening around here.
However, in the form of a question for Tony. I wonder if you find it coincidental, Tony, that something like six hundred days after a report was made from this authority to the police about the conduct of a former councillor, five hundred and ninety-nine days later, and one day before you appear before us, the police finally announce that there will be no further action?
Mr Hogg did not answer the question
***
However, this is how the above is represented in the minutes:
“Paul Arnott spoke about the conclusion of the police investigation into former councillor,
Graham Brown, of the district council and questioned if the investigation had indeed been
robust and extensive as stated; he accused the Chief Executive of “meddling” with the
investigation and targeting the council’s best councillors. Following a reference to the
current president of FIFA, he commented on whether the announcement of the police
investigation one day prior to the Police and Crime Commissioner attending the committee
that evening was co-incidental.”
As you can see above, Mr Brown’s name was not mentioned by me, and the Chief Executive was not “accused” of “meddling” with the investigation.
Therefore it is essential that the minutes record was actually said. I would suggest they be amended as follows:
Mr Paul Arnott spoke from the floor, asking Mr Hogg if he found it coincidental that something like six hundred days after a report was made from this authority to the police about the conduct of a former councillor, five hundred and ninety-nine days later, and one day before he appeared before the committee, the police finally announce that there will be no further action. Mr Hogg did not address the question.
It would be much happier for the conduct of tomorrow’s meeting if this amendment could be made in consultation with the Chairman.
With many thanks,
Paul Arnott.’
To listen to the audio recording follow the link to the section of the minutes relating to the Police and Crime Commissioner (click on a link under the words Minute 47)
http://new.eastdevon.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/committees-and-meetings/overview-and-scrutiny-committee/minutes/13-november-2014/police-and-crime-commissioner/
BISHOPS CLYST PARISH COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO INVITE YOU TO:
AN EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF THE PARISH COUNCIL
Tuesday 20 January 2015
Clyst St Mary Village Hall starting at 7.30 pm
Items on the Agenda:-
To consider and agree representations in connection with the following planning applications submitted by Friends Provident at Winslade Park, Clyst St Mary:-
14/2637/OUT Demolition of Brook House and Clyst House and outline application (seeking to discharge means of access only) for up to 237 new dwellings, 1805 sq metres of B1(A) and D1 commercial floorspace, together with replacement sports facilities comprising two football pitches, a cricket pitch and sports pavilion, and associated development including parking and access
14/2638/LBC Renovation works to secure the continued use of the building for B1(a) purposes. Removal of the modern bridge link between the Manor House and Winslade House.
14/2640/MFUL Conversion of the building from current B1(a) office use to 61 (C3) residential units including the removal and making good of the bridge link between Winslade Manor and Winslade House and provision of basement car park.
14/2641/LBC Conversion of Winslade House from B1(a) office to 61 (C3) residential units including the removal and making good of the bridge link between Winslade Manor and Winslade House and provision of basement car park.
14/2642/FUL Demolition of modern extensions and conversion of the former Stable Block form D2 Leisure Use to 6 residential units
14/2643/LBC Demolition of modern extensions and conversion of the former Stable Block form D2 Leisure Use to 6 residential units
14/2644/MFUL Change of use from Agricultural Land to Community Park including the provision of footpaths, new landscaping and changes to levels
To consider and agree representations in connection with the following planning application submitted by The Turnstone Group at Land to North of A3052 between Cat & Fiddle and Devon County Showground, Sidmouth Road, Clyst St Mary:-
14/2237/MOUT
(amendment) Outline application with some matters reserved for the construction of up to 93 dwellings and new access and associated open space (access to be considered)
To consider and agree representations in connection with the following planning application submitted by Solstice Renewables Ltd at land surrounding Walnut Cottages, Oil Mill Lane, Clyst St Mary
14/2952/MFUL Installation of ground mounted photovoltaic solar arrays together with power inverter systems; transformer stations; internal access tracks; landscaping; CCTV; security fencing and associated access gate.
As decided by the Full Council (17 Dec 2014), EDDC’s office relocation project is to have much more thorough scrutiny than it has had to date. Both the internal and external auditors are already in the process of producing new reports (by late February 2015) with as much content as possible to be in the public domain, as agreed at January’s Audit & Governance Committee.
This week’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee, charged with the close scrutiny of other aspects of the relocation project, may find helpful the maps and comment at this link: http://futuresforumvgs.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/knowle-relocation-project-and-politics.html
There’s a curious continued reluctance of the relocation Team to fully answer SOS Chair Richard Thurlow’s Freedom of Information request on the matter. Details here: http://saveoursidmouth.com/2015/01/13/energy-costs-for-relocation-disclosure-of-information-still-refused/
The Local Government Association (LGA) has major concerns. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-30780126

Radio Devon news today announced EDDC’s huge project for Exmouth seafront, to include an open-air sports facility. Shame Councillor Moulding and his team haven’t noticed there already is a superb one, that families don’t have to pay to use, requires no energy consumption, and doesn’t pollute. The wide open spaces and sandy beach have long been the resort’s main attraction. (The little-used new ‘super’ bowling alley complex has been struggling to make a profit, we’re told.)
Now Exmouth’s signature seafront beach huts are to be removed, to make way for the District Council’s ambitious Splash project (just a part of the massive site pictured above). Same glass-and-concrete vision as that which bulldozed the much-loved, constantly used and unique Elizabeth Hall,so the land could be sold to the ubiquitous Premier Inn…
So Exmouth loses more of its special character and much-loved landmarks. What exactly will it gain?
This point was made very firmly by Deputy Chair Cllr Bowden, at this afternoon’s Audit and Governance (A&G) Committee meeting at Knowle.
Councillors and the public will naturally bear this in mind when the two independent audits, called for by A&G today, arrive in quick succession. The Committee was assured by EDDC officer Simon Davey, that both reports would be available by mid- to late-February 2015, to give time for a thorough reading before the next A&G meeting in March. They are long overdue!
Individual councillors, and of course Save Our Sidmouth (SOS), have made repeated requests for independent audits over the past two years.Not until 17 December 2014, and long after the political decision to move had been approved by themselves, did the Full Council, prompted by Cllr Graham Troman, vote to ask for a thorough investigation of the figures behind the relocation project.
Today, partly in response to questions from Richard Eley of SOS, and Tony Green of|East Devon Alliance, it was formally requested through the Chair, Cllr Ken Potter, that the the reports must be in writing, and that most of the content should be in Part A…i.e. in the public domain.
Internal auditor, Andrew Ellins,of South West Audit Partnership (SWAP) acknowledged that until now his work had depended more “on reliance than in-depth delving ” into the actual figures given by the relocation team. “If the figures are not accurate, then I have been hoodwinked”, he said. He appealed to members of the public to send him any information about possible errors in the Council’s facts and figures, that they would like him to report on.
External auditors, Grant Thornton, also promised to take a rigorous look at the Council’s calculations including the energy savings claimed by Richard Cohen to justify the move from the Knowle . Richard Eley had already expressed his incredulity at the “maverick and pessimistic” predictions of the Deputy CEO.
Several councillors expressed their awareness of the massive public concern over relocation, and Chair, Cllr Ken Potter declared, “This committee is anxious to get to the detail”. The business plan for relocation, and the soundness of the assumptions driving it, might at long last be thoroughly examined. We shall see.