Is EDDC’s second Draft Local Plan doomed to fail and leave us with the current developer free-for-all?

A GOVERNMENT inspector is challenging East Devon District Council to explain a series of decisions it’s made regarding future, district-wide development before he gives his long awaited stamp of approval.

In April last year, planning inspector Anthony Thickett rendered the council’s draft Local Plan 2006 – 26, as “unsound with serious evidential failings”.

Since then, the council has been working hard to address the short fallings, including that the plan’s 15,000 housing target was not justified by evidence submitted which the inspector dubbed “inadequate and not up to date”.

Mr Thickett also rendered the absence of an up-to-date Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) as a “serious failing” which made making a full assessment of need difficult.

So the council went back to the drawing board and now year on, in March, the council approved its latest draft which saw a number of significant changes:

The council is now recommending an alteration and extension to the period it covers, from April 2013 to March 2031.

And, as a result of the long-awaited SHMA, the council has said that, based on job projection growth, 17,100 homes should be built across East Devon over the next 18 years – 950 per year, and 200 more per year than originally projected.

The council has now launched an eight-week public consultation and as part of this information gathering phase, the inspector has submitted a number of questions, the answers of which will help him inform his conclusions.

Despite the council having already sought to address any issues raised by the inspector last year, a council spokesperson said it was “usual practice” for inspectors to raise challenges to Local Plans at this evidence reviewing stage.

But one East Devon resident, David Daniel, from Budleigh Salterton, has raised concerns that the plan could be set to fail again because the questions that the inspector has asked, echo clarification that he sought over a year ago and which formed the basis for the failure of the plan.

For example, a year ago, the inspector instructed the council to make more progress assessing the need for gypsy and traveller sites and to identify locations where sites could be created – but, now a year on, Mr Thickett has said the council has “failed” to allocate land to gypsies and travellers in the Local Plan which therefore, “does not accord with national policy and is unsound”.

He asks how the failing can be rectified. The inspector also asks whether the council has “robust and reliable” evidence to support the revised housing target of a minimum of 17,100 new homes between 2013 and 2031. He goes on to ask: “Assuming 17,100 is the right number; does the plan make adequate provision for its delivery?”

The council spokesperson would not confirm whether the inspector’s questions suggested that the issues he has raised have not been adequately answered.

But one East Devon resident, David Daniel, from Budleigh Salterton, has raised concerns that the plan could be set to fail again because the questions that the inspector has asked, echo clarification that he sought over a year ago and which formed the basis for the failure of the plan.

For example, a year ago, the inspector instructed the council to make more progress assessing the need for gypsy and traveller sites and to identify locations where sites could be created – but, now a year on, Mr Thickett has said the council has “failed” to allocate land to gypsies and travellers in the Local Plan which therefore, “does not accord with national policy and is unsound”.

He asks how the failing can be rectified. The inspector also asks whether the council has “robust and reliable” evidence to support the revised housing target of a minimum of 17,100 new homes between 2013 and 2031. He goes on to ask: “Assuming 17,100 is the right number; does the plan make adequate provision for its delivery?”

The council spokesperson would not confirm whether the inspector’s questions suggested that the issues he has raised have not been adequately answered.

Mr Daniel, said: “The questions make devastating reading and there is a very real possibility that the council’s revised plan will be rejected for the second time.

“His principal reasons for throwing out the last plan were: That the housing targets were not based on empirical evidence; there was no five year land supply; that the plan period was too short; and there was no plan for gypsies and travellers.

“When reading the inspector’s latest comments, as consultation questions, it seems as if the council has failed in the past year to provide satisfactory answers to any of these.

“Without an adopted Local Plan we are at the mercy of uncontrolled development.”

A council spokesman said: “We have sought to address all the issues in the draft local plan and the inspector is now reviewing the evidence and seeking public opinion.

“It is usual practice for inspectors to raise challenges on Local Plans, which is what Mr Thickett is doing. Housing is invariably the highest profile issue. The purpose of the inspector’s questions is to gather more information to help inform his conclusions on the Local Plan.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Inspector-challenges-East-Devon-council-questions/story-26435085-detail/story.html

Public consultation on latest version of Local Plan starts tomorrow until 12 June

A fresh public consultation on the future blueprint for planning in East Devon will be launched on Thursday 16 April and will run until Friday 12 June.

Planning Inspector Anthony Thickett has advised East Devon District Council of the matters that he wishes to see consulted upon, following the completion of extra work that planning officers were required to do to supplement the previously submitted draft Local Plan.

The Inspector has given the council a list of questions and these will be available for interested members of the public to view online, at Knowle and at libraries and town council offices* across the district for a period of eight weeks.

As before, it will be possible for people to submit comments online or on forms that may be emailed or sent through the post. These will be available on the council’s website and at the various access points around East Devon. The online documents can be accessed at:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/emerging-plans-and-policies/the-new-local-plan/examination-and-hearing-sessions/

In this final round of consultation, the council will be asking residents to comment only on revisions to the earlier version of the draft Local Plan.

The Inspector’s questions that are open for comment will be grouped together in four clusters, plus there will be a fifth section for comment on any proposed changes not covered by the Inspector’s questions.

The four specific clusters concern:

• Housing levels and development in the plan

• Gypsy and Traveller provision

• Site allocations

• Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

CIL supporting documents and forms for making comments can be viewed at: http://eastdevon.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/community-infrastructure-levy-cil/cil-examination/

Each access point will have a package of information available, including guidance notes explaining what the Inspector wants to know and how to fill in the electronic forms or paper documents.

Comments must be received by 12 noon on Friday 12 June 2015 at the very latest. The responses received will be collated and sent on direct to the Inspector for his consideration. It is anticipated that the Inspector will be able to reconvene hearing sessions in July.

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/East-Devon-public-given-chance-comment-planning/story-26338840-detail/story.html

EDDC and the Case of the Mysterious Numbers

An article in ine of today’s newspapers is about health and the figures for Body Mass Index and cholesterol ( Sunday Times). It makes the point that figures for “healthy” BMI and cholesterol were picked arbitrarily and based on little firm evidence and may be quite wrong.

Rather like EDDC’s old AND new annual housing figures.

Several readers have made the point that they can find no evidence at all for the figure of 950 houses a year for the next 18 years in any of the latest Local Plan documents. All sorts of figures are mentioned for all sorts of scenarios but 950 does not seem to be one of them.

Perhaps this is why Mr Thickett, the Inspector who is usually so quick at responding to EDDC, has yet to reply to EDDC’s submission of the new draft which they sent to him on 18 March 2015 (with Community Infrastructure Levy rate information sent on 30 March). He usually replies witin a few days.

This new draft must be giving him much food for thought.

Surely not yet another enormous blunder that will allow a developer free-for-all to continue well beyond the life of this (currently) Conservative-controlled district council with its “economic growth” at all costs mantra?

EDDC’s letters to Planning Inspector on latest draft local plan

18 March 2015

Click to access 07-letter-to-mr-thickett-18-march-2015.pdf

30 March 2015:

Click to access 08-letter-to-mr-thickett-30-march-2015.pdf

and

Click to access cil-letter-31-03-15.pdf

Mr Thickett, the Inspector, is usually quick to respond so we should see replies to all three of these soon (or, indeed, he may have already replied but letters may be awaiting posting on EDDC’s webpage of correspondence with the Inspector:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/emerging-plans-and-policies/inspector-and-programme-officer/correspondence-between-the-inspector-and-council-after-the-examination-hearings/

Bad day for EDDC’s Local Plan officers. Good day for Clyst St Mary.

A barrage of questions from the public (no less than 17 people had pre-registered to speak) were fired at the DMC who were today considering the revised Local Plan. Several councillors firmly added their own particular concerns.

Seven speakers were from the Save Clyst St Mary Group. Campaign leader Gaeron Kayley has just circulated the news copied below:

As you will be aware, today was the day the Development Management Committee met at EDDC to discuss the Local Plan.

This had great significance for Clyst St Mary, given that it had been proposed that both the Winslade Park area and the green field owned by the Plymouth Brethren would be used for the village’s allocation of an additional 200 houses.

22 members of our group met last Monday and discussed our key arguments against this which were to be delivered at today’s meeting.

We are thrilled to announce that, following today’s Committee meeting, it was unanimously agreed by the 15 councillors present to reject the green field proposal and reduce the housing allocation for Winslade Park to 150 in total.

A massive thank you to everyone who attended last Monday’s meeting, including the seven brave souls who spoke so passionately and articulately today, as well as all those local residents who turned up simply to offer moral support. It really was greatly appreciated.

Whilst this was only a hearing for the Local Plan – not a hearing for the specific applications to which we have all objected – it does give us hope for the future. Things certainly appear now to be less bleak than they did ten days ago!

Rest assured, with your support, we will continue to fight in a dignified, professional and open manner to unite and preserve our village community.

Local Plan version 2: a layperson’s summary

The Development Management Committee meets this week to nod through the latest draft of our Local Plan, after which it will go out for consultation.

It’s just about a year since the first version was inspected and thrown out straight away – the Inspector saying he expected to re-hear it in October 2014.

That month came and went and the excuse was: we have LOTS more work to do, be patient.

Those dealing with the revised plan were given few extra resources (around £50,000 worth when costs last published), more resources being piled into headquarter PRE-relocation work (£750,000 plus at least £10,000 to keep consultants reports on the project secret after EDDC was taken to court by the Information Commissioner for refusing to publish them).

February 2015: and we are told consultants reports are “imminent” but must not be published before local elections (May 2015) as they are deemed to be “too politically sensitive”. However, Mid Devon (relying on the very same consultants reports) decided to put their Local Plan out for consultation, eventually publishing the reports for the public with no qualms about their sensitivity.

Our Inspector would have no truck with this “political sensitivity” excuse and said he expected our new draft Local Plan to be out for public consultation by April 2015, election or no election.

Out of the mist came the consultants report – short, based on widely available figures and with no explanation as to why they had taken so long and soon after what appears to be a new draft Local Plan hurridly changed to reflect the new numbers and with an extra addendum of vastly more housing for Cranbrook and Clyst St Mary.

The Local Plan still appears to be (possibly fatally) flawed. Whereas it fixes on a number (18,000 plus houses including windfalls) IT DOES NOT MAKE IT CRYSTAL CLEAR WHERE EXACTLY THEY WILL GO except for Cranbrook and Clyst St Mary.

The report says some towns will have their built-up boundary respected (e.g. Sidmouth) whereas no such promise is made in other places (e.g. Budleigh Salterton). Some towns and villages have little idea of what their allocations will be or where they are to go. That makes Neighbourhood Plans very difficult.

What are the chances of this draft Local Plan being passed by the Inspector? Layperson’s opinion: very slim.

Whatever happens it will be a THIRD council that carries the can – the previous two having failed to get to grips with an out-of-date plan. Let us hope the new council will do a better job than the first two (big Conservative majority) councils did.

A vote for Independents is a vote for a new Local Plan to protect the district from free-for-all development. Heaven knows what a vote for Conservatives would bring on past and present performance!

Cautions for Councillors voting on relocation

From SOS: http://saveoursidmouth.com/2015/03/13/auditors-reports-highly-dependent-on-quality-and-sufficiency-of-data-used/

Incursion into Knowle’s Public Open Space “has never been debated by councillors”

and from more than one senior Honiton Councillor, at various stages of EDDC’s ill-starred (jinxed?) ‘road to relocation’ project. Remember this SIN post, anyone? https://sidmouthindependentnews.wordpress.com/2014/02/17/watchdog-kennelled/

Council challenges Planning Inspector on 5 year land supply calculations

Planning Inspector says 1.91 year land supply, council says 7.51 year supply.

What can you do when even the so-called experts can’t agree! And by such a large amount.

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=21673:council-eyes-judicial-review-after-findings-of-inspector-on-housing-supply&catid=63&Itemid=31

Local Plan – further setbacks – “complexities” cause delays

Full story, Page 6, Sidmouth Herald: Development blueprint suffers further setback

Our comment:

Why the delay? Councils need to show that they have co-operated with but not necessarily agreed with) adjacent authorities.

For us this means Exeter (and inevitably mopping up some of their housing need) and West Dorset – but EDDC decided, for no obvious reason, to add Mid- Devon, Teignbridge AND Dartmoor National Park into the mix. So we have to take into account the needs of Dartmoor National Park where almost no new building is allowed! Still, Exeter and Dartmoor have ex-EDDC planners at the helm, both of whom were very enthusiastic supporters of the East Devon Business Forum, so it will make for nice cosy chats.

AND Teignbridge and East Devon CEOs know each other well – having both been dragged before a Parliamentary Committee on Voter Engagement in December 2014 to explain why they had not been registering voters in their areas. Perhaps they shared a first-class railway carriage there and back!

The Planning Inspector who threw out the first draft Local Plan in March 2014 anticipated a re-hearing in October 2014 and cleared his diary in anticipation.

Looks like it won’t be going in his 2015 diary either.

The £750,000 already spent on relocation consultants (the figure not including officer time) could have had this wrapped up within the Inspector’s timeframe.

What was it Councillor Halse said about relocation: the council had “fallen flat on its face”? Seems to be making a habit of it.

EDDC’s “new” website seems to have lost a lot of information

Anyone else finding that EDDC’s “new” website is very thin on content and almost impossible to navigate and search, particularly in the Planning section?

For example, can anyone tell us where the Local Plan Programme Officer’s web page (with all the Documents scrutinised by the Planning Inspector and all the correspondence before and after the examination) has gone to, its former link no longer seeming to work?