It’s true: localism is dead – murdered!

“Automatic planning permission would be granted on many brownfield sites in England in an attempt to boost house-building, under government plans.

Ministers would also get powers to seize disused land, while major housing projects could be fast-tracked, and rules on extensions in London relaxed.

Chancellor George Osborne said reforms were needed because Britain had been “incapable of building enough homes”.
It follows a warning this week’s Budget would cut investment in new homes.

The proposed changes feature in a 90-page document to address Britain’s productivity record, to be released later.
It is aimed at boosting British workers’ output levels, which experts say lag behind other leading nations – an issue dubbed the “productivity puzzle”.

The chancellor’s Fixing the Foundations package has been billed by the Treasury as the second half of the Budget.

Upwards extensions

BBC political correspondent Ross Hawkins said Treasury sources argue house-building boosts productivity, as it is helpful to have workers living close to their workplaces.
Housing is just one part of a broad plan, they say.

The report also features proposals on higher education, transport, devolution of powers to cities and trade.

George Osborne says reforms are needed to planning laws so more homes are built.

Under the new proposals – which will need to be approved by MPs – automatic planning permission would be granted on all “suitable” brownfield sites under a new “zonal” system, the Treasury said.

The term brownfield refers to land that has previously been developed but is vacant or derelict.

Another change would see ministers seek to scrap the need for planning permission in London for developers who want to extend buildings to the height of neighbouring properties.
Planning powers will be devolved to mayors in London and Manchester, while enhanced compulsory purchase powers will allow more brownfield land to be made available for development.

There would also be new sanctions for councils that do not deal with planning applications quickly enough, and the government would be able to intervene in councils’ local development plans.

House prices

This week, the Office for Budget Responsibility warned government plans for rent reductions in social rented homes would hit housing investment.

The OBR said 14,000 fewer affordable homes would be built and cut its forecast for investment in private housing by 0.7%.

It also said house prices were expected to rise compared with both consumer prices and household incomes.

A Treasury source said the OBR assessment considered only the impact of the Budget and did not reflect the new policy.
In his Mansion House speech in June 2014, Mr Osborne said 200,000 permissions for new homes would be made possible by 2020 as councils put in place orders to provide sites with outline planning permission.

Housing ladder

The Treasury said the new plan went further – in effect stripping away the need for any planning permission in some brownfield locations.

The Conservative manifesto pledged to “ensure that 90% of suitable brownfield sites have planning permission for housing by 2020”.

In a statement released before the publication of the productivity plan, Mr Osborne said: “Britain has been incapable of building enough homes.

“The reforms we made to the planning system in the last Parliament have started to improve the situation: planning permissions and housing starts are at a seven-year high.
“But we need to go further and I am not prepared to stand by when people who want to get on the housing ladder can’t do so.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33472405

How developers exploit the planning system

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jun/25/london-developers-viability-planning-affordable-social-housing-regeneration-oliver-wainwright

Changes to the judicial review process

The (only, expensive) way of allowing members of the public to bring councils and developers to justice:

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=23493:not-in-my-back-yard&catid=63&Itemid=31

Local Tories show their true colours

Andrew Moulding and Steph Jones’s election leaflet issued in Axminster, seems designed to misinform.

AxmstrLeaflet

A close look at the leaflet (above..click to enlarge) reveals some apparent misconceptions and economies with the truth:

Moulding/ Jones: Imply East Devon Alliance is centred in Sidmouth.
Incorrect: EDA Chair lives in Colyton; Vice-Chair in Feniton; vast majority of East Devon Alliance Independent candidates are from other parts of the District.

Moulding/Jones: Suggest Knowle is just adapted bedrooms and bathrooms.
Incorrect: Only the old part, which was once used as a hotel, then as flats.  No serious attempt has been made to market this individually to fund update of the newer building, which consists of purpose built offices in 1970-80s, with outside space for extension if required.

Moulding/Jones:  Move will save £6m over 20 years.
Figures are disputed ( posts on http://www.saveoursidmouth.com may explain why ‘Sidmouth’ is a painful subject for EDDC Deputy Leader, Cllr Moulding) – and some withheld documents concerning office relocation are still under legal review (Tribunal decision imminent: Information Commissioner and J. Woodward vs East Devon District Council).

Moulding/Jones: Why Honiton and Exmouth? “Because Honiton is more central, and Exmouth is the largest town.”
Then why did they previously support Skypark (which could not be less central) and selling the site in Honiton? In reality, a newbuild office at Honiton is just the fall-back plan, as the Honiton site couldn’t be sold for enough money to make a move to Skypark financially viable. And Exmouth has only now come into the equation, as space at the Town Hall has become available. The leaflet makes no mention of the issues of running a split site; nor of existing air pollution problems where the £7m newbuild HQ at Honiton would be sited (no such problem in Knowle parkland!), etc.,etc. 

Moulding/Jones; Why is Local Plan taking so long? “Because we want to get it right”
Or is it because EDDC are struggling, having got it so wrong in the past, and exasperating the Inspector, who rejected the previous one? (Remember the 53 ‘minor changes’ which the Inspector found to be ‘major’? SIN blogged the story: https://sidmouthindependentnews.wordpress.com/2013/11/30/sum-thing-amiss/)

Moulding/ Jones: Why so much new housing in Axminster? “Because you wanted it!!”
Who are ‘you’? Does it embellish the town and help it to thrive? Or is it symptomatic of consequences when deciding where to build the massive number of new houses EDDC has chosen to opt for?

Moulding/Jones:  Do you have a plan for the future of Axminster. “Yes, we have a vision.”
Who are ‘we’, and has the vision, with no neighbourhood plan yet in place, been led by speculative development?

This leaflet, along with quotes from Hugo Swire in the local press yesterday (https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/05/02/east-devon-alliance-responds-to-hugo-swire-misinformation/), show tired tactics which are looking rather stale. On May 7th, East Devon voters may well show they’ve had enough of them.

Election hot topics on IEDA blogs.. and on the video intros

Confused about who to vote for, how many votes you have, or why all the talk about neighbourhood plans? This blog has brief, clear summaries: http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/candidates/sidmouth/cathy-gardner/

EDW also recommends Cathy’s video intro; and the one by the iEDA candidate standing against Paul Diviani (in Yarty), Steve Horner.
Many of you will already have watched this straight-talking one, which we highlighted yesterday : http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/candidates/coly-valley/paul-arnott/

Then there’s one by Megan Armstrong (Exmouth); and by Martin Shaw (Seaton)…… the list goes on, and is steadily increasing.

Election only one week away!

Who shapes our future?

Anyone who’s been to the new town of Cranbrook lately, will be interested in this link: http://futuresforumvgs.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/where-we-live-now-new-town-home-town.html

Was it Churchill who once said, we shape our buildings and our buildings shape us…

‘Peoples’ Voice on Planning’ event has support from all but one Party!

CoVoP crowd
About a hundred people from various parts of East Devon gathered on the lawn terraces at Knowle on Sunday afternoon 12th April to listen to speeches from parliamentary candidates and others about the national planning set-up.

The event was part of a nationwide Day of Action called for by Community Voice on Planning (Covop) and was organised by Covop trustees and Vision Group for Sidmouth.

Parliamentary candidates representing all parties, except the Conservatives ( from both the Honiton and Tiverton and the Devon East constituencies) gave their views on the national planning system and in particular the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

All of them promised reforms, mostly involving prioritising brownfield developments, protecting the countryside and building more affordable homes for local people. Conservative candidates were unable to attend and failed to respond to requests to send a written statement.

The first speaker was ex-judge Ian McKintosh, of East Devon Alliance and Covop. After reviewing the situation nationally and locally, he argued that local communities were being ignored in favour of developers.

Caroline Kolek, Labour candidate for Honiton and Tiverton, claimed that Labour would stop land-banking and prioritise brownfield sites. She shared her slot with Henry Brown, district councillor candidate for St Paul’s ward, Honiton,who made the case for more affordables for local young people.

Paul Edwards of the Green party and candidate for Tiverton and Honiton, said the countryside was our greatest resource and should be protected.

John Kelly, standing in for Andrew Chapman, UKIP parliamentary candidate for Devon East, who was indisposed, argued that the planning crisis was caused by EU regulations.

Stuart Mole, Liberal-Democrat candidate for Devon East, contended that the reforms recommended by the recent Communities and Local Government committtee should be immediately instated, for instance the proposal that all planning permissions be counted towards the 5-year land supply.

Claire Wright, Independent candidate for Devon East, put the blame for the massive increase in inappropriate development squarely on the government’s deregulation of the planning system and on the Local Council’s developer-bias and failure to produce a Local Plan.

Robert Crick, for Vision group of Sidmouth, read a litany of some of the inappropriate developments approved in the district in the past three years together with statistics provided by the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England. These included the prospect of about a thousand houses a year in East Devon until 2031.

A Covop petition, to be presented to the new government, was handed out along with a short guide to the planning system and suggested reforms. The petition is available online at https://you.38degrees.org.uk/p/covop2015

Housing ‘crisis’ based on shaky foundations?

Simon Jenkins believes so. For those who missed it first time round, here’s his evidence…http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9452952/the-myth-of-the-housing-crisis/

 

Cranbrook to swallow Rockbeare?

See http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Villagers-concerned-250-homes-plan-connect/story-26269146-detail/story.html

Neighbourhood plans to the rescue?

Lympstone residents, Hugo Swire, and Ben Bradshaw, discuss this in the Sunday Politics show:

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.

Questions for the Local Plan

When maximum, minimum and average figures were compiled why was maximum chosen, as maximums can be skewed.

Why was the final figure designated as the MINIMUM number to be built if maximum numbers were chosen?

Where are these houses to be built: sites for such numbers are not identified nor the number of houses per site. This will encourage very large initial developments with no ability to refuse (aaah). Only Clyst St Mary seems to have designated (large) numbers.

Where is the Community Infrastructure Levy document which specifies the cost per square metre of development to support local and district-wide infrastructure for these massive increases?

What is our current 5/6 year land supply?

With the future of the inter-modal freight terminal uncertain why is this not designated as extra employment land?

Green Party research paper on the housing crisis

Click to access Everyone-knows-we-have-a-housing-crisis-lets-do-something-about-it.compressed.pdf

Can EDDC be serious, with revised Local Plan?

One example here: http://saveoursidmouth.com/2015/03/16/what-eddcs-revised-local-plan-specifies-for-the-sid-valley/

More East Devon AONB under threat

Just heard from an EDWatcher, who says: “Did you know that Clinton Devon Estates are applying for 22 houses in East Budleigh AONB…? 14/2959/MOUT ”

EDDC Revised Plan- directly affects CLYST ST MARY

Gaeron Kayley, leading the Save Clyst St Mary campaign, urges you to read his message:

There has been a significant development regarding the Clyst St Mary planning applications of which you need to be aware.

We have been advised that East Devon District Council, in its amended Local Plan, has now stated that our village is to take an additional 200 new homes (on top of the 95 that we have already agreed to.) Moreover, the Friends Provident and Plymouth Brethren sites are the proposed locations of these new homes.

It is important to note that this news concerns East Devon’s Local Plan – it is not a result of the specific hearings for which we have all battled so hard to object to (these planning applications are still to be heard). This announcement is part of a totally separate decision where, for reasons we are not party to, our village seems to have become the exception to the apparent aim of preserving East Devon villages’ identity; it is believed it is due to our ‘proximity to Exeter’.

As you can imagine, having devoted a large part of our spare time to this campaign for several months, we feel, as you probably do, utterly devastated to hear this shocking news. There remain many questions unanswered and we would, in the longer term, be keen to hear your views regarding the group’s response and possible actions. In the first instance, we desperately need speakers at the meeting at the Council’s headquarters on Monday 23rd March at 10am. It is crucial our voice is heard. Would you be prepared to speak? If so, please respond to this email – or call 01392 969100 – as soon as possible. Anyone that is prepared to speak must have a booking made by mid day with EDDC. We are hoping to arrange a short get together for anyone prepared to speak on Tuesday evening.

To say that we are shocked at this development is an understatement; now, more than ever, we have to stay strong and united as a group and really hope that, despite how recent events appear to have manifested themselves, ultimately justice, transparency and equality shall still prevail.

Gaeron

Relevant links:

The agenda for the Special Development Management Committee to be held on Monday, 23 March at 10amcan now be viewed at: http://eastdevon.gov.uk/media/990985/230315-special-combined-dmc-agenda.pdf

The revised draft New East Devon Local Plan can be viewed here: http://eastdevon.gov.uk/media/990979/230315-sp-dmc-local-plan-with-changes-for-post-hearing-consultation-ver-04-march-2015.pdf

The draft schedule of proposed changes to the East Devon Local Plan can be viewed here:http://eastdevon.gov.uk/media/990982/230315-sp-dmc-table-of-changes-to-local-plan-v3-march-15.pdf

Paper copies of the agenda, revised draft Local Plan and schedule of proposed changes have been posted to those committee members that would normally receive a paper copy of the DMC agenda.

Reminder: National Day of Action event at Knowle (12 April)

Details here: April 21 National Day of Action CoVoP Poster

The Knowle event is being organised by two East Devon Alliance members, Ian McKintosh and Mike Temple, who have joined the National Community Voice On Planning (CoVoP) as trustees.

CoVoP is constantly working for reforms in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), as this latest message shows:

‘Two letters from our members have appeared in the Telegraph this week – both were edited to remove references to CoVoP National Day of Action (12 April), but both expressed the key message that the Government is not listening to communities on planning. References to the 5 year plan supply have also been removed. The full text for both letters is here: letters to the Telegraph

Another member has written to Messers Betts, Pickles and Lewis expressing similar frustration.
“Dear Honourable Members
The NPPF is NOT working for local communities!
Further to the recent press release by the Communities & Local Government Select Committee on the operation of the NPPF I would like to draw your attention to further evidence that the NPPF is not protecting important local landscapes from inappropriate development and that Planning Officers appear to be ignoring sustainable planning principles outlined in the NPPF.
South Lakeland District Council (SLDC) planning officers regularly emphasise the ‘presumption in favour of development’ to their Planning Committee while failing to mention that all planning applications (even those for allocated sites in a Local Plan), must comply with core planning principles in the NPPF. These are outlined the NPPF (219 paragraphs) which also states (several times) that these sustainable planning principles are ‘material considerations’ when assessing planning applications.
At an SLDC Planning Committee meeting last December (attended by six out of 17 members), a planning application for a prime green field site, in the middle of Grange-over-Sands’ Conservation Areas, was granted. Committee members did not bother to discuss major infrastructure problems (drainage and roads), or the likely adverse impact on the town’s tourist economy. These problems had been raised at the meeting by local residents and Town Council representatives who also drew attention to the relevant paragraphs in the NPPF. No wonder people are losing faith in local planning procedures. This feels like a District Council dictatorship; not a local democracy.
We believe that District Councils are being ‘threatened’ with appeal cases by developers that they claim will be resolved in favour of granting planning permission. Also, we have evidence that our planning officers are also being pressurised into putting planning applications before the Planning Committee, due to perceived time constraints, even when the developer has not provided all the evidence needed to support their application such as an adequate flood risk assessment that considers the potential for flooding elsewhere.
We need more homes in areas where there are good employment prospects and good public transport links. We do not need them in areas with poor employment prospects, poor public transport links and inadequate infrastructure or where they will become second homes and have an adverse impact on Conservation Areas that are important to the local tourist economy.
I realise that you cannot do anything about specific issues raised above but I hope that the next Parliament will rectify some of the problems highlighted as a matter of urgency!
At the moment many of us do not know who to vote for at the next election because none of the main political parties have robust proposals for dealing with these serious planning inadequacies.
Yours sincerely”

We need to shout more loudly! Please demonstrate your frustration on 12 April.

Best wishes
Julie

Chairman of CoVoP
admin@covop.org

Community Voice on Planning
A National Alliance to provide communities with an effective voice on planning
http://www.covop.org’

Two tier home ownership: green for the rich and brown for the poor

Green = executive-style homes in lovely surroundings and in beautiful countryside or coastal areas – you choise – where, if you fancy a change or a trade up or downsize or you get a job elsewhere, you sell for something else of your choice

Brown = little boxes on brownfield sites, no planned infrastructure, forced to keep the “starter home for 5 years before selling, so if you get a job elsewhere or your family size increases beyond your number of (small) bedrooms, before 5 years is up, tough luck, you have to pay the 20% discount back if you need to move.

And what if your Local Plan doesn’t accommodate the “200,000 starter homes” but instead relied on affordable housing? Tough luck again, affordable housing is thrown out in this plan.

Can you work out how the “starter homes” are funded from this press release:

“The 20% discount will be paid for by waiving the fees homebuilders have to pay to local authorities under so-called Section 106 agreements, amounting to at least £45,000 per dwelling on brownfield sites.

The Conservatives say homes worth £250,000 outside London – or £450,000 in London – would be eligible for the scheme and that first-time buyers would have to repay the 20% price advantage if they sold within five years.”

Anyone else thinks there are more holes in this scheme than in a pair of fishnet tights?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31683974

Visions of East Devon

Great news for those who enjoyed the preview launch (Sidmouth, December 2014) of Peter Nasmyth’s  new book on ‘East Devon’s Literature and Landcape’, AND for those who missed it. A follow up performance will take place in May, in Coleridge’s home town, Ottery St Mary. Special dispensation has been given for pixies in the church! Here’s the poster, with another of Peter’s stunning photos (Click to enlarge).

Visions of Childhood poster rgb

Meanwhile, this poem, by co-organiser of the event, Mike Temple, has just been published in the Express and Echo. It’s called simply, ‘A Vision’.

(with apologies to Coleridge)

In Honiton E.D.D.C.
Says its new offices shall be –
Far from the town where, as we know,
The office workers like to go.
No longer all Knowle’s greenery
But superstore and factory.
An Exmouth office, too, a place
Where few will find a parking space –
The building looks like an old barn,
Not like the “dome” in “Kubla Khan”.

But, Oh, the waste of public money –
The ratepayers don’t think it funny:
To build a glass and concrete shed
And trash the park and Knowle instead,
For “Our Great Leader” and his crew
Have no care for the public’s view;
Nor badger-setts, nor many a tree;
Nor office blocks, built ’83;
Nor Chambers, used by you and me;
Nor weekend tourist-parking, free;
Nor jobs and trade Sidmouth will lose;
Nor all the lovely parkland views –
All sold to builders for a fee –
And all for what? For vanity?
This Council, with no Local Plan,
Lets builders build where’er they can.

Yet in my crystal ball I see
A new look for E.D.D.C.:
Independents there will be
As councillors for you and me,
Come from every town and shire
With the Wright One to remove Swire,
Who all will cry: Please be aware:
We will not relocate somewhere
Based on false claims that there will be
“Big”(?) savings made in energy.
We come to bring Democracy,
And Probity, Transparency.
You all know there’s a better way –
It’s signposted by E.D.A.* ,
So, all you readers, lend a hand
And save our green and pleasant land.

(*EDA is East Devon Alliance)