Category Archives: NPPF

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

6 Feb 2015

Posted under

Clyst St Mary, Democracy, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Environment (local), General Election, Local Plan, Neighbourhood Plans, NPPF, West End: WestClyst BroadClyst/ Pinhoe

Save Clyst St Mary..next meeting, 12 Feb 2015. Hugo Swire taking an interest.

Save Clyst St Mary Notice of meeting 12 Feb 15 (1)

Thank you to everyone for your support over and attending the meetings. A lot has been achieved in a very short space of time.

The Parish plan is progressing well and there is another meeting(Sorry!) on Thursday 12th February at 7.00pm this is to discuss the draft proposals of the village plan the venue is in the village hall. Once this plan becomes adopted it should help to stop our village from the continual threat of further large scale planning applications from developers!

Many of our residents have asked what our local MP is doing about all these planning applications and why Clyst St Mary has had so many in such a short space of time. Mike Howe has convinced Hugo Swire to come and talk to us on Thursday 19th February in the School Hall at 6.30pm (Sorry we couldn’t get the village hall it was already booked) I would really like to fill the hall to show how much support we have behind us and to ask what he is doing about it! Please Please come if you can.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

5 Feb 2015

Posted under

Clyst St Mary, Democracy, Development Management Committee, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Environment (local), Latest news, Local Plan, NPPF, West End: WestClyst BroadClyst/ Pinhoe

Planning meeting this evening… 05/02/15..reminder

Just a reminder that this evening there is a meeting in the village hall at 7.30pm to discuss the planning proposal to demolish no 16 Clyst Valley Road and build 40 new houses on the land sandwiched between the football ground and the back gardens of houses on Clyst Valley Road. Charlie Hopkins (Expert planning consultant) will be there.

Should anyone need transport please ask. We have several willing volunteers that have offered to ferry residents to and from the meeting.

Hope to see you all later on.

Best wishes

Gaeron
http://saveclyststmary.org.uk/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

1 Feb 2015

Posted under

Clyst St Mary, Democracy, Development Management Committee, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Environment (local), Latest news, Local Plan, National Planning Policy Framework, NPPF, West End: WestClyst BroadClyst/ Pinhoe

Planning reminder from Save Clyst St Mary

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!’

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

28 Jan 2015

Posted under

Clyst St Mary, Democracy, Development Management Committee, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Environment (local), Latest news, NPPF, West End: WestClyst BroadClyst/ Pinhoe

Comments

2 Comments

Problems with East Devon District Council On line Planning

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.’

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

28 Jan 2015

Posted under

EDDC, Environment (local), Flooding, Latest news, National Planning Policy Framework, Neighbourhood Plans, NPPF, Planning System

Treeconomics

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/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

26 Jan 2015

Posted under

Clyst St Mary, Democracy, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Environment (local), Latest news, NPPF, Planning System, West End: WestClyst BroadClyst/ Pinhoe

*** Save Clyst St Mary Village from Inappropriate Development ***

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

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

21 Jan 2015

Posted under

Clyst St Mary, Democracy, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Environment (local), NPPF, Planning System, West End: WestClyst BroadClyst/ Pinhoe

‘Saving the identity’ of a unique East Devon village… Clyst St Mary residents out in force at last night’s meeting.

It appeared that the entire population of the village of Clyst St Mary had turned out to listen and voice their objections at another Extraordinary Meeting that had been called by the Bishops Clyst Parish Council on Tuesday night, 20th January 2015, to discuss the inappropriate number of planning applications that have recently been submitted to East Devon District Council for development in their village (including 304 residential units plus employment use at Winslade Park by Friends Provident, 93 dwellings on land near the Cat and Fiddle by Turnstone Group, a solar farm in Oil Mill Lane by Solstice Renewables and 40 houses on land off Clyst Valley Road (with the demolition of a residential estate house in Clyst Valley Road to gain access) by developers acting for Plymouth Brethren).

Clyst St Mary has also already agreed two planning applications totalling 93 dwellings for social, affordable and private needs, which is felt to be sustainable for a small village of this size and the current additional proposals would increase the size of the village by around 120%, which, the villagers felt, was certainly not sustainable.

The normal venue for Council meetings is the local School Hall but the previous Extraordinary Meeting had attracted such huge numbers of residents wishing to object, that it was assessed that a larger venue was necessary and the Village Hall was chosen, which was equally packed to capacity.

At the previous meeting the Parish Council had unanimously agreed to employ Charlie Hopkins, an experienced planning consultant, who had successfully assisted other local campaigns with their objections. With the support of the newly formed Save Clyst St Mary Campaign Group, financial pledges from the villagers were offered together with existing funds from the Parish Council to enable the employment of a consultant.

Charlie Hopkins was attending this latest meeting to explain to the villagers the very complex planning issues involved and he recommended to them their best course of action in objecting to such inappropriate proposals.

Many locals spoke with great passion about their views on saving the identity of their unique East Devon village by ensuring that only sustainable development is acceptable and the solidarity of the residents was expressed by them voting against every one of the ten current proposed planning applications.

To date The Save Clyst St Mary Group have received many financial pledges from the villagers and a Post Office account is now available for anyone to submit donations in support (Nat West Bank PLC 56-00-49 A/C 32633181 ). They would urge anyone who has not yet become involved in their campaign to contact Gaeron Kayley by e-mail at saveclyststmary@gmail.com or visit http://www.saveclyststmary.org.uk

Please support us in protecting our unique very special village because

‘Alone we can do so little but together we can do so much.’

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

20 Jan 2015

Posted under

Democracy, Devolution, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Environment (local), Freedom of Information and EIA, General Election, Independent Councillors, Local Plan, National Planning Policy Framework, Neighbourhood Plans, NPPF, Planning System, Voting

‘Democracy Day’ today, 20th Jan 2015.

‘Why Democracy?’ was discussed in a wide-ranging and perceptive debate led by Professor Michael Sandel, on Radio 4’s ‘Public Philosopher’ programme this morning.
The current changing mood of the electorate was one of the main topics that arose. Among possible reasons given for this change, were the failure of government to react to public views; a feeling of disempowerment; and the erosion of public spaces (in all senses). Here’s the link to what was said: http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/r4sandel

The importance of proper scrutiny was implied. When EDDC’s Overview & Scrutiny Committee next meet this Thursday (6.30pm at Knowle) they will no doubt bear this in mind.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jan 2015

Posted under

Clinton Devon Estates, EDDC, Environment (local), Exmouth, National Planning Policy Framework, NPPF, West End: WestClyst BroadClyst/ Pinhoe

Solar farms.. viewed from the AONB.

The Clinton Devon Estates’ Liverton Solar Park, was mentioned in a comment (copied below)  recently left on the East Devon Watch blog. An observer has subsequently sent in these photos of the solar farm in question (which lies just outside the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) taken from the  AONB, south of the B3178. The pictures may shed more light on the issue.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAOLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAOLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

‘By coincidence, having driven past the solar farm at Liverton Farm and seen just what an impact on the ‘Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty’ the solar park has, I have been looking again at the application (13/2202/MFUL) https://planning.eastdevon.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=externalDocuments&keyVal=MU6J9QGH3A000 made by the agents of Clinton Devon Estates.
It takes an enormous amount of plodding through, something still in progress, but it seems clear that , let’s say ‘ much of what was claimed is open to serious challenge’. Start with looking at what the CPRE had to say about some of Clinton Devon’s agent’s claims.
Not far away is Liverton Park 2, and industrial and business park complex adjacent to Liverton Park (1). It struck me that the massive sheds on Liverton Park 2 might well have had solar panels built into their roofs if CDE were really green for greens sake- but it seems not. But you do get a view of the solar panels from LP2!
The message seems clear, you cannot take a developer’s word. Check, check and check again. Oh, and see what subsidies the development attracts and wonder if that might be what makes solar panels the preferred choice when other more appropriate schemes may be better suited.’
Source: https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/01/15/save-clyst-st-mary-campaign-new-proposals-and-important-meeting/comment-page-1/#comment-9681

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 Jan 2015

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Devolution, EDDC, Misc, NPPF, Planning System

“Ask Pickles” – videos of questions and answers from a parallel universe!

Polished spin by Mr Pickles on a number of important topics in videos produced from “Question Time” events held last year.

Topics given the Pickles treatment include:

What help is there for villages under threat of over-development? Yes, he REALLY thinks there are things we can do!

Fracking (live with it)

Are councils doing enough to engage voters? (Well, he thinks so – our missing 6,000 voters might not have agreed and the Parliamentary Committee pointed the finger at EDDC for not doing enough)

Why have new unitary councils bedn blocked? (Because we can, and some of them might be too powerful and the wrong party)

What are the solutions to unaffordable affordable housing? Yes, Pickles thinks we can solve this problem!

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/communities-and-local-government-committee/news/ask-pickles-16-december/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

8 Jan 2015

Posted under

EDDC, Local Plan, Neighbourhood Plans, NPPF

Comments

1 Comment

Plain English Guide to the Planning System

Of interest is that, if we had Community Infrastructure Levy, parishes would receive 15% of it directly (25% if a neighbourhood plan is in force). Our CIL was thrown out bt the Planning Inspector as having a poor evidence base so our developers are absolved from paying this charge.

East Devon: The Developers’ Dream! No wonder it is Development Wild West here!

Click to access Plain_English_guide_to_the_planning_system.pdf

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

6 Jan 2015

Posted under

EDDC, General Election, NPPF

Subjects to quiz Party representatives on, in approach to election

You may have heard Eddie Mair on a recent PM programme (Radio 4), asking guests what they would like him to quiz the various party representatives about, in the run-up to the General Election.

A written suggestion has subsequently been sent by one of EDA’s fellow -members of the national network of campaign Groups, Community Voice on Planning (www.covop.org), as follows:

Dear Eddie Mair,
SUBJECTS TO QUIZ PARTY REPRESENTATIVES
I would like the respective parties to be quizzed on their understanding of how much the rural population feels aggrieved at the exploitation of the current Planning policy by developers and how powerless local councils are in the process of controlling their respective districts. Realistically affordable housing is required for first-time buyers, smaller single/couple only occupied properties are needed and in many areas the ever expanding older population requires bungalow properties. Yet current government policy is blatantly allowing developers unchallenged consumption of green spaces for house construction of the wrong type, in the wrong places and with insufficient infrastructure to support them. Instead, all over the country, open-market ‘executive’ style homes are the predominant design being applied for on agricultural and open greenspace land because its easier and cheaper to develop then brownfield sites. Yet, no constraints are then placed on the developers to proceed with actual construction so the land and its benefit to the community in its original form is lost nevertheless and cannot be challenged.

Paul Adams
DefeND North Devon
Barnstaple

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

3 Jan 2015

Posted under

East Devon Growth Point, Environment (local), General Election, Hugo Swire, Independent Councillors, Latest news, NPPF, Paul Diviani, Skypark, West End: WestClyst BroadClyst/ Pinhoe

Tory Party reveals its vision …the tarmac road ahead

EDA has been sent this spoof version of the new Conservative Party poster (rumoured to be a photo taken in Germany), with added accompanying features of the Government’s vision for growth. !cid_Image2638
Let your friends know the important choice facing Britain this year…More green fields cut through by tarmac and disappearing under sprawling cloned housing estates? Or new voices at Parliament and around the country, who will bring changes to the NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework…the so-called ‘developers’ charter’)? More info at Community Voice on Planning at http://covop.org/

Could there be another, very different, route to long-term prosperity more suited to Britain’s natural assets, particularly in East Devon…..?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Dec 2014

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, EDDC, Environment (local), NPPF

So many words, so little action

“The Government’s flagship planning policy is leading to “inappropriate and unwanted housing development”, MPs have warned.
The cross-party Communities and Local Government Committee also raised concerns that town centres were not being given proper protection against the threat from large out-of-town retail developments.

They called for the Government to scrap rules allowing small shops and offices to be converted to housing without the need for planning permission, arguing that the changes could lead to town centres becoming “an unattractive place to visit or, indeed, live”. …

…The committee said: “Our report has identified a number of issues with the operation of the NPPF: that it is not preventing unsustainable development; that it is leading to communities being subject to inappropriate and unwanted housing development; and that it is giving insufficient protection to England’s town centres.”

But there was no need to “tear up or withdraw” the controversial document, but insisted ministers should ” reinforce its provisions and ensure it does the job it was intended to do”. …

…They said: “Councils that fail to produce a plan surrender their ability to influence the future development of their local areas.”
The committee’s Labour chairman Clive Betts said: “Councils must do more to protect their communities against the threat of undesirable development by by moving quickly to get an adopted local plan in place.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2875415/Warning-planning-policy.html

and reviewed in more detail here:

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=21169%3Achanges-needed-to-nppf-to-stop-unsustainable-development-say-mps&catid=63&Itemid=31

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

16 Dec 2014

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, AONB, EDDC, Environment (local), Local Plan, NPPF

Government admits National Planning Policy Framework not working

The government has produced its long-awaited report on the National Planning Policy Framework. It reveals that even they now belive it is dysfunctional.

Summary:

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) has now been in operation for two and a half years. The simplification it has brought to the planning system is welcome and was acknowledged by many witnesses, but it needs more time to bed in, and the Government needs to collect more data, before a full assessment can be made of its strengths and weaknesses.

Nevertheless, the evidence to this inquiry has highlighted a number of emerging concerns: that the NPPF is not preventing unsustainable development in some places; that inappropriate housing is being imposed upon some communities as a result of speculative planning applications; and that town centres are being given insufficient protection against the threat of out of town development.

These concerns point to the need to strengthen, rather than withdraw, the NPPF. We have suggested a number of changes that should be made both to the NPPF itself and to the way it is applied.

First, we must take steps to ensure that the planning system delivers the sustainable development promised in the NPPF. We should ensure that the same weight is given to the environmental and social as to the economic dimension; that permission is only given to development if accompanied by the infrastructure necessary to support it; and that the planning system places due emphasis on the natural environment.

Second, all councils must move much more quickly to get an adopted plan in place: this will give communities increased protection against the threat of undesirable development. We call for a statutory requirement for councils to get local plans adopted within three years of legislation being enacted.

Third, we must address the complex issue of land supply. Provisions in the NPPF relating to the viability of housing land are leading to inappropriate development: these loopholes must be closed. There also needs to be clearer guidance about how housing need should be assessed. In addition, local authorities should be encouraged to review their green belts as part of the local planning process.

Finally, changes should be made to ensure the NPPF gives greater protection to town centres. The internet has changed the way we shop; town centre planning policy must therefore evolve too. We call for an end to permitted development that allows shops and buildings used for financial and professional services to become homes without planning permission, a policy which is undermining the local planning process.

The NPPF makes clear that importance of a plan-led system that delivers sustainable development. We trust that the Government will make the changes we propose to ensure that this principle is met and the NPPF becomes a document in which everyone can have greater confidence.

Click to access 190.pdf

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

11 Dec 2014

Posted under

AONB, Environment (local), Local Plan, NPPF

Report: Not in my backyard: local people and the planning process

A useful and timely report from the Local Government Ombudsman:

Some interesting bits:

“… The government has recently introduced new legislation which requires council officers who grant permission under delegated powers to produce a written record of that decision. Councils must make the record available at their offices and on their websites. These written decision records must be kept for a period of six years and any background documents must be kept for four years. This only applies to decision made by officers with delegated powers however there is no reason why councils should not extend this to decisions made by committee. “

Ahmir’s Story:

“Ahmir complained the council had given a local councillor planning permission for a house in an area of outstanding national beauty. The councillor was close friends with the Chairman of the Planning Committee. We found that both councillors had a close relationship as they and their families regularly attended the same social functions. The Chairman of the Planning Committee failed to declare this.

The council’s constitution and Code of Conduct said councillors must not take part in a meeting if they had a ‘prejudicial interest’ in what was being discussed. We found the chairman was at fault for not declaring an interest and that he should not have taken part in the meeting.

The council’s officer report recommended the committee refuse planning permission for the house because it was contrary to national and local policies and could set a precedent for inappropriate development in an area of outstanding natural beauty. The vote in favour of granting planning permission was finely balanced. If the chairman had not taken part in the meeting planning permission would have been refused.

Following our investigations the Leader of the Council applied to court to have the committee’s decision overturned. The judge overturned the decision and said “any fair-minded and informed observer would conclude that there was indeed a real possibility of bias in the decision to grant planning permission”. The Council incurred significant costs in dealing with the complaint and subsequent court action. The applicant wasn’t able to recover the cost of building the house or any of their legal fees. …”

Click to access 2093-Planning-Focus-report-final.pdf

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

7 Dec 2014

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Environment (local), General Election, Hugo Swire, NPPF

Is our MP’s Party “Committed to protecting our natural environment”?

Not in East Devon, nor indeed in the UK, as pointed out in this letter in the Exmouth Journal (04/12/2014):

‘Last week Hugo Swire told us that his party is committed to protecting the natural environment, keeping development sustainable etc. But that view is not shared across the country.
The Government planning policies have failed to protect communities from rapid and disproportionate development. That was the widespread view of those, like me, who had been invited form all parts of the country to Westminster in September to give evidence to a Parliamentary Select Committee.
Everyone had stories to share of large tracts of agricultural land being built on; villages doubled in size; brownfield sites in the centre of old industrial towns being left, while the green fields around the margins are being built on because it is cheaper; extensive building in flood plains; the green belt eroded; AONB protection swept aside.
All this is happening under the guise of sustainable development because of the Government’s drive for house building at any cost and in any place. But the term sustainable is so ill defined that using wooden cladding or installing plastic plumbing in place of copper and a low flush toilet, ticks the box.
No thought is being given to social or environmental sustainability. Yes, we need housing to meet local needs, particularly affordable housing. But we are not getting it and we have sacrificed a lot of agricultural land in the process. Affordable housing promised in planning applications disappears when developers plead poverty. I understand none of the affordable housing promised by Tesco in Seaton, for example, will be built.
David Daniel’