When were plans mooted to reroute the road in Exmouth – and why?

A comment received:

“… It follows a council document from 2015 about the Queen’s Drive development that says: “The people of Exmouth are …

So – the road and car park move was recommended in the Masterplan?

It was also put forward apparently as a new idea in April 2003 in a letter to Mr Karime Hassan at EDDC. The letter was in support of a planning application for new premises for Spinnakers Sailing Centre. It was signed by Stephanie Bridge now of Edge watersports the business she runs with her husband Eric Bridge that is destined to have prime position on Grenadiers site. – or Bridgetown as I have heard it called recently.

From the letter

“In our opinion we need to be on the beach side of the road, not least as we have many children on weeks courses and the safety aspect on crossing the road is not something we relish.”

NOT the case. It has been acknowledged that it is not safe for children to be trained in the sea at that point.

“One idea we had was to reroute he seafront road around the back of the car park ( ref to a map and pics 9 +10) this could create a large pedestrian area, room for businesses such as ours and encourage natural traffic calming on the seafront in that area. It wouldn’t have a detrimental effect on other businesses…………”

Er……. complete elimination of Fun Park, DJs, Golf and Putting course, Carriage Café, Model railway, ….. not a detrimental effect?? Most of them were prepared to upgrade and modernise their facilities. …”

EDDC has difficulty explaining the difference between a gift and a loan

“… It follows a council document from 2015 about the Queen’s Drive development that says: “The people of Exmouth are being offered a gift of a new Watersports Centre that will operate as a community interest company (not a private facility) whereby a philanthropist is investing up to £4m of his own money in this national venue.”

But a council spokesman said that the debate is about what constituents a gift and that once the original investment without interest is recovered all income generated will be reinvested in Exmouth.

Save Exmouth Seafront spokesman Nick Hookway said: “We have a number of concerns about the arrangements that East Devon District Council has made with Grenadier.

“Grenadier is not gifting the Water Sports centre site to the people of Exmouth. Information supplied by both the developer and the Council shows that the cost of the project will initially be paid for by Grenadier. The whole cost of this development will then be paid back to Grenadier over a number of years with no interest except for the cost of inflation. Inflation is running at 3.9% as measured by the Retail Price Index. Wouldn’t it be nice if residents could get 3.9% on their savings accounts?

“In most people’s minds Grenadier is a making a loan not a gift. Why are Councillors unable to see this?”

But a council spokesman said: “Grenadier is investing £3m to £4m upfront in providing a water sports centre and we have seen the attractive plans that will enhance Exmouth’s seafront and attraction to visitors and residents.

“The developer is involved on a not for profit basis with a business model that involves recovery of their original investment (without interest). The water sports centre and associated facilities will then be operated by a non-profit making Community Interest Company. Income generated from that point on will be used to reinvest in Exmouth by the Community Interest Company.

“There seems to be some debate about what constitutes a ‘gift’. To be clear, the cost of building the asset will be paid upfront by Grenadier and this will be paid back to Grenadier by the CIC without interest using income derived from the operation of the facility.

“The specifics and priorities of that re-investment will be something that the Community Interest Company will decide and it will have local representation on the board. This varies considerably from the standard investment model that commercial developers would usually follow and, in fact, Grenadier has chosen not to make a profit on this project when they could have directed their funds elsewhere into a profit making venture as would normally be the case for a private developer.”

Questions were also raised by SES as to who exactly is behind the realignment of Queen’s Drive that will see the road move from its current position on the seafront to behind the proposed new watersports centre.

Mr Hookway said: “Why is the road being moved and who suggested this realignment? Grenadier has stated the realignment of the road was not something that they asked for. East Devon District Council will say that it was included in the Exmouth Masterplan which was adopted in 2011.

“However there was no explanation in the Masterplan for the proposed realignment, indeed recent changes to the design of the road are different from those proposed in the Masterplan. Save Exmouth Seafront wants to know why the road is being moved and who proposed these changes.”

But in response, the council spokesman said: “The road and car park move was recommended in the original masterplan and made a lot of sense in creating a new, accessible and safer space connected directly to the beach.

“There is no confusion here since the council marketed the site on that basis and Grenadier bid on the clear understanding that the road and car park were being moved. This was a council decision following the recommendation of the masterplan.”

Save Exmouth Seafront in response to the plans say that they would like the main buildings to be moved back eight metres from the current proposed location, is it necessary for it to be two storeys, and will there be a clearly displayed safety plan for kite surfers, but did say the consultation process funded by Grenadier was a most welcome change from the usual process of planning consultations.

A spokesman for Grenadier added: “We are currently reviewing all feedback received during the community consultation process. All comments are receiving our full attention and we will provide an update once we have completed our review. In the meantime we encourage the community to check back regularly at http://watersportscentreexmouth.co.uk/ for any updates.

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/public-havent-been-misled-over-822186

Grenadier in Exmouth again today – some questions to ponder

Grenadier are at Ocean again today. 9 to 5.

Here are a few possible questions to ask Grenadier or EDDC:

How much is Grenadier paying EDDC for the 125 year lease for the whole of the Phase 2 site? (Presumably this is no longer commercially sensitive information) and what are arrangements for profit-sharing (if any).

Does the designation of Phase 3 now as “mixed use” means business, commercial or residential or a combination of these uses?

Whose idea/decision was it to reroute the road? There is confusion as to whether it was EDDC or Grenadier.

Is there a longer-term plan for the area that has not yet been disclosed?

Chance of straight answers to simple questions?

Independent East Devon Alliance councillors spearhead rethink on Port Royal development

“Cllr Cathy Gardner, who jointly led the ‘Three Rs’ campaign to retain, refurbish and re-use existing buildings at Port Royal, said: “I’m delighted that the reference group has reacted to the views of residents and the consultant will reconsider their recommendations.

“The redevelopment of this area of town is important to all of us and a chance to do something wonderful for the town.

“The Three Rs campaign group will be working to encourage a community-based solution that makes the most of the heritage of the area without over-commercialisation.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/report-on-renewal-of-port-royal-unlikely-before-next-year-1-5238392

Exmouth Water Sports Centre: Grenadier’s three days of consultation announced

Grenadier is holding consultation events at Ocean in Queen’s Drive on October 21 and 25, between 9am and 5pm, and on November 1 between 5pm and 9pm.

It says the proposed scheme would provide training and changing facilities alongside an outdoor events space and eateries, and is expected to provide services throughout the year.

The initial plans have been called “uninspiring” and protestors note that the illustrations do not show the Queens Drive road diversion as described by EDDC.

Amsterdam bans new tourist shops to “prevent Disneyfication”

“Amsterdam has announced a ban on any new shops aimed at tourists – effectively limiting the abundance of places hiring bikes and selling souvenirs, tour tickets and ubiquitous waffles.

After mounting rage from locals – who wrote collectively to the mayor to protest against the “Disneyfication” of the city centre a year ago – the Dutch capital has decided that no more tourist shops will get licences in the central area.

“Nowhere else in the world has such a decision been made,” said Kajsa Ollongren, deputy mayor. “The balance is missing. We are only getting more of the same, and that is not good for our quality of life.”

It is estimated that there are 280 such shops in the centre, while tourist numbers have increased to 17 million visitors a year in the latest estimates – a tenth of them hosted by Airbnb, according to research by Colliers International.

But while some are making money, not everyone is happy. In May, chief executive of Amsterdam Marketing Frans van der Avert told a tourism conference that the city was aiming to ‘increase the quality of visitors’, rather than hosting tourists ‘with no respect for [its] character.

Amsterdam has put up tourist taxes, and on October 1, a new licencing system was imposed for anyone wanting to rent out their house short term – with fines of at least €6,000 for failure to comply, and a limit of 60 days annually.

The latest ban will apply immediately in the city centre and 40 shopping streets, meaning no new licences will be granted for things like ticket shops, bike rental companies, cheese, doughnut and ice-cream sellers.

“By not allowing new tourist shops to open we make sure our city centre remains attractive and liveable for Amsterdammers and our visitors,” said Ollongren, who heads economic affairs.

“Tourists are very welcome, but we want to avoid mass tourism taking over entire streets and neighbourhoods.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/05/amsterdam-bans-new-tourist-shopsto-combatdisneyfication-city/

Exmouth water sports centre plans revealed

First thoughts?

Owl’s – well, it doesn’t look like it will win any design awards! Personally, Owl preferred the boating lake and swan pedallos.

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/watersports-centre-plans-exmouth-seafront-575281

EDDC seems to prefer income loss to seafront attractions

Owl has spotted a disclosure by EDDC in relation to a FOI on the loss of income and business rates on closed Exmouth seafront businesses:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/lost_council_income_from_queens#comment-80255

EDDC effectively admit that council rental income from those properties on Queens Drive, which they closed a while back, mean a loss at a rate of over £18,300 pa. On top of the rent, they will have lost an as yet unspecified amount of council business rates and beach hut hire income. Oh, and the area now looks derelict.

Though there were claims that the Fun Park site was needed in connection with works on phases 1 and 2, there are plans in existence (see on Save Exmouth Seafront Facebook page) which show no such need for access as yet to the Fun Park.

It seems clear that EDDC have done little or nothing about arrangements for ‘temporary attractions’ on the Fun park site next year – at least as far as the public can determine.

So, we know that already part of the seafront is looking run down and desolate, and is losing money into the bargain. Further, the case for getting rid of the Fun Park seems much more to do with EDDC taking offence at a long established family business having the sheer gall to take EDDC on in pursuit of that families legitimate rights, than allowing them to continue to provide a much-loved service to the community – including thousands of tourists.

No, rather EDDC take a chance that something “might” come up by way of temporary attractions if only it hopes hard enough.

And surely EDDC is breaking its own (well-honed) rules on confidentiality when it voluntarily gives information that one owner allegedly had an outstanding unpaid bill – again.

Sidmouth Drill Hall ‘propaganda’

Owl says: starting a consultation by illustrating it with a detailed schematic plan of 5 storey buildings is asking for trouble – duh!

If you then go on to construct those 5 storey buildings, it would get very murky indeed!

A campaigner determined to see Sidmouth’s Drill Hall considered as part of any regeneration plans for Port Royal has slammed ‘propaganda’ from project leaders.

Mary Walden-Till’s research into the history of the eastern town has covered much of the same ground as the scoping study commissioned by landowners Sidmouth Town Council (STC) and East Devon District Council (EDDC).

Town clerk Christopher Holland and Councillor Jeff Turner sat down with the Herald in a bid to reassure residents nothing has yet been decided – but Ms Walden-Till took issue with several of the points they raised.

She raised: “I know that both Cllr Turner and Mr Holland are committed to doing what they think is the best for Sidmouth so I was very disappointed to read something in the Herald (‘Port Royal could see massive development – or nothing at all’) which appeared to be propaganda rather than unadorned fact.

“If we want the best outcome for the town, we all need to make sure we are not playing games, even accidentally. If they can’t avoid ‘spin’ then they can’t claim to be open-minded on the issue. It is a matter of fact that both of them are on record as being vehemently opposed to preserving the Drill Hall.

“If the starting point is that the Drill Hall must be demolished, then it has to be accepted that it is unlikely that a developer would be interested in such a small plot, so then the search begin for a way to make it worth a developer’s time.

As a designer, it is important to me to start a project with no preconceptions about what should be removed or retained in order to achieve the desired result.

“The scoping exercise consultants should have started from the same point, and we should be able to see that they had considered a range of ways of increasing what Port Royal can offer to the town.

“This development should be about the town and not about ways of making money for the district as a whole. The district has already benefitted from Sidmouth’s loss in far too many circumstances: for example the loss of Fortfield Hotel to expensive apartments, the Section 106 money from which went to the district not solely to Sidmouth, and the upcoming loss of the council jobs at the Knowle, moving employment from Sidmouth to other areas of the district.

“To suggest that reusing the Drill Hall will of necessity ‘take away from other users’ of Port Royal is clearly ridiculous. How would preserving what is there at the same time reduce what is there?”

In a joint statement, Mr Holland and Cllr Turner said: “STC and EDDC would like to reiterate the aims of the scoping study. It is to research, investigate and report on the opportunities and constraints of improving the whole important Port Royal area.

“The councils have yet to receive the independent consultant’s Scoping Study to even begin discussing issues such as detailed designs, which would come further along in the project.

“The study is the start of a process that would, if supported by the councils, involve a much more detailed visioning for future consideration.

“To champion a single building at this stage which is a small part of a much larger area and be in constant opposition to a simple study which only aims to help inform councillors is not helpful.

“Members of both councils will decide how and if to proceed once the scoping study report is presented to them.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/drill-hall-campaigner-hits-out-at-port-royal-propaganda-1-5194185

Exmouth Fun Park WILL close – even though there is no developer for the site

A VOTE WILL BE HELD NOW ON THE MOTION TO GIVE THE FUN PARK THE SAME TERMS OF THE LEASE AS THE HARBOUR VIEW CAFE
KEY EVENT
For – 21
Against – 26
Abstain – 0

Notice of motion is not agreed – it is the end of the debate – the fun park will close.

For full summary of what residents and councillors said, see:

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/vote-no-confidence-east-devon-470930

Funding opportunities for coastal communities

Unfortunately, in terms of regeneration £40m doesn’t go very far.

“£40m for new coastal funding round

Ministers have confirmed that £40m will be available through the next round of a fund to support coastal communities. The government has already provided £170m for 278 projects around the country since the Coastal Communities Fund was launched in 2012. Coastal communities minister Jake Berry said: “This year is already looking like another record year for staycations and our latest round of funding will help attract even more visitors to the great British coast so that our coastal communities can thrive.”

http://www.room151.co.uk/151-news/news-roundup-pwlb-borrowing-on-the-rise-basildon-slams-javid-lga-attempts-to-kick-start-devolution/

Exmouth resident disputes terms of Fun Park closure

From a comment from Save Exmouth Seafront – these are views and claims that Owl cannot verify but which do come from a usually reliable source:

“Recently we reported that last minute efforts to keep the popular Fun Park trading beyond 31st August sadly collapsed late afternoon on the final day.

We understand from a very reliable source that an officer of EDDC council said during discussions that the Fun Park was not being granted a licence to remain open to the public and trade because the tenant did not ask for this type of licence.

However it emerges that the tenant did in fact request an extension of his lease explicitly referring to trading after August 31st. This explicit request was in an email sent a week before the closure – to that same EDDC officer.

This information is verifiable. It is shocking to contemplate that an EDDC officer would or could behave in this way.

It reveals what appears to be underhanded tactics in dealing with the closure of the Fun Park. Many Exmouth residents have said they believe the tenant and the Fun Park have been treated unfairly by EDDC. Many have expressed the opinion that he has been victimised because he challenged EDDC through the Courts.

On the surface it’s made to appear publicly everything is being carried out in a systematic and business like way. Behind the scenes, however, it looks like there is no intention of allowing the tenant a decent chance to keep the Fun Park open at this time. Nor is there any intention of giving any credence to the views and wishes of residents and visitors who value and want the amenities of the Fun Park to remain longer.

So, District Councillors – including those of you who also sit on the Town Council, it is time you read, and answer, the emails being sent to you about the closure of the Fun Park. It is time to have a close look on the Facebook pages where Exmouth residents and visitors are expressing their views and their frustration at not being listened to by you. It is time for you to demonstrate that you understand you were elected to serve, not to dictate, what the community wants. The voters in Exmouth for the most part do not have a very high opinion of you at this time. You were elected once but there is a ground swell of dissatisfaction with your performance. Exmouth voters are finding their voice.

It is also time, District Councillors, to question EDDC officers more closely and to expect to be given the evidence backing up their plans and statements. It is also time to stop accepting at face value what you are told in reports and to proactively support what your electorate wants in Exmouth.”

“How will councils survive the funding abyss?” (Especially if they are in hock to a vanity project!)

Not to mention re-routing roads in Exmouth so developers can make more money!

“No one in Westminster can say how local authorities will be funded after 2020

From struggling northern councils to seemingly prosperous counties, talk of a financial meltdown is getting louder. “It looks as though we’re approaching a cliff edge and no one has any idea how to stop us hurtling over it,” warns Nick Forbes, senior vice-chair of the Local Government Association (LGA) and Labour leader of Newcastle city council. It is a sentiment echoed across the political spectrum.

For once, it is not the dire prospect of failing to reach a Brexit trade deal which is exercising the minds of local politicians, but rather the consequences of an inconclusive general election. The resulting stasis in government has left English councils in financial limbo, staring into an abyss. Bluntly, no one in government can say how authorities will be funded after 2020 when they were all supposed to become self-financing.

Business rates plan raises fears of greater inequality among councils
Former chancellor George Osborne’s big idea was to set councils free of Whitehall – minus multibillion-pound grants – by handing them back business rate revenue raised locally, instead of redistributing it centrally. Since 2013, councils have kept 50%, which yields £26bn nationally. In his 2016 budget Osborne proclaimed that, compared with 2010 when 80% of council funding came through Whitehall, 100% of local government resources would come from councils themselves by 2020 – “raised locally, spent locally, invested locally”. An alluring prospect?

Some fell for it, foolishly believing this would mythically fill a looming £2.6bn social care funding gap, likely by 2020 on LGA calculations. In reality, the consequences were dire. Without a redistribution formula to compensate councils in poorer areas with boarded-up high streets and, consequently, small tax bases yielding low business rates, some authorities would struggle to balance their books – a legal requirement (unlike the NHS or Whitehall departments). Alongside this financial “devolution” came a sting in the tail: a multimillion pound central government revenue support grant, a mainstay of council funding, would be phased out.

But Osborne’s grand design crashed when a local government finance bill, the delivery mechanism, fell in the run-up to the June election. It has not been resurrected. The resulting Queen’s speech omitted to mention the proposed legislation.

Forbes highlights the dilemma. While Newcastle, ostensibly with the highest business tax base in the north-east, raises £154m a year from business rates, he estimates it would still be £16m a year worse off than under the current grant regime. By contrast, Westminster city council would be the ultimate winner – raising £1.8bn annually.

Such disparities were being addressed in a “fair funding review” involving senior civil servants and local government professionals earlier this year alongside discussions on the practicalities of devolving business rates to councils by 2020. But since June there has been a deafening silence in Whitehall. No meetings have taken place. “There was a relatively advanced debate about how the 100% retention [of business rates] would work – and a debate within local government about what kind of criteria is needed for some kind of redistribution mechanism,” says Forbes. “We were gearing up over the next few years to work with government. And all of what has collapsed.”

The result is one almighty mess. Professional bodies, such as the organisation representing senior council finance officers – the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (Cipfa) – are close to despair. English local government is facing the worst of all outcomes: the phasing out of a central revenue support grant without the compensation of a locally held business rate underpinned by a yet-to-be defined redistribution formula, in which rich councils would have to help compensate the poorest.

Having seen their budgets chopped by at least a third since 2010 in the name of austerity, councils are already facing their biggest financial crisis. This is compounded by funding for adult and children’s social care consuming two-thirds of their budgets, with other once-essential services slashed or axed.

Confusion reigns. Already three areas, Greater Manchester, Liverpool city region and London are piloting the full, local 100% business rate regime, buoyed by – presumably interim – government funding to ensure they do not lose out. Other pilots were promised. But there is doubt over whether the full devolution of business rates will ever happen.

If that’s the case, Forbes wonders what the pilot areas are meant to be piloting? For its part, the LGA has one concern: “Where’s the Plan B?” asks Forbes. No one can answer. The clock is ticking.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/05/how-will-councils-survive-funding-abyss

“Floral tributes laid as hundreds say farewell to Exmouth Fun Park”

Floral tributes were left inside the iconic swanboat and messages of thanks were left as a family run seafront Fun Park closed after more than 60 years tomorrow.

The Fun Park on Queen’s Drive, Exmouth, closed for the last time on Thursday ahead of major multi-million pound plans that East Devon District Council has to renovate the seafront.

Hundreds of people came out for one last ride on the pedalos and a round of crazy golf at the Fun Park.

A vigil was also held by Save Exmouth Seafront campaigners and floral tributes were presented to the Wright family who have run the Fun Park for more than four decades.

Unless a motion that an extraordinary meeting of East Devon District Council to be held on September 13 to discuss the closure of the businesses as part of the Queen’s Drive redevelopment is agreed to give the seafront businesses a chance of an eleventh-hour reprieve, the Exmouth Fun Park has now closed for good.

The Harbour View Café is set to follow the Fun Park in closing at the end of September while several long-standing businesses including DJ’s Diner, the Arnold Palmer/Jungle Fun site, and the model railway have already closed. … ”

http://www.devonlive.com/whats-on/family-kids/floral-tributes-laid-hundreds-say-408634

Vigil for Exmouth Fun Park – say farewell to the local family and their much-loved attraction 11 am – 8 pm today

Today is the last day today for the Fun Park complex run by the local Wright family in Exmouth, who must make way for EDDC’s vision of the future – a no-doubt very expensive water sports centre and other coastal clone businesses.

If you will miss this attraction and the local family who run it, people are being asked to please turn up with thank you’s, mementoes etc for a Wright family tribute today.

Save Exmouth Seafront will be there from 11 to 8 pm tonight when the doors finally shut.

Its contents will be auctioned on Friday:

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/exmouth-fun-park-contents-set-403954

Sidmouthians enjoy Ham picnic – more signatures for Port Royal “Retain, Re-use, Refurbish” petition

Sunday’s picnic in celebration of The Ham open space took place in bright Sidmouth sunshine, suiting the mood of the organisers, and catching the attention of a steady stream of passers-by.

Information sheets showing the Scoping Study single ‘Proposal’, as displayed at the public consultation, were the subject of much discussion and concern from locals and visitors alike. More signatures were eagerly added to the paper copies of the 3Rs petition, calling for Retain-Refurbish-Reuse, an alternative plan for Port Royal. ..with the numbers already far outweighing the signatures collected online.

To view the petition, search 38 degrees Sidmouth Retain.

It will be handed in to the joint Scoping Study partners, East Devon District Council, and to Sidmouth Town Council which next meets on Monday 4th September, 6.30pm at Woolcombe House, Woolcombe Lane. Public can attend the meeting.

More on Port Royal “Retain, Reuse, Refurbish” meeting last night

All the presentations, and programme for the meeting, are detailed here:

Vigorous audience participation at last night’s ‘3Rs’ Public Meeting, for a Retain-Refurbish-Reuse alternative for Sidmouth’s Port Royal

Slides are here:

Click to access 23-aug-3rs-final-slides.pdf

Report of meeting:

“The five perfectly-pitched short presentations at last night’s Public Meeting were each restricted by Chair, Di Fuller, to not much more than 5 minutes. This maximised the time for questions and comments from the audience packed into Sidmouth’s All Saints’ Church Hall, and ensured ample time for the questions to be answered. There was a clear strength of opinion in the room, that Port Royal regeneration should be carefully conceived as a suitable legacy for the town. Local knowledge from those attending, raised issues such as flood risk and contamination that could disadvantage residential development on this site. Potential loss of existing public parking behind the lifeboat station was also a concern.

Speakers were EDDC Councillors Marianne Rixson (Ward Member Sidmouth-Sidford), Cathy Gardner and Matt Booth (Ward members Sidmouth Town); and local residents Mary-Walden-Till and Jeremy Woodward.

Mary Walden-Till concentrated on The Ham conveyance land.

She told the crowd:

“Under the terms of the Conveyance the land was given to the inhabitants of and visitors to Sidmouth as a place of recreation ‘for ever’. Subject only to ‘reasonable restrictions and regulations in accordance with the law for the time being affecting the use of Public Parks and Pleasure Grounds’.
It was a Trust for which Sidmouth Town Council is now the Trustee, with all the legal responsibilities that entails. Sidmouth Town Councillors act to manage that trust on behalf of the Council. It is a complex legal arrangement but it does not in any way affect the terms of the Conveyance which forms the Governing Document of the Charity.

It was therefore incorrect to allow part of The Ham to be included in the Local Plan area ED03 as being available for redevelopment. The toilet block stands on Ham land, and the Land Registry deed says it is covered by the terms of the Conveyance. I have asked EDDC Councillors to correct the boundary of ED03 but they never even bothered to acknowledge my email.
None of The Ham land is available to be built on or to be used in any way other than for free recreation for all. It can not be used as parking for cars or boats, as that is restricting its use. Using it as car parking was suggested, and thrown out, in the early part of the 20th C. Nothing has changed since then as far as the Conveyance is concerned. And nothing can change with the Conveyance except through our connivance or apathy.

It is in breach of charity law to do anything which adversely affects the rights of a charity’s beneficiaries, and any of those beneficiaries has the right to complain to the Charity Commission. Anyone who has ever been to Sidmouth is covered by the terms of the Conveyance, so there are a large number of people who can demand that the terms are kept.”

Vigorous audience participation at last night’s ‘3Rs’ Public Meeting, for a Retain-Refurbish-Reuse alternative for Sidmouth’s Port Royal

Exmouth: EDDC and Grenadier sign contract

And here is the spin, spin, spin:

“East Devon District Council has confirmed it has signed a deal with Grenadier Estates for new watersports centre in Exmouth.

The watersports centre will be community focused and a not for profit development, and forms an integral part of the council’s plans to regenerate the seafront area, the new centre will be built on a former car park on Queen’s Drive.

As well as offering watersports facilities, a new access ramp will be incorporated within the development allowing easier access to the beach, and will further confirm Exmouth’s place as a leading UK watersports destination, the council say.

Cllr Philip Skinner, the council’s portfolio holder for economy, and chairman of the Exmouth Regeneration Board, said: “I am delighted that we are entering into this agreement with Grenadier Estates. There has been a long-held commitment to have this watersports centre for Exmouth and we are now taking a huge step forward to achieving this ambition.

“The council, through the Exmouth Regeneration Board, has delivered significant improvements for Exmouth over recent years including the new Strand in the town centre, the new Premier Inn and more recently, the re-opening of a brand new Mamhead slipway. The delivery of the first phases of the Queen’s Drive regeneration is now the next step in this exciting journey for Devon’s largest town.” …

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/deal-signed-developers-new-watersports-369821

There is more in the same vein, but Owl can’t bear to give them more oxygen of publicity.