Cllr Brian Berman

bbappealstatementmilburyfarmjuly1st08.pdfbbappealstatementmilburyfarmjuly1st08.pdfExminster Parish Council Response:

Steve Robinson, Service Lead – Planning, Design & Property
Teignbridge District Council
Forde House
Brunel Road
Newton Abbot
TQ12 4XX
28 November 2007

Dear Mr Robinson

OUTLINE PLANNING APPLICATION 07/04708
PROPOSED APPLICATION FOR 300 HOMES BY MIDAS AT MILBURY FARM, EXMINSTER

The Parish Council have voted unanimously to recommend that this application is refused. We are charged to listen and support the views of our community; their overwhelming response to this application has been to say NO!

1. Planning Policy

The Parish Council strongly deprecates the implication in the Midas submission that there has been inadequate attention to planning by Teignbridge District Council. The suggested ‘planning void’ is, a ‘virtual void’ created through Government intervention in the planning process. This originally prevented the TDC plan to 2016 being adopted by DCC. The instruction to completely revise the process and detail of the planning sequence to defined by the then DPM [John Prestcott] led directly to the creation of the “void”.

The Exminster Community was extensively consulted by TDC over the original planning [-2016], and equally made representations when consulted over the new Local Development Framework & associated documents.

We are also aware that, before the RA had considered the collected documentation at the end of 2006 new targets were being set, again repeated during 2007. It is not then rational to allow a speculative planning application to take priority over a more considered strategic planning policy lead approach.

Within the planning which had been undertaken, provision of 150 houses in the Exeter PUA within the boundary of TDC adjacent to Alphington was proposed. This accepted many of the requirements detailed in the Midas submission re the PUA, but at the same time recognised the need to safeguard the aesthetic and environmental qualities of the Exminster and the Exe estuary.

2. Land Classification

The fields at Milbury Farm have always been used for agricultural purposes and are classified as ‘Countryside’. As stated in the Local Plan the countryside is a valued inheritance and should be safeguarded and afforded protection. These fields are on a hill and represent a significant green wedge of land that defines and protects Exminster from the motorway and the noise of adjacent road networks.

3. Land Boundaries

The fields fall outside of the defined ‘Residential Development Boundary’. In the past the Parish Council have successfully worked alongside TDC on other applications, to respect these defined boundaries and protect our village.

The village fought hard when TDC undertook their Local Plan First Review initial deposit in 2001. At this time approx. 1200 village residents signed letters supporting the designation of Exminster as a ‘Classified Rural settlement’. This was supported by the Parish Council, District Councillors’ and incorporated by TDC both in the Local Plan and Local Development Framework.

Consistency in the enforcement of defined and agreed planning restrictions must be maintained. If Midas succeed with these proposals then this will set a new precedent not only in the Parish of Exminster but in the whole of Teignbridge. Planning rules are made for a reason; if these are not respected then the countryside of Devon is open to abuse from developers on a massive scale.

4. Education

The Local Education Authority have advised that the methods used by Midas in preparing figures and statistics in regard to a potential Section 106 agreement do not conform with current local best practice policies.

Exminster Primary School’s pupil numbers have grown from 83 in 1991 to almost 300 in 2007. The application states that children from the new housing will push existing class sizes up to 30 pupils. This is contrary to government guidelines which call for class sizes to be reduced to 25 pupils and contrary to the schools own existing target to maintain class sizes of 23 pupils.

The village school has a special needs capability which is demonstrated by the provision of a multi sensory room. This attracts many pupils from outside the village boundary. A significant increase in pupils from within the village will not only force class sizes up but will inevitably mean children with special needs will have to be turned away. Having gained a good reputation and fought hard to build quality facilities, to turn away those most in need will be a travesty.

The school site is land locked and has very little room for expansion. Any new building work undertaken as part of a 106 agreement will effectively take up sport field space and reduce the available area for outside play and PE. This flies in the face of the government initiative for an increase in sports undertaken by children. Additionally curriculum space is at a capacity with the hall already extremely uncomfortable for school assemblies, etc.

Dawlish Community College is Exminster’s local catchment school falling within Teignbridge District Council. They have not been consulted by Midas regarding this application.

The Local Authority have confirmed that Dawlish CC are not eligible for any extra money since they have 840 students and in theory capacity for 900. In isolation, the impact of 300 houses may be absorbed but we believe Devon County Council should be considering the cumulative effect. Taken with other potential developments of significant size, the impact on the College must be taken into account. If DCC fail to do this then the taxpayer will end up subsidising a development; because improvements to the school will be needed in the longer term but the county won’t have ‘banked’ developer contributions.

A large number of Year 10 and 11 travel on a public Stagecoach double decker bus. However it is often
late resulting in children missing valuable lesson time. Who is going to pay for an additional dedicated

bus service to cater for the increased number of students and how will it be controlled and retained to ensure pupils arrive in class safely and on time.

5. Transport & Highways

The village centre already suffers from dangerous overcrowding at peak times of the day. Cars, lorries and buses mount pavements on a regular basis causing real danger to pedestrians. This is not an idol threat but a very real safety concern that places our community at risk.

Put simply the current infrastructure is not sufficient to support the existing needs of the village let alone a new development that will increase the population of the village by 18%. The Parish Council in our ‘Community Travel Plan’ have campaigned since the late 90’s to make improvements, but Devon County Council have been unable to secure significant funding to implement the recommendations of the Plan. The village has already grown significantly without any improvement to infrastructure; we cannot allow this to happen again.

The single junction into the development is directly opposite the Listed gatehouse/lodge buildings leading up to the Listed Devington Park building. We don’t believe the historic status of the buildings or the significant tree lined private driveway (Lime Trees subject to TPO) have been considered.

New traffic flow from the development opposite the gatehouses will be significant and has been concentrated only on this junction. This places all the cars in one area thereby increasing risk, especially at peak times when vehicle movements will be considerably. We would also question the visibility available when exiting towards Exeter considering the position of existing residential boundary walls.

Existing frequent bus routes are packed at peak times and therefore Midas have suggested the bus service from Aplington on the A route is extended to serve the proposed 300 houses. Who is going to run the extra buses, how will they be funded and how can we be sure they will be retained? The Parish Council only recently fought hard to keep the D bus service but Stagecoach cancelled it even though it was well used by the community. Stagecoach have announced this week that further services will be cut because of rising fuel costs. We do not believe that Midas will succeed where we have failed.

The proposed entry bus lane will cause major discomfort as it angles between existing houses. As it exits the proposed site it then shoots across the Stowey Arms pub car park before exiting opposite but not quite, the existing busy Reddaway Drive junction. We do not believe these routes have been properly considered and know they will only create more complication.

6. Flood Risk

The flood assessment submitted with the application is a desktop study only and makes some very broad assumptions about the existing site conditions. It fails to consider site specific issues such as the location of existing natural springs occurring with the proposed dry basin location, the inadequacy of the existing ground conditions to act as a soakaway, etc.

We are extremely concerned that the extra water loads imposed will only worsen existing problems. The fields already cause flooding problems to the rear of properties in Glebelands with inadequate containment of surface water into the streams and existing drainage system. We believe the new proposals will compromise the existing drainage routes causing serious boundary erosion and placing adjoining houses at risk.

The provision of attenuation/balancing ponds may help to slow down surface/rain water flow rates from the site, but will cause safety problems in a residential area. Children from the proposed housing will play around these ponds ………….. they represent a huge risk group which ultimately will become the responsibility of this Parish Council. The erection of ‘Danger Deep Water’ signage will not deter children.

The RSPB and Rural England are concerned that the existing drains all exit into the Exe Estuary lower marshes which support a diverse and plentiful range of flora / fauna including wintering waterfowl and waders. The importance of this area is such that it has been designated a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), a Special Protection Area (SPA), a Ramsar Site (internationally important area for birdlife) and is a candidate for a Special Area of Conservation. We reiterate their views and believe no recognition of the impact of the proposed development on these areas has been considered.

7. Affordable Housing

Midas have stated that 35% of the 300 homes will be allocated as ‘Affordable’. Teignbridge District Council currently have a requirement for only twelve of which six have been found in the Limes refurbishment project. As a forward thinking Parish Council we believe we have land available for the remaining six within the existing development boundary.

Policy ST18a of the Devon Structure Plan Adopted Oct. 2004 (A Sustainable Strategy for Devon) states that the ‘mix and type of housing’ should ‘meet the needs of local communities’. Exminster not only does not need 105 ‘Affordable’ homes (of which 50% will be flats) but we do not believe an influx on this scale will create a ‘balanced community’ as required by the Structure Plan.

8. Public Open Space

The donation of public open space to the community represents a mixed blessing. As a Parish Council we have ongoing responsibilities to maintain public facilities within a meagre budget. Who will pay to maintain this new area, how will it be managed and how will it be safeguarded for future generations. Midas have not approached the Parish Council regarding these issues.

We are concerned that the closeness of the open space to the old quarry cliff face falling down towards the motorway is a safety concern. Midas’s proposal to re-use soil from the site to create a bund will not deter children from the new housing. Proper attention and risk assessments need to be undertaken to ensure the Parish Council (and village Council tax payer) are not lumbered with an expensive safety issue to resolve and an ongoing maintenance bill.

The public open space pays no attention to the close proximity of the RSPB Cirl Bunting sanctuary between the Devington privaye driveway and Reddaway Drive. A strategy is required to ensure the habitat and general development pattern promote and protect this endangered ‘red’ listed bird.

9. Sustainable Development

An additional 300 homes represents an 18% increase in the size of Exminster. For a development of such significant proportions it pays very little attention to its responsibilities towards the quality of life, the existing village environment and increase required to infrastructure. Under the requirements of the Devon Structure Plan Adopted Oct. 2004 (A Sustainable Strategy for Devon) a sustainable development must add to, enhance and respect the character of the existing community whilst providing continued protection of the open countryside. This application fails on all counts and is therefore unsustainable.

The provision of a new community hub in the application recognises that the existing services within the heart of the village are insufficient and therefore that the proposed development would place a further burden on our amenities. Additionally these new facilities will seriously divide and alter the character of our village creating a them and us scenario; this does not demonstrate considered sustainable development. We would also argue that whilst intent to provide facilities can be stated in the application there can never be any guarantee they will be delivered.

The fields at Milbury Farm are on higher ground which helps to define and enclose our village with a green lung bounded by Devon hedge banks and trees. To build on this hill will have significant visual impact on surrounding areas including Topsham and Countess Wear with an additional increase in light pollution.

The proposal to build two and three storey terraces on a site which rises relatively steeply from the marshes level would be a totally unacceptable urban intrusion into a relatively sensitive area both in terms of nature conservation and the all important attractiveness of the estuary in respect of tourism and leisure.

10. Noise and Air Pollution

The comments of the Parish Council will be forwarded shortly.

11. Conclusion

In the last 10-15 years Exminster has made a significant contribution to the increase in housing numbers within Teignbridge. This is reflected in our school pupil figures which have increased from 83 to 300 in only 16 years or by 360%!! Our community has therefore done its bit and this application to increase the size of the village by a further 18% must be refused.

The site is outside the designated village development boundary and on green field land which is against national, regional and local government planning policies. It must be refused to protect not only Exminster but the whole of Teignbridge from setting a precedent for further adhoc development in the countryside.

1320 Exminster residents have signed letters of objection so far …………… this means at least 27% of our village have put pen to paper asking for this application to be refused. This is a huge response from our community and cannot be ignored.

This application has a major implication for the future of our village and we would therefore be grateful if you would keep us informed of progress and allow us time to consider any fresh evidence as it arises.

Regards

Peter King
CHAIRMAN

CC. Richard Younger-Ross MP
Brian Berman District Councillor
Howard Milton District Councillor

Extract from above:

The Parish Council have voted unanimously to recommend that this application is refused. We are charged to listen and support the views of our community; their overwhelming response to this application has been to say NO!

1320 Exminster residents have signed letters of objection so far …………… This is a huge response from our community and cannot be ignored.

Planning permission for the 300 houses
was refused on January 10th but the appeal by Midas
Homes is to be heard on 1st - 4th July 2008 at Forde House,
Newton Abbot.

“I will be speaking at the Inquiry against the proposal”,
says Brian Berman.