Strategic Planning Committee, 3 March 2026

00:07:41Good morning, everybody. We're going to get started. First up, the usual health and safety announcement. There is no fire alarm drill anticipated today, so in the event of a fire alarm sounding, please leave the building through the nearest fire exit by following the green running man signs above the doors and make your way to the rear of the car park.

00:08:03If anybody needs assistance leaving the building in the event of an emergency evacuation, please let us know. The organiser of the meeting will tell you when it is safe to return. Please also make sure all phones are either muted or switched off. To start the meeting proper then, good morning everybody and welcome to this Strategic Planning Committee meeting on Tuesday 3rd March 2026. I am, as always, your Chair, Councillor Todd Olive, and to my right, the usual suspect, Vice Chair, Councillor Mike Howe.

00:08:37Supporting officers present today are Ed Freeman, Assistant Director, Planning, Strategy and Development Services, which appears later in the script. Damian Hunter, Planning Solicitor, and Wendy Harris, Democratic Services Officer. can I remind everyone present please that this meeting is recorded for publication on the council's website so please can members and officers make your contribution to the meeting use a microphone or your comments will not be recorded we will now start the meeting by doing a roll call of committee members and declarations of interest thank you chair I'll start with yourself Councillor Olive present and nothing to declare at this time thank you Councillor Howe vice chair present and nothing to declare at this time Councillor Brian bailey present and being lobbied on all things x Councillor Jess bailey present and I'd like to declare it may not be a formal interest but I'd still like to declare that um I'm a Devon county Councillor And also that I'm a member of the Devon and somerset fire and rescue authority because it's referenced to that in the Cranbrook

00:09:59Report thank you I don't think it's a dpr or anything like that but I'm just just noting that thank you thank you Councillor Blakey present and no declarations thank you thank you Councillor Davey present no declarations thank you Councillor Faithfull Present, no declarations.

00:10:27Thank you. Councillor Fernley. Present and received lobbying emails. Lobbying emails for? Eczema.

00:10:44Thank you. Councillor Fitzgerald. Present and no declarations. Thank you. Councillor Hayward is arriving a little bit later, so I'll move on to Councillor Jung. Present and I've had lobbying emails on. Exmouth, and also on various communities along the Otter regarding sewage.

00:11:23Thank you. Councillor Levine. Present. I only want to declare I behaved myself this last week, so I hope to do the same in this meeting.

00:11:35Thank you. And finally, Councillor Parr. Present. No declarations. Thank you. Back to you, Chair. Wonderful.

00:11:50Thank you. Agenda item one, then, the minutes of the previous meeting held on the 6th of January 2026. Are there any comments from committee members on those minutes, please? No. In which case, then, as Chair, I'd like to move those minutes as true and accurate records. Please raise your hand if you're in support, members. That's fairly clearly carried.

00:12:14Thank you. So I will sign those. Agenda item two, apologies. I have a record here of apologies from Councillor Ingham and Councillor Ledger also asked me to pass on his apologies. Do we have any others? Okay, thank you. Agenda Item 3, declarations of interest we have already done, which brings us then to Agenda Item 4, public speaking. And first up, please, [member of the public]. In January, I ask you to prove that you are actively seeking to engage with and listening to the public.

00:13:01Unfortunately, this seems to have been ignored, as are my emails at the moment. So who do you listen to? Obviously, the planning officers and the developers, as no change can be made to the draft Local Plan in case they are classed as significant. But you do not even know what would be classed as significant. We still do not have an agreed HRA or an air quality mitigation report, but we can continue on the premise that these will be produced soon and will provide the required results. What if they do not? They have not been satisfactory so far, so why would they be in the future? Or are they going to be made to be satisfactory? Developers say that they can overcome any obstacle on this site. Everyone will walk and cycle. Access is not an issue.

00:13:52They have their own reports to prove it. No fact-checking, no sense-checking. You listen to them, but not us, despite the evidence. Because if you were listening to us, you would know that EXMO20 failed HELAA, so it would not have been available in Reg 18 nor Reg 19. This is according to your own site selection methodology, processes, procedures, and documentation. Exmo_46 was allocated, EXMO20 wasn't. As stated again in your own documentation, you would know that Exmo 20A and 20B were invalid and only created six days before the Reg 18 consultation and never discussed or even agreed by this committee.

00:14:42You would not be ignoring over 2,500 objections to EXMO20 from the public, statutory bodies and key organisations. How can you justify this? You would also realise that the spatial strategy is unrealistic. Exmas may be the largest town in East Eben, but why must it take the highest level of growth? You should be asking, can it take the highest level of growth, instead of just assuming that it can?

00:15:12Exmouth's unique location, the fact that there are only two access routes in and out of the area, which are already running at, if not beyond capacity, cannot and should not be ignored. You would also know that this development was rejected for inclusion in the current Local Plan, as it's not suitable, sustainable or viable. And what has changed? Only more and more issues have been identified. Just on EXMO20, you are effectively ignoring over 40% of the total Reg 19 comments.

00:15:44You have the opportunity now to prove that you're listening to us. Seriously reconsider EXMO20 before it's too late. Otherwise, why should the public bother to even engage with you? Please do not ignore us again.

00:15:59[Passage not reproduced here. It contains allegations or strong criticism of named people or the council, made at the meeting. We don't repeat allegations; you can hear the passage in the council's own recording by playing it from this point.]

00:16:43[Passage not reproduced here. It contains allegations or strong criticism of named people or the council, made at the meeting. We don't repeat allegations; you can hear the passage in the council's own recording by playing it from this point.]

00:17:07[Passage not reproduced here. It contains allegations or strong criticism of named people or the council, made at the meeting. We don't repeat allegations; you can hear the passage in the council's own recording by playing it from this point.]

00:18:21Bureaucrats to account, not a dozen bureaucrats, thank you. Mr Freeman, this plan is not what the government is insisting upon, it's not what the people want and it's clearly not what the councillors want. Thank you [member of the public]. [member of the public]. You may be pleased to know you're not

00:18:55[Passage not reproduced here. It contains allegations or strong criticism of named people or the council, made at the meeting. We don't repeat allegations; you can hear the passage in the council's own recording by playing it from this point.]

00:20:02Hadn't voted for it. And at least two of you have had the integrity to say this publicly and have asked to speak against the plan at the inspection stage. You would have to be totally disconnected from the world not to have heard the enormous reaction and outrage this proposal has evoked. Just read the briefing papers. 2,600 objections have been received. Over 50% of all the comments on the whole East Devon plan.

00:20:27And whereas I accept that noise doesn't necessarily equate to error, this volume should make you stop and think. The water industry hides behind the regulator. In your case, you hide behind the government numbers and demands. In neither case is there a moral argument to support these positions. Your sole justification now for the inclusion of EXMO20 is that to remove it would impact on the whole plan, and your ability to submit it in the timetable Mr Freeman has scared you into following.

00:20:58You have lost sight of the needs and the wants of your local community. You have lost sight of the unparalleled damage EXMO20 will cause to the natural environment, to the historic environment, the inevitable water and sewage calamities and the collapse of an effective road network in East Devon. But you will satisfy [member of the public] agenda. So I urge you this morning, carry on. Do the wrong thing. Support a plan you don't believe in, because that appears to be the default position of all policymakers and politicians.

00:21:34[Passage not reproduced here. It contains allegations or strong criticism of named people or the council, made at the meeting. We don't repeat allegations; you can hear the passage in the council's own recording by playing it from this point.]

00:22:35A decision is finalized to gather opinions and advice the recent consultation on the strategic plan received 1500 opinions on the first on the second one and 1100 on the first for just EXMO20 alone from the public. The method and procedure was non-inclusive and it was a barrier to many more people who wished to voice their valid opinions on EXMO20. In spite of the huge amount of comments you did not hear us, you certainly took no notice. This shows this council is possibly arrogant and uncaring, a council that does not respect our beautiful countryside or what the people think you hide behind the government's decision to build more houses they did not mean build all over national landscapes and next to a triple si which is one of only three in europe yet in dunk as well permission wasn't granted for housing application because the proposed houses would have been on a national national landscape and create the loss of an open green field The council also felt it would erode, detract and harm the setting of the conservation area

00:23:54And it further noted that the historic airfield and other assets warranted protection more than the need for homes there. There were also concerns about being poorly located in relation to nearby services and facilities. the substandard pedestrian and cycle linkage as well as concerns about a lack of plans for the surface runoff water plus an archaeological potential this is more than familiar for EXMO20 yet you plan to build 700 homes commercial buildings and no doubt a battery-powered station on the edge of it all and extremely close to the pebble beds as written in your climate and mitigation plan how is this hypocrisy sitting with you as councillors I question why we need more houses in this area as so many new builds are empty and those in evansfield Budleigh they've been unoccupied for years they if occupied will provide much more sewage which this government allows to be dumped into our sea and waterways just as a matter of course. Please listen to the 2,600 voices of reason and stand up for what some of you may feel in your hearts for common sense

00:25:16And decency. We voted for you to look after our heritage and our countrysides. Please have the courage to do so. Thank you [member of the public]. We now have a statement to be read out from [member of the public]. This plan is built on numbers, but it seems no one is checking the numbers, so I've taken the liberty of doing so, and I've found there is significant confusion and contradictions in the plan.

00:25:49In 3.11, the figure is incorrectly quoted as 1,188. This figure must be based on the latest available data at the time of publication, not knowingly outdated data. In the Supporting Evidence HOU01 Housing Delivery Technical Report, November 25, the figure is falsely quoted as 1,146, with apparently 80% being 950.4. The correct maths would be 916.8. In the Supporting Evidence HOU02 Housing Needs Assessment, October 25, the document explains the standard methodology in detail and calculates overlooking latest ONS data.

00:26:43Worryingly, no document states the correct figure. I calculate the figure to be 924.7 per year. The standard method housing requirement is a factor based on the last five years' data. These figures are really critical as think back five years and we were in the midst of a pandemic resulting in a race for space housing market. This distorted the East Devon figures and the figure you are choosing to use is 22% higher than the 2024 figure you are required to use.

00:27:19And once the 2025 figure, anticipated to be similar, is published later this year, the five-year average figure will drop significantly, sending the East Evans housing targets tumbling. The foreseeable trend is downwards. You have a plan currently that is significantly overshooting the government's targets. You originally agreed a 10% headroom, which last September you actually voted to increase to 13%. and later this year will become 16%. This is despite you continuously protesting that Westminster is pushing you to these numbers.

00:27:58They are not. You are volunteering to build more houses. More importantly, the last iteration of the draft Local Plan includes a whole new five-year review clause, 17.3. This is so that if housing numbers are short, more sites can be added, but if the number are high, it is impossible to remove sites. This clause frees up long-term obligation. Therefore, you should only commit to 10% headroom for the first five years.

00:28:32There may well be a change of policy, government, and without doubt this downward trend evident today, all feeding into the target. The plan you are currently agreeing is to set to concrete over dozens more fields than is necessarily and just one more is too many more with our volatile world food security is of paramount importance councillors request 925 per year plus 10 for five years 23 408 would drop to 20 805 this is all you need to commit to you state you are doing everything in your power to resist new housing but that but your hands are tied yet last autumn you decided to increase the headroom please don't sit in planning committee and say this is coming from central government Councillor Levine you said you would lead a march in westminster by all means do that but you can start by using the mechanisms already in place to reduce housing numbers you owe it to the councillors of tomorrow to ensure they are not backed into a corner and can make decisions at that time this

00:29:50Is forever thank you thank you wendy for reading that out um miss Freeman could I there's a matter of fact in that last set of comments that I think is just worth correcting for the benefit of the record um the rest um I I will leave the public speaker's views to stand for themselves yes thank you chair good morning members yes so in terms of the change the standard method we did address this in a report to the committee on the 2nd of september and highlighted that the standard method because it changes every year in relation to the affordability ratio that's a factor in the standard method meant our standard method figure had come down at that point and that was addressed in that report at section three which did talk through the reasons why we weren't proposing to make any changes in light of that partly being that while the number can come down it can also go up again in future and so obviously by the time we come to Local Plan examination it could have

00:30:51Gone back up again and that's quite possible in the next few months indeed. We're also mindful that we're being substantially substantially shorter than 100% of the standard method because we're going through under the transition arrangements at 80% and we're being robustly challenged by some parties for doing so um so having a reasonable amount of headroom uh could be important in terms of challenging that um there's also this factor in terms of the time scales uh for the plan in fact that we're supposed to have a 15 year plan period at the point of adoption if the plan isn't adopted by the end of 27 we won't have a 15 year plan period but by building in headroom in addition to what we've got at malcom in terms of future areas for housing growth we would potentially have a significant amount of space to to to argue that we should be allowed to adopt a plan with less than the 15 year plan period because we have a plan for meeting the housing needs for that additional year if the plan is adopted after 27 so there's those various

00:31:58[Passage not reproduced here. It contains allegations or strong criticism of named people or the council, made at the meeting. We don't repeat allegations; you can hear the passage in the council's own recording by playing it from this point.]

00:33:03Should residents feel that that that's necessary um mindful of the nolan principles so I will be careful of what I say I think it's wholly inappropriate to be coming in here and accusing um mr Freeman of some of the things that have been said this morning I I think it's I think it's out of order um totally um and I'm I'm going to um I'm going to leave my comments there and move on. I'm not going to sue anyone. I've not said that I, excuse me, I've not said I think you're being libelous. I've not said I think you've done anything illegal. I just said I think it's out of order and I think it's inappropriate and I'm going to move on from there. You've said much worse about me, about my colleague and about this authority this morning. Thank you. Agenda item five, matters of urgency, there are none. And agenda item six confidential or exempt items there are none which brings us to agenda item seven update on work on the production of the East Devon Local Plan pages

00:34:0610 to 14 in your agenda [member of the public] you chair so this brief report is just to update members on where we are in terms of production of Local Plan it's obviously the key work of the committee at this time so just to highlight that the second stage of regulation 19 consultation concluded on the 26th January. We received around 3,200 separate comments from around 750 respondents through that consultation, many of which were raising concerns and issues that had been raised at previous stages of consultation, despite the fact we were really seeking comments on the amendments and changes to the plan. As has been said, a number of objections to allocations in the plan particularly EXMO20 with 1500 responses in relation to that site alone and various other comments received which are summarised in paragraph 2.4 I won't go through the details there and would highlight that we'll be bringing a full feedback report to your next meeting summarising in detail the responses that we've received and the other issue that is highlighted in the report is the further technical work that's underway to address

00:35:19Some of the remaining outstanding issues, so the report particularly highlights the West End-focused transport assessment work around Malcombe and growth in that part of the district, lots of ongoing work in terms of transport modelling, work on junction arrangements, particularly at the airport junction, visit Mary Roundabout, discussions with national highways around junctions 29 and 30 the m5 and obviously uh with the help of Devon County Council in terms of doing all of that work um so lots of work going on there to try and address concerns raised there and how uh the additional transport infrastructure can be provided uh the other issue that's particularly highlighted is air quality impacts at the Pebblebed Heaths very mindful of the need to address those issues and get to a satisfactory Habitat Regulations assessment prior to planned submission uh so this report says further modeling work underway uh through our consultants ricardo whose independent work is um looking at how this uh the the growth that's planned in the area can be accommodated without having a detrimental impact on the habitats um so that's further

00:36:30Modeling work that's ongoing to hopefully get us to a mitigation strategy prior to plan submission and as I say an acceptable HRA uh so in terms of the timetable um we're still looking to uh submit the plan in in the spring um hoping to bring the plan back to you in may which would then need a recommendation on to full council and then submission before the june deadline as things stand in terms of the transitional arrangements um so that's essentially uh just a quick sort of run through as to where we are in terms of the the plan making process but happy to take any questions or comments thank you chair thank you mr Freeman starting with questions from committee members please Councillor Faithfull thank you chair sorry Councillor Faithfull Councillor Barlow in fairness also this handout and he's outside of committee so I'll come to him first thank you very much chair sorry to bother you um just a question for mr Freeman the five-year housing allocation supply oh do we have to still have that at a five-year point so that the plan can be adopted

00:37:32And if so, are we happy we're going to get there before the plan goes through or the idea of the plan going through? And if so, how? We're putting our plan forward. Do we have any idea how long we'll find out whether or not it's accepted and if it's rejected, how long extra will it likely take to address anything? Do we have any idea on that? Any other questions before I come to Mr Freeman?

00:38:15Councillor Jung? Habitat Regulations assessment, really good report. It says what the problem is. I don't see how we can overcome. There's no report of how we're going to overcome that yet. and it does clearly show that a lot of the problems is along the highways but then it says that highways is not a significant problem to the problems with air quality on the common. So I'm a bit at a loss at the moment of knowing how we're going to resolve this air quality problem on the Heath.

00:39:03Councillor Parl is there any indication about the um technical work that's being done how how much longer is it going to take thank you um so yes um so sorry helen when you put your

00:39:42Microphone on um colin um colin peter's name comes up and vice versa so it might be worth you just switching over not that it's the seats you need to switch not the microphones so if you just just try put your microphone on after that excitement Mr Freeman

00:41:01Thank you Chair. Yes, so coming back to Councillor Barlow's point, yes we do need to get to a five-year housing and supply. The way to do it is fundamentally to keep granting consent for housing development fundamentally. We are getting there, I think. It's heading in the right direction. I think the last monitoring report showed we had 3.5 years supply, which was up from about 2.9 I think the previous year.

00:41:26So it's slowly heading in the right direction we are monitoring it it's going to be tight but yeah hopefully we can get there by the time we need to which is the point of adoption I would stress it's not the point of which we submit the plan it's the point of adoption so we have got a bit more time than you might otherwise think but we do need to get there in terms of Councillor Faithfull's point well we set out a timetable for plan making at 4.1 in the report obviously uh once we submit the plan we're in the hands of the inspector in terms of um hearing dates um how they consider the plan and then um you know the examination period is not a fixed period of time so they could come to view after initial hearing sessions that there's further work that we need to do and could be sent back to us to undertake that further work previous Local Plan for example um there were issues in terms of the housing numbers that we

00:42:24We needed to address um so you know the the examination was held in abeyance for about 18 months while that work was done hopefully we won't be in that situation again but we could be in in some kind of period where further work is needed uh in all likelihood there will be some modifications main modifications needed to the plan and the consultation on those so the timetable we've set out is is our best guess um we're still hoping to adopt the plan by the end of 2027 um but obviously that relies on on the examination and the hearing sessions progressing through 2026 and the early part of 27 and getting to a satisfactory outcome um so we'll have to see see how that progresses but there's there's no you know fixed rigid timetable uh for the examination process um in terms of Councillor Jung's point in terms of the HRA um yes there's no no clear mitigation strategy at the moment the initial work that ricardo did um does identify some potential mitigation measures um so there's there's things around um trying to encourage the

00:43:32Uptake of electric vehicles particularly on new developments in infrastructure in place um to enable that um potentially looking at our own fleet and other vehicles that we control to turn them into evs uh for example um other things around um you know digestate storage facilities and things on farms uh around um there and farming practices so there are measures that are highlighted it's further work that's needed in terms of modeling the impact of those interventions and how those will impact in terms of getting to an acceptable impact and then having a strategy for how that's all implemented um one of the things that's going on at the moment is looking at the modeling work that's been undertaken which we think takes quite a pessimistic view in terms of the uptake of electric vehicles uh in in the district particularly when you take into account you know government policy about transitioning to electric vehicles you you would hope the uptake during the planned period is going to be quite significant and we'll see a shift to electric

00:44:34Vehicles being the predominant fuel source for vehicles on the roads um currently I don't think and that's really reflected in the modelling to the extent that it should be. So I'm hoping when they rerun the modelling, we'll get to a point where we will naturally see the impacts in terms of vehicle movements over the pebbleheads declining, such that the mitigation measures will not have to be as unachievable, shall we say, that we'll be able to achieve the outcomes that are needed.

00:45:03In the worst-case scenario, you know, Obviously, we might need to look at some sort of land management measures in the short term while you see the electric vehicle uptake happen, while we've still got a lot of petrol and diesel vehicles on the road to directly mitigate the impacts on the habitats themselves. So those are the kinds of things we're exploring at the moment in terms of modelling.

00:45:26We're meeting with Natural England shortly to discuss some of these issues as well. So we are making progress. we'll have to see how the modelling goes and the mitigation strategy but I'm still hopeful and confident that we will get to a position where we have a satisfactory HRA at the point of submission and then I think I've partially answered Councillor Parr's comment but in terms of how much longer in terms of all of the technical work I mean fundamentally we have quite a clear deadline of needing to submit the plan I think it's the 12th of June is our current understanding of the deadline so we need to get all of these technical reports completed and available to submit for the examination by that date so it's quite a tight deadline hence a lot of work ongoing to complete these technical reports and get them ready. Thank you. Thank you Mr Freeman. A question from me before I come back to the rest of committee. It's been suggested this morning that in the event that the evidence suggests we can't

00:46:30Achieve a satisfactory mitigation strategy on the HRA front will fudge the numbers. I know what the answer is, but just for the benefit of the record, could you perhaps clarify what actions we will have to take in the event that the evidence says we can't mitigate the impacts from the plan?

00:46:50Thank you. Well, I think the first thing to say is we've got reputable consultants in the taking of this work, and Ricardo, are a multinational environmental consultancy who are undertaking the work in terms of the air quality assessment work for Perlbead Heaves. And their work would ultimately feed into the Habitat Regulations Assessment, which is being undertaken by Footprint Ecology. So these are not reports that we are producing.

00:47:13Not that we would fudge any reports, but clearly we're not producing them. This is independent consultants producing them on our behalf. In terms of if we don't get to... well we have to get to a satisfactory solution in terms of the Habitat Regulations assessment fundamentally it's it's um it's um a requirement of the legislation um so if we don't in that time scale then we we need to revisit the time scale and give ourselves time to get to that position um but um I think we just need to see where we get to over the coming weeks couple of months um and hope that we can find a satisfactory solution but there'll be no fudging of figures this is independent consultants I have to be honest I don't have the expertise to fudge the figures even if I was so minded to uh which I'm very much not um it has to be sound it has to be robust to stand up to the examination process and we have independent consultants doing all of this work for us not doing it ourselves thank you mr Freeman um clearly that has provoked

00:48:20A number of further questions um I I will in in strictly speaking we are back inside your committee but I will go to Councillor Roy collins and then Councillor Barlow um as as an exception thank you chair I would like to know about the examination where is it likely to be where's the venue what sort of date and times how long is it going to take if it's in the autumn which looks likely it would be useful for people to know because some people have late summer holidays etc and they wouldn't want to [member of the public] sure thank you Councillor Barlow thank you chair two things going back to the answer I had on the previous question, just about the, we've improved it by just over half a year in a year, which is great, but we've still got three and a half years to go, which means that about seven years of getting the numbers up, so are you confident there's lots of big ones in the pipeline that you're aware of, and also could you remind not only the members

00:49:43But also the public, what happens if we don't have a plan, however imperfect they may think it is. Who inside committee wanted to speak? I can't visualise where the hands were. Councillor Brian Bailey, oh everyone, okay. We'll take Councillor Brian Bailey and then we'll continue.

00:50:06Thank you Chair. I'd like some clarification please that we discussed some months ago now about the if, heaven forbid Exxon 20 was to go ahead the access from the main road by the Archery Club, was suggested that the access would be there, which would be running through the 400-metre buffer zone with the Pebble Bear Heaves. Now, my understanding, having read through the new MPPF guide, that there should be no intrusion into the buffer zone whatsoever, no development in the buffer zone whatsoever.

00:50:49And the way I interpreted it, rightly or wrongly, I'm sure Mr Freeman will have an opinion in a moment, is that we should not be doing extra 20. We certainly should not be accessing through a buffer zone to the Pebble Red Heaves. And I'd like some clarification on that, please, Mr Freeman.

00:51:06Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Bailey. I'm going to come to Mr Freeman to tackle those three speakers' questions, and then I will come back round to committee.

00:51:19Thank you, Chair. So coming back to Councillor Cullen's questions, I mean, the venue for the local blind examination will be here. we would host that in terms of dates and times and how long I couldn't say at this point in time I mean assuming we stick to our timetable I would envisage the hearing sessions probably being in the autumn as you say but until we submit the plan and the inspector have allocated it to an inspector or probably multiple inspectors and check diaries and everything we won't have dates so we probably won't have dates until the summer realistically um so for example Exeter's first hearing session for their local power I believe is today uh but I don't think they had the dates uh until very late last year um so you only get a couple of months notice really uh of the date so I won't be able to tell you those until much nearer the time um coming back to Councillor Barlow's point um I mean it's not necessarily big sites um it's sites that are going to deliver in the first

00:52:23In the next five years in terms of the five-year housing and supply but I mean we do have some big sites in the pipeline there's obviously expansion areas at Cranbrook that have got um a motion to to approve but subject to section 106 agreements so if we get those 106 experiments resolved and we can issue those decisions there's some housing that can be counted into the five-year housing and supply there uh there's quite a lot of other sites coming forward um sites that are proposed for allocation in the Local Plan that are coming through as applications ahead of that which potential opportunities there so I think there is opportunities coming up to help to bolster the housing and supply position and and get to a five-year housing and supply at the point of adoption but obviously that can't get in the way of sound decision making on those applications have still got to be sustainable development and appropriate in whatever respects so what What happens if we don't have a plan?

00:53:21Well, we would continue to not have a five-year housing land supply, probably. So we retain the position of having the tilted balance in play and having to give substantial weight to developments that are bolstering the housing land supply position. So I don't think that's a position we want to be in. Fundamentally, not having an up-to-date plan creates those sorts of problems, not just in terms of housing, but also to some extent in terms of employment.

00:53:48Land provision increasing number of decisions on employment land coming through sort of where there's not adequate supply or a plan to deliver supply where the balance is weighing very much in favour of those developments but ultimately you know it's a government requirement to have an up-to-date plan and and if we don't you know the government can can come in and and do the plan for us is the ultimate sanction um so um it's very much in our interests and in the interests of the area to have a plan an up-to-date plan in place clear policy framework to make decision making to um defend the important environmental characteristics of the area from developments that we don't want to see and focus growth and development where we have decided as as a council you want that to go however hard those decisions were they they they are protecting the most environmentally sensitive areas in the district um in terms of Councillor Bailey's comment about EXMO20 um yes you're right the access would be essentially opposite the archery club um the 400

00:54:59Meter buffer zone though is is is not a no development buffer zone uh my understanding is it's development that's um the housing development or development that in itself would would have a detrimental impact on the public we've obviously got you know it's obviously not ideal to have the access there but it's not something that you can't have within the 400 meter buffer zone and I think as we've said in the plan and in the allocation there won't be any homes within the 400 meter buffer zone um so we are respecting the 400 meter buffer zone um under the guidance Thank you, Mr. Freeman. So I believe coming around then I had Councillor Levine and you did promise you'd behave yourself, followed by Councillor Davey and then Councillor Blakey, was it? Somebody on the left-hand side put their hand up. Councillor Fearnley. Sorry, I thought you were nodding at Kevin. Councillor Levine.

00:55:52Thank you, Chair. Are we allowed to break election promises? That's what politicians do. We just heard from the public. My question is about something completely different. I think it's very encouraging that you had lots of comments about the plan from the public, and it is such an immense amount that I can't see that officers can deal with them all by themselves.

00:56:15So you have to rely on artificial intelligence. The top of the head is that artificial intelligence software has had some very bad press recently because of hallucinations. So I was just wondering whether, how are we going to check that artificial intelligence is going to give us a representative summary of what our residents are complaining about?

00:56:44Thank you, Councillor Levine. And while you're at it, [member of the public], you might like to tell Yehudi how many objections we had at Regulation 19 stage to the last Local Plan. Councillor Davey.

00:56:56Thank you, Chair. The modeling for the Pebblebed Heaths mitigation, does that take any account of possible planting or providing better vegetation up there, or is that not an option on the Pebblebed Heaths because of their sensitivity, even encouraging some of the vegetation to spread, particularly along the roadsides, would help in improving the air quality. And the second thing is about the elephant in the room. Around about the time our plan is adopted, we will also be going through, if everything goes to plan, local government reorganisation.

00:57:43What is the status, or what might be the status of the plan after local government reorganisation? Would it remain in place as kind of guidance for possible area committees or something like that those are my two questions thank you thank you Councillor Davey Councillor Fernley coming back on what mr Freeman was talking talking about mitigation of air quality on the heats and he said that um there are land management things that can be done to mitigate the air quality problems I was wondering what those land management things are thank you um thank you chair so yes if you come back around then uh in terms of council levine's comments um yes I mean I think we will need to use ai to help to to summarize um the responses that we've received we did use ai last time um when we had as a lot more comments um to deal with we did do a checking process in terms of um We didn't use AI 15 years ago on the last Local Plan.

00:59:00No, on the last round of consultation on this plan. Yeah, no, it didn't exist at the last Local Plan. Very much, we would have had to invent it. So we did use AI then. And yes, I mean, inevitably when you use AI, you have to check what's coming out makes sense because it does come out with some interesting stuff sometimes. So there is a checking process that we go through to make sure that what we've got actually makes sense and does reflect the comments that we've received.

00:59:36Obviously, the whole point of using AI is that we don't have to go through and check every individual one, but, you know, the general sense check. And particularly on sensitive, particularly sensitive issues or where something stands out as that doesn't make sense. Why would someone have said that in relation to that? and I think what we had last time was was an accurate representation of of the comments that we received certainly not aware that we received any complaints um in in terms of that um so I would envisage going through the same process again um and um bringing through a summary report at the next meeting which will reflect that I would stress however the the examination process will receive the actual you know a full full summary of everything so um there's no fear that anything will get missed during that that process um in terms of council david's comments um planting vegetation yeah so in terms of the pebble beds yeah so one option in terms of of mitigation um which is probably sort of the least attractive option but an option is to um do actual physical

01:00:48Works within the buffer areas to the size of the roads to address the impact of the sort of pollution on the ground and the change that that leads to in ecological terms in terms of the nutrients in the soil and the plant life that's then growing in those areas by treating. So it's basically, I think, from the traffic going through there is nitrous oxide impacting on the soil and changing the nutrient profile of the soil.

01:01:16So you can then treat the soil, take out alien vegetation that's grown in those areas, treat the soil to bring the soil back to the natural condition it should be that then brings back the vegetation it should be growing and wildlife that should be growing in those areas. So generally, obviously, we're trying to work on the basis of a strategy that prevents those impacts happening in the first place.

01:01:38But if we can't get to a point where the strategy can achieve that then obviously an option would be to then go in and do those sorts of land management measures to then address the impacts of the pollution and that might be an option in terms of the short term as I say given the uptake of electric vehicles will hopefully help to address the impact in the long term so that might be an acceptable mitigation measure in the short term to do those management measures on the site so it's not so much planting new vegetation it's more treating the soil to ensure that the vegetation and wildlife that should be in that location can return to those areas that have been affected through through the pollution um sorry ed um I think Councillor Davey's question was whether those measures are included in the modeling my understanding is that the modeling is the impacts without mitigation and then we look at what we need to do to mitigate the impacts that the modelling says if the plan would have is that correct that's correct but also then going on and

01:02:39Modeling the impact of the mitigation so that we can show that the mitigation has sufficient impact to overcome the impacts without the mitigation so we've got a baseline then we've got the mitigation measures being modeled to show that they can take us back to the sort of pre-plan position um so yes that's the work that's going on at the moment um in terms of the the status of the plan post lgr well I mean effectively the plan fingers crossed we're getting through and adopted um that um it would remain in in place until it's superseded by whatever plan that the new unitary authority puts in place over that wider geography but I mean realistically um that's not going to happen overnight um so um you know the plan should go through be adopted and stand as a Local Plan for east evan um obviously plans should be reviewed every five years so I would imagine it's going to last at least that five years um before it's superseded by uh the the plan that the unitary authority would put in place so um I don't think the status of

01:03:49Plan will really change as a result of lgr uh I think if you look at um somerset for example um you know they've still got all of the individual plans for the districts within there I think some of those plans are still going through examination and trying to get them through to adoption post lgr um because obviously it's better to have a plan in place over over that geographical area than than not um so I don't think we need to worry about the impact of lgr in terms of the Local Plan room. In terms of Councillor Fernandes, I don't know, I may have answered that in terms of my response to Councillor Davey, but effectively the land management measures are about the nutrition of the soil and the dressing, the impacts of pollution on that to then reinstate the natural vegetation that should be growing in those areas.

01:04:38So if that was the case and mitigation had to be done in the way you meant it who pays for that well the mitigation strategy would be collecting financial contributions from developers uh that we would then need to uh develop an arrangement with the landowners and management of of the pebble beds uh to then use those contributions to undertake those land management measures on al-Bihar. So those conversations have started, obviously, with those parties.

01:05:16There were workshops that are mentioned in the Ricardo report that's already been published with those stakeholders, the Peppabed Heath Trust and the Clinton Devon Estates and other parties. Councillor Jung.

01:05:32Thank you for allowing me to come back on this. Yeah, the Peppabed Heath's buffer zone is only a restriction for dwellings and you can have construction on there as defined by previous planning applications like a Black Hill Corridor that it didn't restrict an industrial unit there although it wouldn't be you'd have to consider what effect any industrial building would have on the on the Pebblebed Heaths we also got a bear in mind there are different boundaries you've got the Pebblebed Heaths is there a question here Councillor You are you sure there is just just pointing out those different boundaries on the Pebblebed Heaths there's itself the SSI which is the base which is the boundary base and then you've got the natural landscape so you're looking at various different landscapes and if the road is coming out onto the road opposite the archery club that is not in the SSSI I'm trying to think of a question now should we just say thank you Jeff and move on yeah the other issue is Natural England would not

01:07:12Take kindly to us planting anything other than what is already there and we would need to be working with nature and encouraging what is already there you wouldn't be wanting to put palm trees there for instance it would have to be exactly what is already there and preserving what is there that is the whole point of the triple SI yes thank you Jeff your your microphone is still on Jeff so I'm conscious we are just now coming back around are there genuine extra questions here or do people want to make a point disguised as a question because if it's a genuine question from Councillor Faithfull a genuine question from Councillor Bailey and it doesn't involve a lengthy preamble I would I would prefer that he didn't a question doesn't strictly so we'll go count Councillor Faithfull and then Briefly, Councillor Bailey, and then I'd like to move into debate on this report, please.

01:08:15Without going into detail, because we're going to go on to it on our next agenda item, how much or how little impact will the water cycle study have on the overall Local Plan? A model question from Councillor Faithfull. Councillor Bailey. A model question, Chair, but never mind. It's quite a simple question. we have the situation I'm talking about Exxon 20 specifically whereas we've had a survey on the houses we would need in Exxon Exxon 20 does not fit the quality of that service the service we need in Exxon is affordable homes one would imagine that if this was developed there would be a minimum of affordable homes we're supposed to be aiming for 25% or was it 50% in the open countryside?

01:09:10That's two things I'd like to mention. Also, there's no infrastructure. There's no mention in this plan of any infrastructure whatsoever. So that is another point. Why isn't it there? Why isn't it mentioned? My final point is we have a situation where we're desperate for homes of a certain type and quality. This doesn't comply with that situation. And why are we pursuing it? Why are we pursuing what would appear to be the most awkward situation we can have? We've got no sewerage structure as such. It's inadequate to say the least. So I'd like to know some justification in my mind for the people of Exeter, who I represent, is why is this being pursued with such vigour when some of us don't agree with it. Thank you, Chair, very much.

01:10:03I hope that was short. I'm not sure they were necessarily genuine questions, Brian. I think those were more points that you wanted to make, which were dressed up as questions. And I think some of that's a little bit, you know, we've been over lots of those points before, Councillor Bailey. The infrastructure one is a perennial point that everybody likes to raise. There's an entire infrastructure delivery plan which sets out the infrastructure that is needed.

01:10:35What it's going to cost and what we're able to at this time in terms of delivery of that infrastructure. In terms of affordable housing, Councillor Bailey, you were here when we voted on the policy on affordable housing. In the current Local Plan, it's 50% outside the settlement boundary. Mr. Freeman will correct me if I'm wrong. In the new Local Plan in Exmouth, it's 35% with, what is it, 70% of that shared ownership and 30% social rent? Something like that.

01:11:04So, you know, you do know the answers to those questions, Councillor Bainey, and the plan, particularly on affordable housing, is genuinely pushing the boundaries of what we can get away with under the rules around viability. That would perhaps be more widespread knowledge if Mike and I weren't the only members that turned up to the presentation from the viability consultants, but it is nevertheless true. Edge, do you have answers for Councillor Faithfull's questions, please?

01:11:32Yes thank you chair um yeah I mean obviously we'll come on to the water cycle study in the next item but I mean I don't there's there's a lot of you know technical comments that you'll see in the report on the water cycle study but I don't envisage it necessitating changes to the plan it's about the evidence documents and ensuring that the evidence is is robust but when you look at the recommendations of the water cycle study they're all in the plan um and fundamentally it's It's about water efficiency standards that are embedded in the plan, ensuring that the infrastructure that's needed comes forward ahead of the homes.

01:12:11So we've added that additional policy that members agreed a few meetings ago to ensure that that was embedded very clearly in policy, that new homes will not come forward unless there is adequate wastewater infrastructure and potable water to support them. And so fundamentally, everything that I think we can put in the plan to address those issues is in there. obviously the the thing the only other thing would be about the strategy itself but it's not like we can suddenly change the strategy in terms of where homes are going because fundamentally we've ended up with with the distribution of growth that we have because of other constraints in the district environmental constraints for example with nearly two-thirds of the district being national landscape we can't just put all of the homes in the eastern part of the district so we're not impacting on the wastewater infrastructure in the western part of the district, that's not an option.

01:13:04So all of these issues were known as the work was coming forward with the water cycle study and have informed the production of the plan. So I think it's about tidying up some of the issues that have been raised by statutory constancies with the water cycle study and getting the report robust rather than changes to the plan itself. okay thank you [member of the public] going to move us into debate now and I will start that out by proposing the recommendation as listed in the report from the chair does anybody wish to speak please silence okay well uh in that case uh as I see no hands um I'm left without very much else to do uh than to uh take us to a vote on the recommendations um so it is as settled in your papers uh that we endorse the proposed program of work and note the contents of the report otherwise uh can I ask all those in favor please yes I think I count 11 for jess is voting yes yes she is hidden by Councillor Davey I think that's everybody apart from brian is that right yeah can

01:14:27I ask for those against. That is one, Councillor Bailey, which means no abstention, so that is clearly carried. Thank you, members. Just in view of the fact that the next item is likely to be a chunky one, shall we take five minutes, members? Five-minute comfort break, please.

01:14:44Thank you. Okay, members, we're going to come back into session, please.

01:26:38Okay, thank you, members. From one fun report to another fun report, as always, at Strategic Planning Committee agenda item eight uh the water cycle study pages 15 to 31 of your agenda mr Freeman uh thank you chair um so members will recall that I reported the water cycle study initially to at the meeting on the 25th november last year prior to the second Reg 19 consultation and the committee took the view that they wanted to see a specific report that enabled you to discuss the implications of the study following responses to the consultation particularly from statutory consultees and further engagement with southwest water um so obviously now having completed that consultation and now having got the comments uh from southwest water naturally in the environment agency as well as other consultee responses uh we brought together this report that um So it starts off summarising a bit about the role of planning and the role of a water cycle study, then sort of summarises the water cycle study, and you'll see sort of the main findings, I suppose,

01:27:51Under the headings for water resources and supply and wastewater collection treatment and water capacity. The main findings really being that, while I think we're fairly confident in position in terms of potable water from the supply position. There are significant issues in terms of wastewater capacity, which I think we're aware of. Several wastewater treatment works, including Colleton, Honiton, Fluxton, Feniton, Otterton, Maer Lane, and Dunk as well, all projected to exceed or approach their permitted dry weather flow limits post-development and need upgrades or phased developments, whereas there's also particular issues at Maer Lane and Countess Weir that necessitate significant upgrade works and indeed the new wastewater treatment works is required to accommodate future pressures on Countess Weir probably needing to be in the western part of the district.

01:28:49And obviously if we don't have all those issues the consequences for the water environment are quite significant in terms of increased nutrient loading and deteriorating quality of watercourses. So a number of key recommendations that come out of the water cycle study, as I already mentioned, around adopting lower water efficiency standards, monitoring and strictly regulating the abstractions, waste water discharges, phasing development in line with infrastructure coming forward, upgrades and capacity increases, ensuring that new developments that are within the scope of environmental impact assessment regulations, have a detailed assessment of their impact on the water environment and protected habitats, integrating biodiversity-friendly design and restrict development in sensitive coastal and riverine areas, and continue engagement with stakeholders such as Southwest Water Environment Agency, Natural England, all of which I'd like to think we are doing or have integrated into the Local Plan in terms of those recommendations um so the report then goes on to summarize the responses so we've done an initial summary of the responses from third parties um as the report says until we do the final um sort of more detailed feedback report um this is just just an outline

01:30:10But you can see a number of people have commented on these issues um I think you know quite rightly raising issues around wastewater capacity which we're aware of and the need for significant upgrades in in numerous locations um and then we've got the south west waters comments um and those from the environment agency and Natural England um obviously I think particularly those from the environment agency raise a number of very detailed um technical points um which I'm not going to go through in detail, but we've attempted to put a RAG rating next to them in the table that's in the report and provide some commentary as to how significant those concerns are. Only a couple of them have a sort of red rating where they're raising issues that potentially impact on protected species, protected habitats. The amber ones tend to be issues where there's a need for upgrading infrastructure that we're aware of needs to be addressed or there's technical issues with the reports uh the ones in in green are just sort of minor typographical errors or technical issues that can be quite readily addressed so

01:31:26Um I think in some respects it I think it looks worse than it is um but obviously there's some additional work that's needed to ensure that this is a fully robust uh study to accompany the Local Plan but as said earlier I don't think there's anything in this that makes me think that we would need to make any any material changes to the Local Plan itself um it's about getting this piece of work in sort of tip-top condition ready for for submission um I would say that um have sent all of this over to both southwest water and hasconing as consultants and asked for their feedback um I noticed looking at my emails in the five minute break that I have now received a response from ask owning in terms of this but I haven't had a chance to digest it uh in any way to to give you feedback but obviously I hope to take assurance that we have had a response from them um I from what I have seen you know they they accept that there

01:32:22Are some issues that require some some further work that they're willing to do um there are other issues where they're sort of highlighting that um the absence of information being forthcoming from southwest water was a limiting factor uh shall we say in some in terms of some of these aspects of the study uh other things they're saying was sort of beyond their brief and not not part of the work and therefore um the expectations of uh environment agency in particular go beyond the original brief and scope of the study um so that's another factor here as well um waiting for some further feedback from southwest water um and then hoping to have some further discussions and meetings with them about aligning our housing trajectories with their delivery plans in terms of infrastructure improvements to try and ensure that those align so where while we've got provisions in the plan to hold up development if infrastructure isn't forthcoming in time obviously in an ideal scenario we'd have some alignment between their investment program and our housing trajectories coming forward to try and ensure that there is

01:33:25Adequate capacity within their network when the new homes will be coming forward without having to use grampian conditions for example or having to ultimately refuse developments because there isn't adequate capacity so working on that to try and get a use our contacts there to get a clear sort of pipeline of projects that that is in line with our trajectories for housing delivery um so I think those are the headlines from the report um so the recommendations ask members to to note the study and the comments that we've received and that the further work that I've um just outlined and updated you on it in terms of ongoing discussions with southwest water and statutory consultees to try and get to this this common understanding of the position and an agreed approach for how that's dealt with thank you thank you uh mr Freeman um first question from me um and uh reflecting on uh the response uh not only from uh [member of the public] [member of the public] of escape and Exmouth but also a number of other um sources in the public um highlighting that um

01:34:38Storm overflows um and the edm data um that is made publicly available by the environment agency don't feature within the report. I wonder if you could just clarify for us, please, why that is. I will then look to members for further questions. Councillors Barlow, then Collins, then I'll get Mr Freeman to respond and then we'll come back round.

01:35:05Thank you, Chair. In planning, certainly, we are asking for smart water butts to be fitted to houses to try and remove some of the downpour and also help with then the potable water where people usually just water their gardens. Are we enforcing smart water butts or are we just putting in a water butt then? Because I am being told by members of the public that we are just allowing normal water butts, which at the end of the day is pretty pointless because all that does is collect water and doesn't actually put it on.

01:35:37I just wonder if we have any comments on that. Councillor Collins.

01:35:45Thank you, Chair. So, in Honiton, there's a developer, Taylor Wimpey. They're planning to put a planning... They've got a planning application through now at the moment for 300 houses. Now, I understand that that would have a Grampian condition on it because of the sewage. obviously if that happens and that condition is put on they're not going to be happy at all do they have rights to appeal against the Grampian condition and can they overturn it if you put a Grampian condition on thank you ok thank you Mr Freeman and then we'll come back round members um thank you chair so um coming back to your initial question my understanding is the the methodology for water cycle study is based on dry weather flow data fundamentally um so um the storm uh issues are sort of secondary to all of that um a lot of the work southwest water doing as I understand it is to separate out uh surface water flows fundamentally so that they don't go through the wastewater treatment works to unlock capacity within them

01:37:15So that's kind of why that's kind of dealt with separately in terms of the work are we monitoring compliance in terms of water butts I'm not aware of any of the developments where the planning committee have put conditions on in terms of water butts actually being implemented yet correct me if I'm wrong Councillor Barlow to actually get to a position of monitoring compliance with that But in terms of enforcement capacity, it is an ongoing problem in terms of actually monitoring developments taking place because fundamentally our enforcement service is staffed to deal with complaints coming in and issues being raised with us.

01:37:56We don't have the capacity to go out and necessarily check all of the developments that are coming forward. There may be mechanisms for using our building control service where it's a development that is being checked by them. to obviously pick up on these things but where they're not within our control we don't have measures in place to be monitoring compliance with with those specific things so that's so yes that is potentially an issue in terms of that in terms of gramping conditions yes they can any condition can be appealed by by the applicants and could be overturned on appeal um so we'll have to see what happens in terms of that development uh I understand from southwest water that they disagree with the findings of the water cycle study in terms of Honiton's wastewater treatment capacity so that's an ongoing conversation we need to have with them to get to that agreed position that I talk about in the report um because there's some disagreement with some of the findings um but yes in the event that we were minded to grant the taylor wimpy

01:39:00Development and imposed a gramping condition they would have a right of appeal and obviously we'd have to defend our our position um but that could be overturned by an inspector who could then uh resolve that the condition had to be withdrawn okay thank you mr Freeman um I think Councillor Barlow wants to come back and then I'm going to take councillors uh jess bailey and then levine uh before we come back to mr Freeman for more answers Councillor Barlow thank you chair Again, just to add about that point, we see very few, obviously, of the planning permissions that come to the planning committee.

01:39:37Are you putting this, with the water butts, et cetera, on all the houses that come through? Because for every 1,000 houses you put in there, you're talking about half a million litres of water, potentially say, probably more than that. And again, it's the potable water that you would be using to water your garden otherwise. I just think, you know, we make the rules, you need to enforce them, otherwise we're doing great things but then it doesn't happen.

01:40:03So what's the point of making the rules in the first place? Or obeying them, for that matter, if you're not checking them. The cynic in the room.

01:40:13Thank you. Councillor Jess Bailey. Thank you very much. I'd like to ask about the claimed recent upgrades of treatment works at Fluxdon, Autry St Mary, Tapwork and Countess Weir. Have you published the full regulation 19 consultation response by southwest water that's my first question um so uh all of the responses have now been uploaded to Commonplace uh the only thing that's missing I think is where there are attachments so if people have attached a pdf or something to their their comments because we can't add attachments to Commonplace we need to upload those separately but the principal comments will be there yeah I've found Commonplace really difficult so we can go online and actually see what they've said can we so we'll be at the southwest world water comments are in this report the comments are but not the full response and I think the thing that I would say is I'm not clear what their upgrades are know nothing about them have no confidence in them because those treatment works haven't been well certainly some of them

01:41:22Haven't been working so what's the point of doing an upgrade if they haven't been working for years and years, and I think it's really important that we need to be clear about whether they're functioning properly and effectively, as well as any claimed upgrades, and what are those upgrades, because certainly my understanding is that Fluxton's at capacity, we impose a gramping condition as an authority in relation to West Hill planning applications for Windmill Lane and probably Eastfield as well, so I have concerns about kind of what they actually mean by upgrades and whether those treatment works are operating effectively and also the Honiton one I believe that that hasn't been working for quite some time whether it is now I don't know but um I think we need to be really clear on um uh whether they work properly thank you we can certainly ask the question of southwest water company and uh and share the response to that um I've forgotten who I said was next Councillor Levine thank you chair um When I read the Southwest Water Commons about the water cycle study, I thought that I was reading a paper that Sir [member of the public] Appleby was presenting to Jim Hacker.

01:42:41So the question to Ed is, are we embracing a courageous policy by accepting the water cycle study? I think that's probably a question for me rather than for Mr. Freeman. I think it is. A question to you, sir. I think it is quite courageous in the sense that we're the only people in Devon who are bothering to do this. It is our tool as the planning authority for holding Southwest Water to account.

01:43:12So yes, I do think it's brave, particularly seeing as the Environment Agency and Natural England are not exactly covering themselves and glory in their response to it and actually backing us on it. Do I think it's the right thing to do nevertheless? Yeah, absolutely. with that said mr Freeman there were some questions in there for you as well please uh yes so if we come back to cancer barlow's point yeah um I mean I I would need to check what we're doing um in terms of uh water butts on every development I know southwest water regularly make recommendations around uh water butts or um planting beds where your down pipe comes in and it fills into a planting bed or something um so certainly um we are very mindful of water efficiency um and recycling water within the site um and I fully agree with the principle that where we're putting those um requirements in place we need to make sure that they're being delivered but that goes for a lot of things that that we require in in conditions um and comes

01:44:20Back to to our capacity to actually be able to to check on those things realistically um so we we need to consider how how we deal with that because fundamentally we're struggling you know in terms of enforcement capacity just dealing with the complaints that we receive never mind actually proactively going out and monitoring things um but I think that's an issue you're you're aware of and scrutiny committee are are looking at um I think uh coming back to council just bailey's points yeah I mean I think this comes back to having this common understanding um with uh ourselves southwest water Natural England environment agency and we're not there yet um obviously our water cycle study is saying one thing in some some areas southwest water is saying another environment agency are questioning um and somehow we need to get to this common understanding whereby we have an agreed position in terms of all of the waste water treatment works in particular which ones have got capacity which haven't um where they have been upgraded do those upgrades work and is that addressing the capacity issue or actually is

01:45:29There still a capacity issue despite the upgrades um and still some way from getting to that agreed position because well fundamentally everybody's got a different view on it and everybody's got different information at their fingertips I think this is where hasconing are struggling frankly because they can only use the information that's available to them um and if the southwest water have got other information then we need to be able to see that and confirm if that information is is correct because as you say there's that loss of confidence in them so they need to demonstrate to us that what they're saying is is correct so that we can take confidence in that and amend the water cycle study is appropriate so those are the conversations that we need to be having uh or trying to have with southwest water the environment agency in hasconing um it's all taking an incredibly long time I think we commissioned this work about three years ago now um so um it's it's proving very challenging to get to the bottom of all of this um but as

01:46:32Chair says um it's important that we do uh and that we have a proper understanding of this and and we sort these issues out within the limitations of the powers that we have but certainly one of them is is to get to a point of having an up-to-date and accurate motorcycle study to support the Local Plan um so determine that we will get there I think it's possibly worth just adding to that with my portfolio holder hat on um the the the document we have in front of us is is not the be all and end all it's not the end of the story um you know as ed says there is further the work to be done um and the job of actually holding southwest water to account over the findings of um the evidence that we've produced um is a is a big one and will remain an ongoing challenge um but I think it's fair to say it's one we're up for aren't we ed there's a correct answer good excellent thank you um okay uh so I'm going to come around uh councillors davie

01:47:32Faithful and young next please thank you chair um ed it there's a section from southwest water referring to hydraulic versus biological capacity um and um they um talk about storm storm overflow performance um and treatment efficacy basically they say the water study um inadequately considers biological capacity what's the implications of that in terms of storm overflows um and um and does it really matter Councillor Faithfull thank you chair um not wishing to do Brian Bailey or Jeff Jung on you but I'm struggling to separate my questions from my comments so reading through I haven't actually read the document itself in full but having read through the reports there seems to be issues it seems six of one and a half a dozen of the other the some of the water cycle study seems to be in error as is commented by the concept the bodies the various other parties but you read what the parties are saying and some of the things they're saying a complete waffle as well from the Environment Agency they don't seem to know what

01:49:20They're talking about some of the time so I think it's possibly along the lines of work mr. Freeman was just saying how are we going to go about getting to a point where we've got something sound because there's this clear faults in the water cycle study but there's clear errors where the parties are criticizing it that they don't know what they're talking about for example environment agency are claiming that we do not have any winter borns in East Devon. My understanding of a winter born is a seasonal stream. We have just spent I don't know how many millions of pounds on the phenotype alleviation scheme. That is a winter stream. It dries up through the summer and it's bloody well pissing water out through the winter. We spent millions of pounds on that there's other things that the environment agency are claiming that southwest water do not extract water in the upper otter where I can tell you it does can I show you the reservoirs they draw it and feed into so it's like where do we go with all of this

01:50:44We've got so many things conflicting comments that we where do we know when we've got a sound document thank you Councillor Faithfull Councillor Jung I think you were next thank you ed for bringing this report to us I remember many years ago uh you uh suggested that we uh bring this uh get a report done I never imagined it would take so long I never imagined it would be as it is with a lot of holes in it but it is a starting point um the yeah I've got quite a few statements to make uh but my only question is um under portfolios and who's responsible it's got um place infrastructure and planning and its environment nature and climate bearing in mind that the environment operations portfolio liaises with the EA and the Southwest Water and drinking water infrastructure, plus if things go wrong. Yes, we'll tick your box next time, Jeff.

01:52:03I'd like it to be ticked. Thank you. I'm sure Mike has always pointed that out. We'll tick your box next time, Jeff. That's fine. Thank you. Coming back to the actual substantive questions. Mr Freeman yes thank you chair so yes hydraulic capacity versus biological capacity I'll try and then hopefully Todd will dig me out of the hole I'll dig for myself I mean so my limited understanding is so obviously hydraulic capacity is physical capacity to deal with volumes of of effluent or water coming through, whereas the biological capacity would be the actual treatment process and how much it can actually deal with.

01:52:53So I think their point is that the study only looks at the hydraulic capacity, which I think is correct. Looking at the report, that is what it's focused on. I suspect Haskoning will say that that's a result of the data that they've been given, and have they had data on the biological capacity, didn't assess that I think it potentially also comes back to um the methodology for water cycle study which is that the hasconians commission was to do it in accordance with the environment agency's guidance on how you produce a water cycle study and I think that predominantly talks about hydraulic capacity um so I think this comes back to this issue of getting to a common understanding because we've got as the council faithful says different people saying different things and you can't necessarily reconcile them um you know coming coming almost on to council faithful's point I did try and develop a a spreadsheet that had all of the different comments and try and line them up in terms of who was saying what in the hope that some of

01:53:52What southwest water's comments were saying would answer some of the questions that the environment agency had and it didn't work like that unfortunately it turned out to be far more complicated than that um so just trying to line it up I really want to get everyone in the room just bagging their heads together and sort of say just tell me what the answers are here um because it's getting quite frustrating at this point isn't it uh in terms of just trying to understand what is a highly technical issue that frankly I'm not trained or qualified to to deal with um and and yet we've all got into quite a lot of detail and understanding of these issues but we're still still amateurs ultimately we need those that are supposed to know um to tell us um but even they can't seem to agree um so this is this is why the report sort of refers to having meetings and discussions to try and come to some kind of common understanding I hope we can do that in time for that to feed into a sort of final version of the water cycle

01:54:52Study and any additional work if that if additional work is needed to understand the biological capacity then hopefully southwest water got the data and that they can be fed in verified by hasconing and fed into the final report um but I don't know about those further conversations with southwest water and hasconing and environment agency what data exists and how how much they can um take comfort from that um the only other thing I'd say is obviously we did send hasconing away after the initial draft to go and look at issues of capacity particularly with merlane and countess weir uh you recall and in the conversations we had with them there which was about not just understanding the hydraulic capacity but also the biological capacity of those two sites where we knew there were particular issues um I think they were quite clear that they just don't have the data in terms of that so what they did was look up spillages basically and um the record in terms of spills in those locations because that would be arguably evidence of lack of capacity.

01:55:59And so that was the basis upon which they did that further work on those two sites. Ironically, I think the Environment Agency now criticising us for not doing that work for all of the sites and for any pinpointing those two particular sites. So again, maybe there's further work to be done there. But I think that did start to touch on those kind of capacity issues uh again um so further conversations and work to be done to try and get this over the line and address those points I don't know if you want to add anything to that from your experience I I think the only thing possibly that that I would add is um and I I think [member of the public] report says it sort of before you get into that um rag rating table um the the environment agency in particular are nitpicking on a lot of quite precise I I don't want to say small but you know they're they're details um that the ea and Natural England are picking up on um I you know

01:56:59I'll accept there's there's the two red rated ones that we do need to look at but by and large um the statutory consultees aren't saying no your water cycle study is wrong Honiton has capacity fluxton has capacity collison has capacity whatever that they're not they're not saying that far from it they're picking up on excuse me points of detail which yes might give us a better more robust study but isn't necessarily going to change the fundamental conclusions about whether or not there is capacity in the stations that the study is looking at I think that that would be a their comment so you know that the the fundamentals of the work that we've done here still stand we still have an evidentiary document that follows the Environment Agency's methodology pretty much and that is very clear that we have genuine and serious capacity issues many of the sewage treatment stations throughout our district that conclusion fundamentally isn't affected by the criticisms the EA Natural England have set out you know some of the comments from some of our partners in the public you know escape

01:58:09And the auto value Association that the conclusions remain there are still capacity issues about which our development management policies approach needs to do something about which Southwest water needs to do something I remain worried that Southwest waters reaction to the study when asked to comment um by uh bradley gerrard for the civil therald was that they don't recognize these conclusions that that does concern me because ultimately the one entity that can really do something about these capacity issues is southwest water um it also concerns me that the environment agency's response has not been more robust in saying yeah well done hoorah we'll back you um because ultimately they're the regulator who can make southwest water do something about these problems um so you know are there still hurdles for us to overcome yet yes absolutely um but fundamentally I think we have a really good piece of work here which we should be really proud of um yes it could be better yes there's more work to do um but we've taken a really big step with

01:59:16This study um are there further genuine questions or should we go into debate I'm feeling okay Councillor Bailey, is it a genuine question, or do you want to go into bed egg? Okay, very well. Go ahead.

01:59:29Thank you, Chair. Before I put my genuine question, I would like to say I agree entirely on what you've just said. Having said that, I'd like to draw your attention to page 62 of the report, I beg your pardon, yes, 62, Table 5-9, which states and gives you all the details of the overspills for Expo area from 2018 to 2024 which are increasing exponentially according to this report.

02:00:04So my question to Mr Freeman is are we as an authority going to take notice of this report we're not going to be noted but we're going to back up entirely what the chairman has just said, we're going to push and push and push because as this report stands looking at it anyone with any interest in it would think well it's not relevant to build any more houses because the system clearly is not capable of taking the sewage and that is the end of my very short question and thank you for allowing me to take it chair Councillor Faithfull briefly please thank you chair reference the comment about water supply to Malcombe.

02:00:49How do we establish where the water's actually coming into Malcombe from? My understanding of what... Because all we've said about it is it's coming from Wimbleball, but there's a long way between Wimbleball and Malcombe. And from personal experience of speaking to a southwest water engineer who used to work in the sewage, and then he got onto the water supply. What happens at Southwest Water is when they're increasing the supply for the extra houses, they just connect to the old water main and to increase the capacity of the water going through it, they just increase the pressure.

02:01:33And they increase the pressure until the pipes burst. And you get all this water coming out all over the road. So they drop the pressure down just a little bit so that it hadn't well hopefully split it and then it splits further up down the road because it's still got the old pipes so you know we basically we do not have the infrastructure we're making do and bodging around or a certain party is working at bodging around whacking up the pressure on our pipes were never built to take the volume of water they're taking So is there any way we can comment on the comment about whoever, it's an environment agency's observations about water supply to Marlcombe?

02:02:20Yes. So coming back to Councillor Brian Bailey's point in terms of actions, I mean, we are already taking the actions that we can. as I say we've we've taken on board the recommendations of water cycle study and incorporated those into the plan um we've put in a policy that makes it very clear that new homes will not be able to come forward unless there's infrastructure in place and we're uh in terms of live applications putting gramping conditions on where we're not assured that there's adequate infrastructure to ensure that they can't come forward until that is in place uh we've even had I think circumstances through planning committee recently where um you know despite having comments from southwest water to say there is capacity because they don't align with the water cycles to be we're challenging that and we're putting on a put on a condition I think on one uh was it last meeting the one before um you know requiring proof that there is capacity um so we are doing everything we can fundamentally you know we are not the the the body that can um take action

02:03:31Against southwest water you know that's for the environment agency for off what to take action and and deal with southwest water directly our responsibilities in terms of development coming forward in the district ensuring that has adequate infrastructure to support it and and phasing development in line with the infrastructure coming forward all of which we are doing so I don't generally don't see that there's anything more we can be doing aside from using our convening power to convene uh the relevant parties um to try and get to this common understanding and put pressure on southwest water environment agency to to take action to address these issues again all of which I think members are doing through various routes um so I think we're doing doing all we can um the last point's gone out of my mind now um yes um yes so the environment agency I think it raised concerns um about that approach um you you you write it comes from the wimble ball uh water resources zone and then there's infrastructure in between uh that needs

02:04:39To be provided I don't think it's necessarily a concern uh with that approach in terms of the supply I think uh from memory from the environment agency's detailed comments they're talking about what happens if that infrastructure isn't provided, is there a plan B and concerns about the risks associated with it and how that's all been assessed. I found it a rather odd comment because when I looked at the water resources management plan 24 that Southwest Water produced which sets out their investment programme and all of these issues that there is as part of that a risk assessment and the consideration of alternative options within that document um so I did find it a rather odd comment from the environment agency because presumably they know that the water resources management plan exists and has that in it so um that's one of the things I need to pick up with um southwest water in terms of making sure that we've got those documents um and and can send them on to the environment agency with any

02:05:48Other evidence that that supports that um as I say I have been in contact with my contacts at southwest water who's going to provide me with a response to to um a lot of these points that the environment agency have raised because I think a lot of them like that one in particular is essentially a question that environment agency are posing to southwest water via us and if we can get an answer from southwest water that's backed up through their reports and their plan like the water resources management plan then hopefully that can be something that's easily dealt with um but I don't think southwest water um to my knowledge are particularly concerned about issues of water supply to malcombe um I think that's uh been not not specifically marking but increasing water supply to East Devon has been part of their plans for for some time um and and and they have um a program of infrastructure to do that and that's reflected in hasconings findings and southwest waters comments I think it's just the environment agency wanting some reassurance

02:06:49That risks associated with that and alternative options have been considered and I'm confident that exists we just need to put that in front of them we seem to be generating more questions as ed says more things so I will take Councillor Faithfull Councillor Fernley and then we are Councillor How and then we are going to debate 110 this was from last night it's not from today 110 litres per person per day have we got any evidence where do we get it from and how have we got any evidence that that is actually the case because we don't need to have all these houses going up and then find we're needing more than that for the residents um sorry Councillor Face was just throwing me. We know that the EA are going to be reducing the amount of water that is abstracted from the otter, and it's going to be reduced, if what Alan Burrows said on the spotlight session, by 14 million litres a day. I know that they're producing cheddar, and they have ways and means of doing this, but have they told the water cycle study

02:08:03When that this is actually going to happen? Because that was a question that was left unanswered at that meeting because that's a hell of a lot of water which kind of relates to peter's question and I was trying to think how many houses was 14 million liters divided by 110 so um yeah do we know when that's likely to happen that's 127 272.7 2727 272 people mr Freeman sorry Councillor How I'm having a daydream um see I'm not so worried about the water supply they will have to provide it end of story you know and they will provide the reservoir as we know being built in cheddar and the rest of it and the EA is the extractor etc the question I've got for mr. Freeman is about counters we're sewage treatment plant because obviously East Devon is not the only district that puts its sewage that way shall we say we've got Exeter and team bridge both supplying new housing new developments and I know counters we're has a improvement works programs but the last improvement I understand that happened that counters we're took 15

02:09:29Years and I'm sat here today trying to think of three districts effectively two districts and a city that really should be slowing down development in those areas affected particularly counters we're because of the sewage load in the accessory and the harm it is doing to our wildlife a triple SI and everything else so it's a question I've got an open question is how are we talking to team bridge and Exeter about the work we've done to try and get them on side with us as well timbridge next to who didn't bother with the water cycle study of course mr Freeman uh thank you chair uh yes so if you come back to council faithful's comments um I mean I think 110 liters per uh per person per day um I mean this is law to efficiency measures that are in the plan they're not uncommon um I think my own house has restrictions on them to be honest um So, I don't really see it as a big issue.

02:10:37I think it's perfectly achievable. I think it's been achieved at many other locations. And I think this is a common misunderstanding of all of this. We are only talking about new homes having that restriction. We can't retrospectively impose those restrictions on existing homes. So, it's about the new homes coming forward. And there's various measures in terms of the design of the homes to integrate that in. So I'm confident that that's a relatively easy measure to comply with, and it's a voluntary measure under the building regulations, so we can actually check that it's actually put in place and carried out as well.

02:11:18In terms of Councillor Fernley's point, I don't have it in front of me, but I'm pretty sure the Southwest Water Resources Management Plan 24 sets out a timeline for the delivery of the improvements that are needed. I think from memory they were slightly later than we're currently looking to start at Malcombe, but equally I don't know, there will only be relatively small numbers coming through in the early years that may be able to tap into existing.

02:11:48Supply without the need for that immediately um it's not something that's been raised as an issue by southwest water and as I say I think it's just um making sure everybody's got all of the information in front of them but I I think the timeline roughly aligns with what we're talking about in terms of um milking coming forward uh in terms of Councillor Howe's point um there hasn't I mean to be honest there hasn't really been engagement with teambridge and extra on these issues obviously team bridge's plan has been through examination is now adopted so it's too late anyway in terms of team bridge and wars by the time we had the water cycle study in terms of Exeter their plan is currently at examination literally as we speak in their first hearing session they are relying on the 2010 water cycle study that was a joint commission across the area so but they are aware of of of the issues and the work that we've been doing um but again you know their plan is so far progressed there's not a lot uh that can really change I I think the other

02:12:58Thing to say on that is obviously I'm not sure what could have changed realistically given the other constraints across the area um as I said earlier I think um you know you you could make an argument that in in terms of the the infrastructure shortfall that exists in the western part of the district you could make an argument that well we shouldn't be putting growth in the western part of the district but where would we put it the eastern part of the district is all national landscape of numerous other constraints in terms of protected habitats flood zones um etc so the the strategy um couldn't really have have flexed to reflect what's coming forward in terms of the water cycle study um I think this is a point the environment agency raised in terms of the study coming forward quite late in the in the process but as I say we commissioned it three years ago we've had outputs from the commission during that time that has fed into our work so it has informed the Local Plan it's just taken a long

02:14:00Time to get to a final report to publish um and and seek views on um so I think it has informed our work but fundamentally we didn't didn't have the luxury of lots of options to do different things that would impact on uh water infrastructure differently and I suspect particularly Exeter would make that argument um I think I'm right in saying that all of the the sewage generated through Exeter goes to countess weir um so any alternative strategy wouldn't have changed that situation um teambridge perhaps a bit different but um yeah I don't I don't know anything different would have happened um if we had had the report earlier and it and and we had had that further engagement with team bridge next um but certainly I would endorse a joined approach moving forward and we need to take a more joined up approach in future maybe the new unitary authority will will enable that in some way or at least the um the the new spatial strategy across the Devon and Torbay combined county authority because obviously it's quite a strategic issue

02:15:08Ultimately in terms of where housing numbers are attributed and go so I've no doubt this will come in and need to inform that work as well thank you thank you Mr Freeman bringing us into debate then and as usual I'm going to propose the recommendations from the chair just for good order. I have no idea the order in which hands went up so I'm going to come to I see Councillor Collins has his hand very tall at the back so I'll do Councillor Collins then Councillor Blakey who we've not heard from at all yet today and then I'll make an arbitrary decision about who I come to next. Councillor Collins. Thank you Chair. I feel that water authorities throughout the country should be culled got rid of. They don't seem to be serving very much useful purpose, causing no end of problems and pollution. Many countries, the councils run their water services, USA, Canada, Australia USA they collect, well all the sewage they turn into fertiliser they collect all the solids and that is turned into a product which

02:16:44They sell on to people with their gardens and to farmers for growing crops that needs to be done in this country yes so many years ago we had East Devon Water Board that took up the same basically the same area as what East Devon Council covers now and East Devon Council in the early days used to send representatives to East Devon Water Board. That worked perfectly well I can't understand why it was abolished. It was privatisation so we had South West Water and all they do is fleece their customers they have to pay large sums of money just to have water connected and all the rest of it and have their sewage taken away and the money is siphoned off to shareholders bonuses very little money is set aside for investments and this is the trouble they've not invested and kept up with the housing demand and other needs so I think the time has come for them to be abolished and brought back to local control I don't see why this council couldn't run

02:18:09The sewage and the water supplies we've all got local knowledge which I've been hearing all morning all this local knowledge we all know how the sewage works I'm sure we know more about it and what South West water do. It seems to be sensible to come back to local.

02:18:29Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Collins. I was reading something in the Guardian the other week, which was pointing out that the quantum of dividends that have been extracted by shareholders from water companies is about £80 billion since privatisation. And coincidentally, the amount of debt that they've taken on in the same period is also about 80 billion pounds um one does sort of wonder whether that's a coincidence or not um but um notwithstanding that uh we can't nationalize the water boards today so um some sympathy there uh Councillor Collins but um I will move on from that subject um I then said I was going to come to Councillor Blakey didn't I so I will keep my word Councillor Blake Yes, I believe you do. Yes, just to take up on Councillor Collins' point very briefly, Southwest Water is, of course, a limited liability business whose responsibility is entirely to its shareholders.

02:19:29It operates under a charter, but priority number one is to maximise the return in its investors. So as a business model, I think we're all pretty clear that that has failed miserably. um the point that I wanted to make which is I thought about bringing this under questions um but I knew that Councillor Howe would have something to say and it and and the point that he makes is absolutely right which is the big issue here is not fresh water supply um to be fair southwest water are generally quite good at that um our big issue is waste water treatment and removal um and particularly for um I think the the west end of East Devon it is creating a major problem we heard from southwest water recently that uh because the ex estuary is a protected area and an area in which no further deterioration of its environment is permitted um that actually any kind of outfall or new outfall into the estuary won't be allowed, the suggestion being that the waste is taken out to sea for dumping,

02:20:51Which seems to me to be beyond absurd. The danger to the marine environment would be horrific. um so the the point is with southwest water being very reluctant to provide us with detailed information and given their history um leopards don't change their spots and for example um for 14 consecutive years um between 2010 and 2024 southwest water was rated red by the Environment Agency for its performance.

02:21:33I don't know what the figure was for last year, but their performance is obviously absolutely abysmal. Do we really have any confidence that they're going to improve? They seem to spend a fair amount of effort making a lot of noise about the intentions, but I don't think we're seeing anything concrete actually happening. So my concern is that our new Local Plan is actually going to be scuppered by a company over which we have no actual control.

02:22:15And without some kind of government intervention, we're not going to be able to deliver the new housing that's required because, simply, there will not be sewage infrastructure sufficient to deal with the outpourings that will follow. And I'm afraid that's coming across as a moment because I don't have a solution to offer, but it is an observation. I think it's a fair point that actually we need the Environment Agency and Ofwat and all of the others and whatever this new water regulator that the government is proposing to actually back us.

02:22:51And give some more weight and put some more spiky bits on the stick that we have built for ourselves. It's a fair concern. My arbitrary decision is that... Councillor Parr, was that a hand from you that I saw? Yes, Councillor Parr.

02:23:09Thank you. How is this study going to be highlighted in the Local Plan? Is it just going to be in the list of references at the bottom? It really should be prominent, part of the introduction even. Looking at the conclusion of this report, I don't know the page number, but under key recommendations and conclusions, there's some excellent wording. I just think that people reading the Local Plan need to know that it must be read with this water cycle study, which does ensure that future growth is achieved without detriment to the environmental assets of our district.

02:24:05I think Ed is furiously doing a control F in the document. But we can certainly take that point and have a look at how prominently we make reference to it. I'm going to come to Councillor Jess Bailey, as she has spoken less than everybody else who wants to speak.

02:24:24Thank you very much. I think the issue is how, as a committee, do we address this? Well, particularly with regards, for me, Southwest Water, when confidence is at an all-time low in Southwest Water and all other water companies. And what I would like to do is make our recommendation more robust, if we can. How do we, when they say things like, you know, the sewage treatment works have been upgraded, how do we have any confidence?

02:25:04I know that Ed's going to, [member of the public] going to go back and speak to them, but can we not develop, and I don't know how we do it, a policy that requires for every application, I know they're not a statute of consultees, but can we not require them to evidence, provide us with evidence, so that we're not just building more and more houses, putting intolerable pressure by generating more and more sewage that can't be processed.

02:25:31I just don't quite know how we can link this cycle, water studies cycle, with requiring evidence-based decision-making by a future planning committee, because that's what we ultimately want to do. We want to stop houses being built when the sewage cannot be treated properly. And so how do we do that? We've got an opportunity to say something. Can we not put a policy in to make it more robust when actually we're being given kind of general kind of, oh, yes, we're upgrading.

02:26:06Well, we need to be clear on how they're going to upgrade, how we're going to make evidence-based decisions. There's hundreds, thousands of properties across the district, everywhere. I mean, it's everywhere, isn't it? It's affected by the sewage treatment works to a greater or lesser extent. So that's my question to Ed. Well, kind of question and comment. Mr. Freeman, I think it would be fair to say we do already ask for that evidence now as part of the DM process, don't we?

02:26:42Yeah, so I mean, I think now that we've got the water cycle study, what's been happening is obviously um we've been having some regard to that in terms of decision making and particularly where the comments from southwest water don't align with the findings of the water cycle study we've been going back to southwest water and challenging them and sort of saying you know you've not objected to this application but our water cycle study says there isn't capacity in this location you know what gives um and asking them for evidence and think this came up at um planning committee last time uh or it might have been the meeting before um where you know the committee was sort of saying you know well we understand there are capacity issues in this location but surface water haven't objected um and the committee resolved to to um trying to think it was I think it was delegated authority to me to go back to them to to ask and find out and if we weren't satisfied with we were to put the gramping condition on

02:27:39Um so we are going through that process I don't I don't want to do that in the long term if we can avoid it I'd rather get to a joint understanding as to what capacity there is in these locations and have this pipeline so we can see you know our trajectories show this level of growth coming forward in honington for example over the planned period at this point in time southwest water are going to need to put more infrastructure in place and they've got an aligned plan that shows them putting that infrastructure in place so we can we can see and there's a clear narrative for each wastewater treatment works that's going to take time and a bit of communication and toing and throwing I suspect that it's probably not going to be resolved in in the next few weeks at least so in the meantime I think we do need to do that challenging and understand and I think southwest water are engaging in that and and and providing us with that information but uh time will tell on

02:28:34That um but yeah it's I think it comes down to that good communication and working together with them to get to the truth fundamentally can I come back on that please because I I think that's a really that's a kind of enough that's a that's a fair comment but I think it doesn't reflect the reality that a we have any confidence in what we're being told at any given time by southwest water and b it's dependent on their assets working properly which we know that they don't so I don't believe that we can effectively put in place a kind of policy that um that will address those two points and I think that every planning application should be assessed on the at that point in time whether the sewage there is capacity and also whether there is whether it's working effectively because they don't half the time as far as I'm aware yeah just just quickly on that I think I think the work on the water cycle study that has going to have done though

02:29:34Demonstrates the difficulty of this is is that in a lot of cases southwest water are the only ones that seem to have the information about um their upgrades and how efficiently they're working um and while I understand you know we don't have the council doesn't have confidence in southwest water I think we need to somehow build up some trust because I think we are ultimately reliant on the information they give us to some extent you know a lot of the issues with the water cycle study have arisen from hasconing struggling to get information from southwest water um but you know there are elements of the water cycle study where it is hasconing reviewing that information and uh making assumptions based on that information because we don't have a third party it's their infrastructure it's their information on its efficiency that they're working I don't think anybody's got comparable information to to um to verify what southwest water are telling us so to a certain extent we have to take it on trust that what they're telling us is accurate I don't like it any more than you do Councillor Bailey

02:30:42Um paula thank you chair um I'm going to go back to um something Councillor Howe said having just completed my water literacy training I think the future water shortage problems are as great as the sewage problems it just isn't as topical yet and I don't think we should dismiss the problem as easily as Councillor Howe and Councillor Blakey did we've got huge water pressures coming up with climate change increasing in housing development the numbers the amount of people that come and visit our area so please don't dismiss it I agree sewage is absolutely up there and needs to be sorted but we have got problems coming our way I I think in in fairness you're probably you're not going to find disagreement that there are problems equally I think it would be fair to say southwest water has in in fairness to them which sort of hurts my soul slightly but they have set out a pretty clear strategy about how they're going to mobilize the resources that that they need and yes fine we need to make sure that they follow through on that um yes you may and we

02:32:10All have our own part to play in this with the amount of water that we use it's not just what southwest water do thank you paula the green has spoken um and we have listened okay uh the arbitrary Councillor Picker uh has now chosen Councillor Jung Thank you. Very good choice. Yeah, just covering a couple of points. Councillor Collins was talking about changing the water company's model.

02:32:45Unfortunately, the government white paper has said that, in fact, They want to make it more investable rather than dispose of the model. Just covering a point from Councillor Bailey, there is a pollution incident on the otter today. I don't know how serious it is, but it does seem to be very odd that yesterday was a beautiful day and today we've got a sewage problem on the author.

02:33:24When I look at biological capacity, I read treatment capacity. And what we need to understand is what the quantity is going into the sewage works. Also, we need to understand what is coming out of the sewage works. how well treated that is or is it treated at all that that's that's very difficult and when we look at sewage works we should be looking at the sewage infrastructure because it's not the sewage works that's been failing at Exmouth it's the sewage infrastructure that's been failing. Now on to the nitty-gritty. There has been a lot of criticism that the water report has come late to this party. A lot of comments on that from residents. Actually, the Local Plan is about where to site these silly number of dwellings that we are compelled by government to provide, and therefore it's not actually Southwest Water to dictate where it is safe to build, but it's actually us, the local planning authority, that decide where best to place these developments, and then it's down to the infrastructure, like National Grid, who've

02:34:52Also got problems, Gas, they've also got problems, Southwest Water, to provide the services for a long-term strategy a Local Plan is the first building block and comes before the required infrastructure regarding 5.2 of the report why not involve the EA on 5.2 it says at this stage we would not envisage seeking any further changes to the plan which I totally agree with however at submission there is the option for the council to identify a series of suggested main modifications to the plan this is talking about Southwest water infrastructure it would not be the council changing the plan rather it would be the council recommending to the appointed inspector the the merits is seen to be making selected changes and asking that the inspector recommends back to the council that the listed changes can be made.

02:36:10Why should it be this council? As I believe it's the Environment Agency that should be the body that makes any recommendations to the Local Plan on the basis of water and sewage drainage implications. They are the police of the water industry. They should be doing that work, or we should be working with them. At the moment, they seem to be just criticising us for doing a report that actually was...

02:36:41It was them that should be doing that report. It's not down to us to hire skilled specialists to look at a report. Therefore, I'm happy with recommendation one, that members note the water cycle report and the comments received. But I would like to change the second one, and my suggestion is that members note the further work that is ongoing with Southwest Water and statutory consultees to develop a common understanding of the position in terms of water infrastructure in the district and the impacts of the Local Plan.

02:37:31Sorry, that's the one that is, that's the current one. Yeah, but my alternative is that members note that further work is required with the Environment Agency and other stakeholders to work with the commercial provider of Southwest Water. to agree the current position of the district-wide water infrastructure in relation to the current failures and to ensure safe and environmental safeguards are put in place for the duration of the Local Plan and the long-term future for East Devon?

02:38:14No, I was just going to say, I heard it. I didn't get the chance to write it all down. If members are minded to agree that word, and I think it's sensible to read it out again before they vote, and also if we can have a copy at the top table please thank you very much oh yeah just a moment were there any other speakers while we just write this up I'm Councillor How

02:39:22Thank you uh chair I'm slightly stumped by what um castle young said but at the same time I wanted to pick up the point about the ea and this is the trouble we are trying to do ea's job and when you look at appeals up and down the country it is virtually impossible to refuse planning unless the ea has put in an objection on sewage and all the other constraints we have And that's the fundamental issue. Without the EEA behind us, this report, to me, I'm trying to think of a good expletive now because the wrong one is going to come out, isn't a lot of...

02:40:03Now expletives. Well, no, yeah. It's a great report, but it is just that. It's a report that won't actually achieve much. and that's a really hard thing to say at this minute in time because it shows what we all knew I suppose is the best way to put it but the EA needs to now act on it and I just want to know how we can sit down with the EA particularly and try and encourage them work with them to use the permits and everything else they've got in their power to assist us and the whole of Devon effectively to get a better result for everybody?

02:40:43And I suppose that's an open question to Mr. Freeman and the Chair. I've been talking to people in Oxfordshire who represent WASP, and they've been very involved with the Environment Agency, obviously there. And the Reading Local Plan is being discussed at the moment with the inspector. And I was amazed at the support that WASP has had from the environment agency there. The environment agency have been told to quieten down, not to make any noise, but they are continuing to.

02:41:38And they have done a really good support for the Reading plan and they've pointed out that actually the information that Thames Waters has provided them is totally incorrect and there is pollution obviously around the Reading area. So one part of the Environment Agency is helping and this area doesn't seem to be supporting us and I think we need to get their support. Councillors Faithfull and then Levine.

02:42:17Thank you, Chair. Looking at these recommendations, is this assuming that we're accepting the water cycle study as is? Because, I mean, there was comments by the Environment Agency and other parties. So do we accept the document as it is? and then or is there any room to change anything in that because I'm struggling with the recommendations peter are saying that we note the water cycle study and the comments received but as part of that we're also noting that the report is saying further work is ongoing you know it's it's just a note we're not saying we're adopting the water cycle study as as final or anything like that it's we're noting where we are um and the report is quite clear further work will still be ongoing so this this is saying further work in on the water cycle study will go yes Councillor Levine can we go for a vote so I I mean I I think councillors jung and bailey have highlighted a desire to make this recommendation the second recommendation a little bit more robust particularly

02:43:37In relation to the role of the environment agency and the need for enforcement and mr Freeman wasn't quite happy with some of the last parts of the wording that Councillor Jung has presented to us with and so I've improvised slightly a rewording of Jeff's rewording and that I thought I would float which I also have written in a digital format that I can actually share with colleagues so my suggestion would be if members are minded to alter the second recommendation that we make it as follows that members note that further work is required with the Environment agency and southwest water to agree a common understanding on the current position of east evans water infrastructure particularly in relation to current areas of infrastructure capacity failures and the environment agency's responsibility for enforcement to ensure appropriate environmental safeguards are put in place I think that brings out the environment agency enforcement point um that we've sort of been dancing around a little bit um I are well I made the proposals in the first place so I I have the power um so unless I see any dissent

02:44:45Um I will um I'll amend my earlier proposal uh to have recommendation one as written and recommendation two as I've just set out um any further comments on that please say no I'm hungry no okay in which case then I will take us forward to a vote on those two recommendations recommendation one is as set out in your papers would members like me to read recommendation two again yeah okay so recommendation two to read that members note that further work is required with the environment agency and southwest water to agree a common understanding on the current position of east devons water infrastructure particularly in relation to current areas of infrastructure capacity failures and the environment agency's responsibility for enforcement to ensure appropriate environmental safeguards are put in place are we all clear what we're voting on Councillor Fitzgerald is laughing Councillor How has his hand up and so does Councillor Davey Councillor How because of that phraseology you've used shouldn't we be including Natural England in that equation as well Natural England aren't the regulatory body though the environment agency are you're right but they also have a remit

02:46:02Regarding wildlife particularly in our rivers and everything else and as such the pollution is actually concerned to them and some of their comments in our water cycle report we could come up with a very long list of people to put in this recommendation I'm happy to add environment agency comma Natural England comma and southwest water fine but we could spend an awful lot of time putting a long list of long laundry list of stakeholders into this when effectively it's not going to change fundamentally what we're saying in this which is that we note that further work is required and particularly from the Environment Agency who need to get their act together fundamentally that is what this amendment says I'm minded to just take us to a vote unless there are serious objections quickly only and well couldn't that be covered by other statutory consultees just to make sure that we are including everyone and also aren't we missing the the second part of recommendation to on the future that we seem to be concentrating on the present in that recommendation rather than

02:47:21Looking at the implications of the Local Plan on water resources and how and when these will be addressed I feel that needs to be in there because that is the nitty-gritty isn't it is you know are they going to have capacity when development comes forward there you go members revised to take into account Councillor Davey's suggestions

02:49:36All we've done is broken it out into two sub clauses so the one is the wording that I previously said and the two has reference to the water resources that Councillor Davey has just highlighted good we're all happy now okay that is recommendation two uh which I'm proposing from the chair recommendation one is as set out in your papers is everybody clear please on what we are voting on I see no objections uh so I will take us uh can we just go back to the camera please wendy I will take us to a vote all those in favor please are the recommendations as set out that is unanimous thank you very much members that only took us an hour and a half uh very good um we are now going to break for lunch uh shall we say half an hour folks amenable to that in which case we will resume at a quarter past one thank you members

00:00:23Are we ready? Be quiet, Geoff. Olly. Thank you. Good. Welcome back, members. I hope you enjoyed your lunch. We pick up where we left off with Agenda Item 9, Cranbrook Category 4 Infrastructure Contributions. Mr. Freeman.

00:00:44Thank you chair excuse me so um this report um is seeking members agreement to a proposal for how we um undertake bidding and assess bids uh for what's called category four infrastructure at Cranbrook and if you're wondering what category four refers to um in the Cranbrook plan we break down infrastructure delivery into four different categories uh so category one is physical infrastructure to be provided by all developments so that's things like open space biodiversity net gain etc which is requirements of all parcels then category two is contributions necessary from all developments towards things like SANGs delivery off-site habitat mitigation travel planning etc category three relates to infrastructure which is site-specific so this is where developers are delivering infrastructure in full such as schools road improvements sports pitches etc and then category four is infrastructure for which contributions are necessary for the proper functioning of the expansion areas so this is basically equalizing out the costs to individual parcels and developers to make sure that it's it's fair among all the developers in terms of what they're contributing and then these

00:02:00Monies are pooled in terms of category four infrastructure projects which are identified in the plan um and uh they're also listed in the report uh in terms of what those are intended to be so this is um the health and well-being hub sustainable transport enhancements extra care provision etc and what this report is seeking to do is um now that we're granting consents for the expansion areas and we see them coming forward shortly and some money's being paid in relation to them is setting out a framework whereby decision-making could take place in terms of attributing funds to specific projects and bids could come in for those projects as they become ready to be delivered so that we can start funding those projects and start to see some delivery so what the process that's set out in this report is basically based on the seal process that we went through last year in terms of seal projects in terms of potential bidding processes the exception in terms of the bidding process is that it would be a bit more open-ended a bit more

00:03:06Flexible because depending on particular projects where they've got to might be opportunities for for bids to be made on a more frequent basis and then in terms of the assessment of those bids again we've used similar criteria and processed as as for sill to to ensure that we're fairly considering those proposals with regard to the criteria that's set out in paragraph 16 in relation to their eligibility the need for the project value for money and deliverability so this framework this process has been considered uh previously by the Cranbrook placemaking group both at the end of last year and in february and the intention is that they would effectively take on a similar role to the seal working group in terms of considering bids and advising the the committee but ultimately the decisions would need to be made by Strategic Planning Committee so Strategic Planning Committee is recommended to agree the proposed criteria and processes set out in the reports and to recommend that it be adopted by cabinet that's pretty much what the recommendation says I was going to read it but not quite exactly what it says but it's a

00:04:24Recommendation to cabinet that the mechanism for the allocation category four infrastructure as an appendix one is uh agreed and adopted thank you thank you mr Freeman questions please strictly about the process in this that set out in this report um today is not the day to be covering wider issues about infrastructure at Cranbrook please this is about the process of allocating category four infrastructure funds with that said councillors jung then faithful Thank you, Chair. An impressive list and impressive amount of money. Who decides the shopping list? I understand it's through the place-making group, but how much input does Cranbrook Town Council have on this?

00:05:14I think I'd be right in saying the shopping list is as set out in the Cranbrook plan. Am I wrong, Mr. Freeman? no that's correct that's already been prescribed in terms of the Cranbrook plan and obviously the town council form part of the place making group so they would have a role in that but it's alongside East Devon District Council Devon County Council as a partnership group council faithful thank you chair sustainable transport enhancement six minutes what is what is the sustainable transport enhancement look like that needs six million pounds because they've got 24-hour bus service I don't know how much more okay we've had the question mr Freeman please yeah so there's a whole series of improvements I mean I have to remember this is for the expansion areas so obviously the bus services serve the consent the consented and constructed parts of Cranbrook those need to be expanded out into the expansion areas um so it could be bus improvements could be cycling routes improvements along the London Road etc so there's a whole

00:06:20Range of projects that make up that six point three seven eight million I don't have the details in front of me but happy to point you to them if you're interested any further questions please members Councillor Jess Bailey every really big figures I'm interested to know how it's been decided that that's the appropriate amount fire station blue light facility financial contribution 1.4 million what's that contribution towards and library fit out that's for a library where is it please so again I believe this was all decided through the crown book plan but I'll refer to mr. Freeman yes so there's a long history to all of this through the Cranbrook plan so like these these figures come through the infrastructure delivery plan for Cranbrook so these were figures that were set at that time so it's all in that's linked so may well be higher in some cases now in some cases funding is coming from other sources so I think the fire station I think that's the residual funding gap but I think there is also ready some

00:07:44Funding secure for that so it's quite a complex picture I'm afraid um library fit out for example that is just the fit out the building um and everything else is incorporated into other contributions elsewhere from memory um so that is literally just a fit out um I did question that seemed a lot um but I think it takes into account things like computers and um you know gates entrances and definitely books yes but obviously the shelving and everything else so they have I mean obviously a lot of the costs have come from the infrastructure provider so in the case of library fit out that's come from DCC presumably based on their experience and costings elsewhere any further questions about the process that is set out please no okay in which case I'll move us to debate then and I'll propose again from the chair the recommendation as it is set out in your papers does anybody wish to speak Councillor You it's more than another question is um do you keep all the money until you spend it on the first item and then work down or how

00:09:10How does spending um uh is how is it decided or do you know do you start with item one do it item two do it when you get the money so on I mean it's similar to the issue that that members would have experienced in terms of sill of obviously you've you've got competing priorities in the sense you've got the priorities that are set out on the table of some of these items are critical priority one projects some are important projects but equally some might be available to deliver earlier than others so there needs to be some flex in terms of what's available to be delivered at a given point in time versus the overall priorities whilst also being mindful that you don't want to be necessarily spending everything that's coming in because you might want to save up for some of the bigger projects you know you could deliver a lot of the smaller important projects but then get to a point where you've never got the money for their well-being hub for example so this is part of the role I think of the

00:10:16Placemaking group in considering those competing priorities when opportunities to spend come to them in terms of well we might have this project that's all set ready to go but do we want to spend all the money on on that or do we need to keep some back for this project that might be available to go next year or year after um so that's really the role of the placemaking group is to consider those competing priorities and make recommendations to to the committee in terms of how they would see that spent anything further members council faithful well mr chairman I'm not sure the conversations I've had reference the library through libraries unlimited we seem to be spending the money on the the building but it doesn't look like there's going to be any any staff there so that's not really about the process that we're talking about here though Peter it in this process will this wait until there's definitely somebody to operate the library or how where does it fit into all of that I don't know I

00:11:31Simply don't know what what DCC's plans are in terms of the library as to whether not I mean it may not even be manned I know some libraries are unmanned um so we don't have those details at this stage but they will come forward in due course but but to be clear this paper is about the process by which we allocate the category four contributions that we receive it's not about specifically what the items of infrastructure in that list are Councillor Bailey Peter oh sorry thank you is it about the process or are we actually saying that those are the figures so the figures have already been decided they're in the Cranbrook plan that's what's set out in the development plan we are deciding here on the process for allocating the money that comes in to the projects that get put in front of the group but then we don't have the scoring mechanism we've got a template sorry I don't understand so appendix two is the assessment criteria that's right so is the actual scoring oh I see one two so presumably somebody's completed those forms

00:13:00Somewhere and then evaluated how they fit in as a priority is that what's happened So the Appendix 2 that you see there is the pro forma that officers would use when bids came in for the Category 4 money, so that the priorities that you see in the paper itself, and again, correct me if I'm wrong, I believe those are the ones that are set out in the Cranbrook plan.

00:13:25There's then a process set out here in the paper through which those are reappraised on a regular basis um and then when when bids come in when we actually have a bidding round the appendix two document that you see there is what gets filled out at that point for us to assess the bids against each other so the bids haven't come in no understand so category one project so is there some sort of time scale of when they're going to get developed out in the category two do we know something no and it's it's not well each individual project probably will have but that that's that's not that's not for today we're here to approve the process by which bids can come in we can assess them and decide whether or not they get money I appreciate there may be questions about the specific projects that are listed in here but they're not please for today there are any comments on the recommendation that's in front of us any further comments no okay in which case I will take us forward please to a vote

00:14:37The recommendation is as it is set out in your paperwork all those in favor please I make it ten those against and those abstaining one abstention okay that is carried then mr. Freeman agenda item ten please thank you chair so this report relates to Habitat Regulations non infrastructure contributions members will hopefully be familiar with the contribution that we collect towards the accessory and East Devon Pilbed heaths in relation to the joint mitigation strategy between ourselves Exeter and Teembridge that seeks contributions through a mixture of non infrastructure and infrastructure contributions so the infrastructure element is basically taken from our seal the non infrastructure elements which is what this report refers to is is collected outside of sill and generally through section 106 agreements or section 111 agreements or unilateral undertaking with the developers so this is a long-standing process since we established the joint approach at the time of the last Local Plan effectively and so we have current charging schedule which is set at at paragraph 2.4 in table 1, where we have contributions per dwelling of £170.81 for the X,

00:16:10£196.81 for the Pell-Bed Heaths on their own, and where development is in the zone that impacts on both sites, it's £367.62 per dwelling. Members will recall the new strategy that accompanies the new Local Plan and has been worked up with um teambridge and Exeter uh for proceeding with mitigation of impacts of development on on the uh protected sites um there's a number of uh additional proposals within that not least additional staff resource including uh additional wardens uh additional SANGs officer to ensure that we're delivering and designing up and delivering SANGs that all adds to the costs of of this strategy quite substantially so actually particularly in terms of these non-mitigation sorry non-infrastructure elements so you'll see at table three in paragraph 2.7 the revised non-infrastructure habitat mitigation charges which are now proposed which take those to 790 pounds and 41 pence for the x 804 pounds and 64 pence for the heaps and 825 pounds and 41 pence for both um so a substantial increase on the existing charges but necessary to deliver the strategy as I say um lots of additional resource needed um that

00:17:36Reflects the fact that through operating the strategy for the last what is it 10 15 years I think it is um you know we realized that those costs were quite substantially underestimated previously um and that we do need additional results I think particularly the SANG officer to ensure that we are delivering SANGs um in in good time um so the recommendation is that the committee adopts these revised charges um and that we put those in place uh for new developments coming forward and received after the first of april this year thank you questions Councillor Jung, Councillor Faithfull, Councillor Dave.

00:18:17As I sit on the Habitat Mitigation Committee, and I'm chair of it at the moment, do I need to declare an interest on the Habitat Mitigation Strategy? Have you actually used the idea of that up there as well? Yeah. Okay, so for the benefit of the record, Jeff, do you want to just declare your interest?

00:19:56Yes, I'm on the committee for the HAPIDAP, what is it? It's the Southeast Devon HAPIDAP mitigation, and I'm chair of it at the moment. So that is an? Exactly. An effects and prejudicial non-registrable interest.

00:20:20Thank you. thank you um so Councillor Jung has confirmed uh he um well do you want to speak now and then hold your peace jeff okay thank you Councillor Faithfull then Councillor Davey thank you chair assuming these figures have been fixed from however long I forget I did see a date somewhere should we perhaps be doing this on a more regular basis because there seems to be an enormous empty hole where the money should have been possibly if we kept up with inflation Councillor Davey thank you um the current contributions are added together for the excess jury and the Pebblebed Heaths if a development is going to impact on both But the proposed one just has a sum that's slightly raised above each individual one.

00:21:23So assuming that development is going to impact on both, how will that work in allocating funding to the respective bodies? and what's the rationale for just having a slightly raised one where there's an impact on both. Any takers for a third question before I come to Mr. Freeman? No, okay. Charlotte. Sorry, Councillor Fitzgerald.

00:21:57Thank you. Just to clarify, this is in addition to site-specific contributions that they'll be making, presumably, and will it apply to all homes across the district thank you uh thank you chair um so yes going back to council faithful's point um should it be regularly regularly reviewed um yes so there was a review so these these charges are index links but also um they were reviewed how many years ago six or seven years ago off the top of my head um so they have gradually gone up over time this is a big step up because of the revised strategy um which as I say has um identified a need for additional uh wardens and the SANGs officer and it's it's it's those additional costs arising from that that put up the prices so much um but yes you're right it does need reviewed on a regular basis we have done some reviews in the past but the step change this time perhaps illustrates a need for more regular reviews which can certainly take away an action in terms of Councillor Davey point my

00:23:17Understanding is the reason why the both contribution this time is not markedly more than the individual ones is because the additional resource is across both sites so if you're paying for a SANGs officer it's um it's the same SANGs officer whether it's Pebblebed Heaths or accessory so you only effectively pay once so it's not markedly more for for the both and I think this is probably a more equitable way of of doing it than than previously um but obviously it will pose challenges in terms of then disaggregating out that money into what goes where but ultimately it's going to the same mitigation whether or not it's accessory or pebble beds in most cases um and then um in terms of council fitzgerald's point so so yes these are per dwelling charges uh that will be sought through uh either section 106 agreement a unilateral undertaking or section 111 agreements um they effectively developments will also pay sill and then we cream off a proportion of sill which plays the infrastructure element of the mitigation strategy so they're effectively paying two different elements through different

00:24:28Routes because you can only spend sill on infrastructure and yet part of the math the strategy relates to costs that are non-infrastructure so we have to collect those outside of sill is it's the issue so that's why it's it's operating the way it is um and it's it's not all homes in the district so it's when they're within 10 kilometers of the excess tree or the Pebblebed Heaths um which is quite a lot of the district um but it's it's not all of it it doesn't extend uh for example for much further east and sydma from memory um but but certainly the western half of the district is is all within that zone thank you mr Freeman any further questions okay uh in which case I will take us into uh debate then uh and uh as is now becoming my habit uh proposed from the chair uh the recommendation as it is set out in your report does anybody wish to speak please no okay uh oh Councillor Fernley your microphone please I thought council young

00:25:42Was going to say this but and this report should really be in our portfolio as well because it says it's in noted okay uh in which case then I will take us to a vote on the recommendation as it is set out in front of you please members uh all those in favor that is 10 because we are missing jeff who is not voting okay in which case then that's unanimously carried uh thank you very much members uh which brings us to uh our final report of today which makes it sound like it's going to be a short one uh I suspect it isn't uh because ladies and gentlemen another christmas gift from the government uh to the planning profession last year uh agenda item 11 response to proposed reforms to the national national planning policy framework and other changes to the planning system december 2025 what a title to that report mr Freeman I hope it lives up to it um I don't know that it will but um so um what I've tried to do in this report is

00:26:54Is summarize the consultation and in our normal format to provide the questions and then a proposed response in this case the consultation document runs to 123 pages there's then the new draft mppf itself uh which is uh an ever growing tome and then there were 225 consultation questions uh in the consultation so we've tried to provide answers to all of those that are relevant to east evan you'll see we skip the ones that relate to green belt because there isn't any green belt within 100 miles of here so um uh sadly yeah um so uh so we haven't bothered responding to those uh we can if if members are so minded um to to summarize the the the consultation um I think there's sort of structural changes to the document and then there's the policy changes so structurally the document um there's lots of changes to the structure and style of the document that don't affect content but obviously they've restyled it into more of a Local Plan style documents with specific policies across themed chapters which tries to make it more structured

00:28:08And easier to follow and understand and then they've broken down the policies into plan making policies and decision making policies so there's that clear distinction which does address an issue that we have come across in the past where applicants with planning permission have tried to interpret policy guidance that's about plan making and adapt it to suit their circumstances in terms of a particular application when it was quite clear in our minds anyway that it was about guiding plan making rather than decision making.

00:28:38So I think that's a useful distinction that's now in there. They haven't gone as far as introducing national development management policies, which you might recall was talked about but they have introduced national decision-making policies which is not far off the same thing so rather than it being stated as text within paragraph they're actually identified specifically as policies and given a reference number which will aid referencing in terms of decision-making reports so in the past you will have seen reports going to planning committee that refer to paragraph x or or y of the NPPF we've now got a specific policy reference that we can refer to which should make that slightly easier um other key changes um there's rather than a presumption in favor of development a sustainable development sort of being invoked in certain circumstances there's sort of blanket presumption in favor a suitably located development and there's issues around trying to support densification in urban areas looking at low density plots and upward extensions in field development to try and increase densities where that's appropriate there's this introduction of what they're calling medium

00:30:01Sites sites of 10 to 49 homes or sites of a land area of up to 2.5 hectares but are talking about having explicit um requirements in terms of uh these smaller or medium sites to try and bolster the role of self and custom build um small and medium size enterprise builders etc by having lower requirements in terms of information that's needed to support those applications potentially lower requirements in terms of biodiversity net gain and seal charging and things like that to try and encourage small and medium-sized builders in particular it seeks to more strongly embed the predict and provide approach to transport planning that's been talked about but perhaps not as strongly embedded in policy previously and talks about securing a diverse mix of homes and puts measures in place to try and support that in terms of there's consultation around minimum requirements in terms of mandatory social rent minimums, perhaps suggested as a minimum of 10% on major developments, and requirements about potentially a national minimum in terms of accessible and adaptable homes.

00:31:26So this part M4-2 of the building regulations and the suggestion around at least 40% of new housing being built to that requirement. Another key feature is around supporting development around railway stations. So a sort of default yes for housing mixed-use development around railway stations at proposed mandatory minimum densities you'll see there's quite a lot of commentary on that in terms of our response it talks in terms of well-connected stations where they've got a frequent service into a main city but obviously you know in some circumstances you've got stations at quite rural villages in in those locations so uh raises some some questions for us I think um I think those are sort of the main changes to sort of draw your attention to um there's a huge amount in this uh naturally it's just 225 questions um but hopefully the report uh helpfully summarizes the key points and proposes responses to those questions that uh would reflect the views um of the council based on previous discussions we've had um but happy to take any questions or comments and we can make any revisions as members see fit to the

00:32:50Responses as we go but the recommendation is that members note the consultation and its contents and agree the proposed responses are set out in the report thank you deep breath members questions please Councillor Levine's the most enthusiastic so this is a tremendous piece of work I don't know how many hours of officers' time has gone into preparing it. There are going to be at least 150 other submissions from other councils to the department of whatever it is looks at it.

00:33:31What are the chances that anybody is going to look at what we've got to say? Councillor Davey, before Mr. Freeman comes back. Okay, sorry about this, Ed. I've got four questions. question 43 on page 63 how much weight is proposed to be given to the reuse of buildings and materials and will it ensure that demolition is a last resort chapter 6 question 48 on page 68 could we be a bit more robust in challenging the target driven assessment of housing need and suggest that it It's based on our own assessment of need.

00:34:27I don't think targets are a good idea in any case. They're never a good idea. We've been accused of outcome-driven planning already. Well, what other alternative do we have when the government is requiring outcomes? And similarly, question 53 on page 70, could we challenge the five-year housing land supply requirement? on the grounds that it leads to poor decisions and speculative applications, which otherwise wouldn't have a chance of being approved, but developers try it on because we've got to apply the tilted balance.

00:35:07And finally, I couldn't see anything in this about any measures to deter land banking. I know we've said it's not a big issue in this area, but it is in some areas, and I just wonder if there's anything in here about land banking.

00:35:25Thank you. Those are my four questions. And I've got to go about 2 o'clock, which is why I wanted to get them in.

00:35:31Thank you. We'll come back to Mr. Freeman now, as that's quite a chunky bit. Mr. Freeman. Well, I'll just start with Councillor Levine's question. I mean, the first thing to say is I have said at the start of the report that we did use AI to produce some of this. because there are only so many hours of office time I'm willing to dedicate to something that may or may not be read and understood and make any change at government level.

00:35:59So the summaries of what's in the consultation are pure AI. We used AI to do an initial draft of the responses to the questions and then I distributed it around the team for people to feed in their thoughts. And I did do a sense check of it so that I don't think there are any AI hallucinations that have made it into the final version but there's some very interesting ones that came out that I had to take out um so um officer time um not nowhere near as much as you would think uh I would say um probably about a day's time in producing the first draft and then a few hours of officer time here and there feeding into it um so try to be realistic in terms of what time is worth putting into this because yes there's no guarantee that our comments will be listened to I suspect the responses will be fed into AI a government and summarized and yes experience shows that essentially once government consults on something like this it's going to happen

00:37:06So yeah I'll show your cynicism in terms of Councillor Davey points I'm just going to have a look at the questions and responses question 43 reuse of materials yes so I don't think I mean we have incorporated this embedded carbon policy into our own Local Plan to try and address that issue and encourage the reuse of buildings and the reuse of materials I think we I think with this we would still be venturing some way beyond uh where government policy is at in in terms of that so it's going to be an interesting one if it comes up at the examination process um but I think it is an important aspect of all of this um in in terms of climate change in that you know it's I can't remember the stats but it's scary how much carbon is expended on just the groundworks for buildings, foundations and groundworks.

00:38:11So to then see buildings demolished and let's take all of that out and then start again in terms of our carbon footprint is really quite frustrating. So I think it is an important aspect of climate change. I'm just quickly scanning out our response. I mean, maybe there's a prospect of putting some additional wording in there to encourage government to do more in terms of that aspect of decarbonisation and addressing climate change, just reading the response.

00:38:37We haven't specifically mentioned that issue. But if the committee's minded to, happy to add some wording on that. Question 46 on wildlife adaptation measures. Could we be more? Oh, sorry. Oh, so this was on the target-driven assessment of housing need. So I hear what you say about a local assessment. of housing need but that's how it used to be before the standard method and I can see why that might be more attractive but the reality is it wasn't at the time because you ended up with us spending huge sums of money on consultants to tell us what the housing need should be and then huge amounts of challenge through the examination process it was the thing that derailed our last Local Plan for 18 months during the examination process was the challenge of our assessment of the housing numbers which the inspector didn't agree with and then it had to be revisited um so I don't think um leaving that to be set at the local level is is a good thing fundamentally I don't I know some people might disagree but I don't fundamentally disagree with

00:40:02Having a standard method to calculate it I think it's that the standard method doesn't take account of local circumstances and environmental constraints and other factors it is simply a numbers exercise um and so I think that's what's fundamentally wrong with the standard method I I think as a principle a standard method is is perhaps the only way of of fairly identifying and meeting housing need um across the country I'm sure some authorities historically when it was set locally massively played down their local need and tried to argue it lots of plans got unstuck at examination like ours did um so I'm not convinced that would be uh progress I think it's about making the standard method work in a way that's come delivers more realistic results for environmentally sensitive and constrained areas like East Devon um in terms of question 53 uh five-year housing land supply requirement I think I was we were probably being realistic in that as much as I'd like to get rid of the five-year housing land supply argument and the

00:41:08Housing delivery test I don't think there's any prospect of the government doing away with them um I mean we could we could put in a comment and suggest that it's um it's not an appropriate mechanism um but I I think realistically the government's quite wedded to having that as a as a stick to beat authorities that are not delivering their housing requirement um so I don't think realistically there's any prospect of getting rid of it and the five-year housing land supply has already always sort of been the the day-to-day whereas the housing delivery test is looking backwards over what's happened so I think they will always want those two two tests to um to keep us in line as it were um but again happy to add in comments if if we want to push back on that um and then lastly uh any measures to I don't recall seeing anything about land banking within this I've always thought that the measures to address land banking would probably be outside of the planning system and and would be more about um well taxation and things the financial

00:42:24Disincentives to banking land fundamentally um I know there is a project ongoing to look at how things like option agreements and land banking would be more open and transparent so we would know would have greater knowledge of land that's being banked or is under an option agreement through land registry um whether that will come to fruition I don't know but I know that is talk about making that more open and transparent uh hopefully that answers the questions I mean there will be some other questions Councillor Levine could I ask you we we left the green bell thing unanswered lots of lovely black lines but I was just wondering is there any way for us to bring forward our green wedges to try and make them some sort of part of the planning policy to try and preserve what little green wages we've got in the in the district we try and put that into the green belt question well we obviously have the green wedges that are embedded in the existing and the new Local Plan as policy requirements to

00:43:51Protect those areas they are quite distinctive from green belts and green belts is probably the most sort of famous planning intervention ever in terms of planning policy and sort of is sort of a national policy so green belt sort of up here in terms of waiting green wedge is quite some way down here um so they don't I mean you can equate them to the same thing they have some similarities in terms of purpose but um an allocation of a green belt is is much more challenging in terms of um I think when we looked into this it needs secretary of state sign off or something um and I don't think green belts aren't generally designated them in the government's policy is is more about identifying these gray belt areas where development could come forward within the green belts rather than actually making more green belts so um I I know we've had discussions before about members desire to have a green belt um in the western part to the sort of east of Exeter um and I think I've been quite open about my views

00:45:03I don't see any reasonable prospect of taking that forward but I think we did reach a point where it was agreed that that was something for a future Local Plan rather than this one so we will need to pick that up at some point when this Local Plan is sorted and bring through a report I think was how it was left on how that could be taken forward so we'll do that but I don't think it necessarily feeds into our response here personally Are there any further questions?

00:45:34No? Okay, I see no hands so I will take us into debate This is the one report on the agenda that I spent quite a lot of time reading and reading again and because clearly I have nothing better to do I I I think it summarizes quite well what our view corporately and as committee would be so I'm happy again to propose the recommendation as written from the chair I think Ed and colleagues have done a very good job for us here and but but welcome any comments from committee Councillor Levine I think I know I'm taking our time now I just want to say that I found the answer you disappointed me after they were real officers answers because they were good and what really disappointed me in a way was that the report the questions are tilted towards urban areas and we have to make caveats time and again about the fact that East Devon is a very mixed sort of area we've got everything imaginable in our district and I just hope that somebody will actually take notice of the fact that one size of NPPF

00:46:50Doesn't fit everyone we don't have a nuclear power station yet Yehudi we haven't quite got everything Councillor Blakey if I were a cynic good heavens no um I might think that what the government are going to do with this is to feed all the answers from the various councils around the country into their ai machine and come up with a homogenous answer which will be a one five one size fits all because that's what this government thinks so it's a very good reflection on what we think whether it will actually have an influence that's going to benefit us I'm not suggesting anybody's wasting their time but really it worries me that that's where it's gonna go I think you're almost certainly absolutely correct Councillor Blakey Councillor Jung yeah thank you for a really good report and I think officers have been listening to us by the comments that you've written so well done on that so let's just hope government will listen to us as you listen to us thank you any further comments? Councillor Faithfull

00:48:13Just following on what others are saying in this use of AI it seems to be that we're getting more and more data centres to handle all this AI and not actually using any brains many brains anyway okay I'm not sensing any further comments are forthcoming on the substance of the consultation responses so I'm going to take us to a vote unless anybody shouts an objection now no okay in which case then I can ask all those in favor the recommendation is written please and that is unanimous okay thank you very much everybody that brings us to the end of today's fun meeting and we will look forward to our fun meeting in May thank you very much everyone