Strategic Planning Committee, 14 July 2026

00:02:01Yes. Good morning, folks. We are five minutes in. We've just been waiting to see if one or two last few members of committee were going to show up. But as it is five past, we will make a start. So good morning, everybody, and welcome to this Strategic Planning Committee meeting on Tuesday, the 14th of July, 2026.

00:07:57First up the usual health and safety announcement there is no fire alarm drill anticipated today so in the event for 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 if anybody needs assistance leaving the building in the event of an emergency evacuation please let us know the organizer of the meeting will tell you when it is safe to return and please also make sure all phones are either muted or switched off to start the meeting proper then uh good morning everybody I'm your chair Councillor Todd olive and to my right uh is uh vice chair uh for the day as Councillor Mike howe uh has sent his apologies uh Councillor Paul hayward I've asked to step in uh supporting officers present this morning are Ed Freeman assistant director planning strategy and development services james doherty assistant director legal and governance and wendy harris democratic services officer good morning Peter can I remind everyone present please that this meeting is recorded for

00:08:59Publication on the council's website so please can members and officers making a 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 any declaration of interests please thank you chair I'll start with yourself I'm present and I have no declarations thank you vice chair Councillor Hayward uh present and a declaration uh on general items uh so seven and eight as uh the acts minster Devon county Councillor Thank you thank you um brian bailey Councillor Brian bailey present wendy um only declarations are all things excellent being an excellent Councillor Thank you thank you Councillor Jess bay present and um I would like to declare that I'm a Devon county Councillor For the otter valley in relation to seven and eight thank you Councillor Blakey present and no declarations thank you Councillor Colin brown president and no declarations thank you thank you Councillor Davey present no declarations thank you Councillor Faithfull thank you I'll do you a card in a minute Councillor Fitzgerald present just to declare that I have been

00:10:47Lobbied on EXMO20. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Jung. Present and I have been lobbied on EXMO20. I think if I may, sorry to interrupt, it's probably fair to say we have all been lobbied regarding EXMO20 because I can read address e-lines, whoever that was, from the public gallery.

00:11:18Thank you. Thank you. I'll note in the minutes that you've done it on behalf of everyone. Thank you um we haven't got council and ledger so uh non-committee members do have any declarations to declare no back to you chair thank you wendy thank you members uh coming to uh the agenda then agenda item one minutes of the previous meeting held uh on the 3rd of march 2026 and the 5th of may 2026 are there any comments on those minutes please members no okay in which case then I will move both of those minutes as to an accurate records from the chair please raise your hand if you're in support members any abstentions and any I went here fair enough and any any against that's clearly carried thank you members agenda item two apologies please yes we have apologies from Councillor Fernley Councillor Levine Councillor Ingham and Councillor Howe. Thank you very much. Agenda item three, declarations of interest. We have already done, which brings us then to agenda item four, public speaking. And we have five speakers, one

00:12:51With a statement to be read out and four who are present with us this morning, all on agenda item seven. And we will start then with the statement to be read out from [member of the public], please.

00:13:04Thank you Chair. Several YouTube videos and Facebook posts have been published recently covering the draft Local Plan and mentioning Exmo specifically, including references to significant change and EXMO20. With regards to significant change, I am not aware that the NPPF states what specifically is a significant change, and it is only SPC that uses the anything above 100 homes definition. So is this specified within the NPPF or just an assumption?

00:13:46Could the changes made to the draft Local Plan between consultations already be classed as a significant change? There have also been several comments about the impact of a significant change, especially in relation to EXMO20. My colleagues and I requested on numerous occasions for EXMO20 to be reconsidered and discussed once it went from not to be allocated to allocated in September 2024. However, these requests were refused and the response was to put our comments into the first Reg 19 consultation.

00:14:27We did this and then this committee informed us that removal of EXMO20 would be classed as a significant change. This must have been known before the first Reg 19 consultation. So in relation to EXMO20, this significant change issue lies solely with this committee. Despite the FAQs in the report today trying to justify the number of new homes allocated to Exmouth in relation to Exmouth being the largest town in the district and therefore needs to take the largest growth, this is again down to this committee.

00:15:08The spatial strategy was agreed by this committee, and as I mentioned before, just because it is the largest town does not mean that it must take the highest growth. Exmouth will always be the largest town in the district, but it does not mean that it can take the amount of growth. The question should have been asked, can Exmouth take this expected level of growth going forward? As the answer would have been no.

00:15:41There is currently an ongoing planning debate regarding 75 new homes in Exmo that has major infrastructure concerns and implications. Yet the inclusion of two sites, EXMO20 and Exmo_17, added up to a minimum of 1,150 homes is okay. How? Several FAQs in the report today seem to focus on justifying why EXMO20 has been included, including the HELAA FAQ, yet non-relating to the 400-metre buffer zone, the access issues, etc.

00:16:20So on the buffer zone, we asked for the 400 metre buffer zone to be removed from the plan. Refused. We asked for no development of any kind to be stated in the plan. Refused. I attended a developers webinar meeting on the 6th of May, 2026, and they proposed to have a sports field, a car park and a care home within the 400 buffer zone. So on the access issues, Southern Wood is a cul-de-SAC of 12 homes, yet the developers are proposing up to 300 homes having access via this route.

00:17:00This equates to an increase of approximately 150% into Meadowview Road and a 2,500% increase of traffic through to Southern Wood. these issues have not been addressed by this committee and you are failing your constitute constituents thank you these issues have always been known and are just being ignored you still have time to sort this out please do so thank you for your time thank you wendy for reading that out there were a couple of questions identified there but we've also had a number sent in via email that we've been asked for response on so I'm going to read those questions into the record and then I'm going to come to mr. Freeman to answer those questions before we move on to the next speaker so firstly the first question we've been asked to answer by mr. Humphrey and I quote from him we've asked this committee on numerous occasions to clarify the definition with regards to the 400 meter buffer zone with specific reference to request for the no development allowed position in this area however the wording in the draft Local Plan is still not

00:18:22Specific in relation to this and we now have conflicting and inconsistent views between the draft Local Plan and the sustainability appraisal report as is identified in the second Reg 19 consultation comments does eddc intend to continue to ignore the comments made by statutory bodies key organizations and the public in relation to this buffer zone and how can you justify this to the planning inspectorate that's mr humphrey's first question and his second several of the faqs in the report for the spc meeting on tuesday the 14th of july refer to HELAA and discussion slash investigations regarding the justification for including EXMO20 it is also confusing as the sustainability appraiser report in the first regulation 19 consultation stated that EXMO20 had passed HELAA yet the sustainability appraisal report in the second regulation 19 consultation states that it failed but that it had been justified for inclusion but without giving any detail therefore please can you provide me with the documented evidence of when where and who was included in these investigations slash discussions and when this was presented to the SPC and also whether or not these were in

00:19:31Relation to Exmo 20A and Exmo 20B or just EXMO20 hopefully you've got all that mr. Freeman if you'd like to read responses into the record please and then we'll move to the next speaker yes thank you chair so in answer the first question I would respond by saying the policy in the Local Plan that allocates EXMO20 states new homes and other development that would result in unacceptable impacts will not be permitted within 400 meters of the Pebblebed Heaths. Policy wording is regarded to establish an appropriate basis for determining planning applications and further detail is not required. It is noted that in their consultation response to the first regulation 19 consultation the Natural England sought clarity about where employment uses would be located. However this is a level of detail that does not need to be determined at this stage. In any event the policy is clear that development would that would result in an unacceptable impact will not be permitted within the 400 meter buffer and clearly this includes employment uses. Notwithstanding this point and

00:20:33Subject to the plan inspector or inspectors wishing to hear or receive further evidence or material on this matter any party that has made representations on the plan with respect to this matter can present their case to the inspector at the appropriate time. In terms of the second question I would respond by saying the issues with EXMO20 that were identified through the heal our process and led to it failing that initial assessment related primarily to the access arrangements which were only considered in relation to access from St John's Road at that time. Alternative access arrangements including from the B3179 in addition to St John's Road were later explored and meant that the site could be achieved. The assessment of these access options arose from members wishing to consider the site further when they initially considered sites at Exmouth at their meeting on the 3rd of September 2024 following members favorable consideration of the site at that meeting officers further explored the site access arrangements with the site promoters and highway authority with subsequent consideration of the site at later

00:21:37Meetings of the committee all of which are documented on the council's website thank you chair I'm going to move through the speakers Councillor Jung thank you next on my list I have [member of the public] with a three-minute statement and then again we have another question there that Mr. Freeman will respond to. I think we can live with that. We last spoke here on the 5th of May

00:22:20Under the considered chairmanship of Mr. Howe and since that date a lot has happened. You failed to meet your deadline for the submission of the plan due to the failure of your officers to have the work done and there's a clear consequence of that. A firm of speculative developers has commenced the process of obtaining planning permission for EXMO20. During this same period, we have had much public interaction, including two meetings at which we've welcomed over 200 people, including some of you, plus the press, and some of your constituents. Our campaign has been endorsed and strengthened and will allow us to introduce new elements into this battle, planning consultants, legal advice, and political clout. Some good things have happened, however, Ever since the 5th of May, for instance, EDDC has at last recognized the risks and consequences of continuing with the EXMO20.

00:23:12I quote your own principal planning officer from his deliberation on the EIA opinion application. He notes the size, nature, duration, and geographical extent of the EXMO20, the designated landscapes, internationally important ecological sites, the heritage assets, and other environmental constraints. He notes the permanent loss of agricultural land and the sterilization of safeguarded mineral resources. The scale of the site together with the presence of existing water resources and flood-sensitive areas means that significant effects on water resources, hydrology, and flood risk cannot be ruled out.

00:23:48The combination of designated landscapes, internationally important ecological sites, heritage assets, and other environmental constraints increased the likelihood of significant environmental effects. In fact, the planning officer must have been thinking, how on earth did this site pass suitable and achievable at Gila? And then he remembered it never did. A further piece of detailed work by your own landscape architects expresses concern over significant adverse landscape and visual effects, significant adverse effects on the national landscape, and the total lack of connection between the site and the existing urban area of Exmouth.

00:24:27Add to this the concerns expressed by Devon County Council. You can see experts are not endorsing and supporting development at EXMO20. It is just the people in this room. So what should you do? You should demand accuracy and honesty about the number of houses required to complete the plan. Mr. Olive, you went public through YouTube, claiming there needs to be 23,000 houses, plus somewhere between 10% and 20% of a headroom.

00:24:54[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.]

00:25:24Look at that, spot on six. Thank you. The question that you've submitted to which Mr Freeman will provide a response, and I wonder if Mr Freeman might also reflect on the distinction between the EIA and development management process that you've highlighted there, [member of the public], and the process that we go through at this committee. But the question that you've submitted, no. because this is the process we go through you're constitutionally entitled to submit a question and to have a response you will get your response if you want to follow that up you can do it subsequently we have a meeting to get on with please mr hamill mr Freeman the question to be answered uh the standard method calculation in 3.11 of your draft Local Plan is based on data to 2023 do you intend to now update and reduce the figure in 3.11 to account for the 24 and 25 year data as the legislation requires. Thank you Chair. In answer I would say officers are not recommending any changes to amend planning policy or text to account for any changes to housing

00:26:37Number assessment resulting from information published after the plan was drafted. Over time overall housing numbers can go up as well as down but this does not mean that we revisit the plan each time this happens. It is also important to note that we are progressing the plan and the transitional arrangements that tie us to the standard method as set out in national planning practice guidance published on the 12th of december 2024 and ensuring that we accommodate at least 80 percent of the local housing need under that method whilst plan making regulations allow for us to progress the plan under this reduced figure we are short compared to the new standard method figures and are being challenged on this through representations made against the plan and we will have to defend that position at examination therefore changing the housing numbers is not appropriate at this time in terms of the points mr. Hamill made in his speech I think it's a bit disingenuous to start referring to our EIA screening opinion when clearly the purpose of that exercise is to identify constraints to

00:27:35The site and the information that's required to address those constraints so clearly we're all aware of those constraints the plan acknowledges those constraints the purpose of that exercise is to acknowledge them and identify the information that's needed to address that and clearly a lot of information is going to be needed to support any application to help us to understand those constraints and how they can be mitigated it does not in itself undermine the principle of allocating the site simply the assessment process we need to go through to satisfy the regulations and ensure that all measures are taken to mitigate those impacts through the application process thank you thank you mr Freeman mr shillito regarding the third of march video edits you have accepted that was wrong and the minutes now do not misrepresent me many have said to me don't bother with eddc it's a done deal it's behind closed doors but I said no there's clear planning policy and this is a transparent democratic process don't I feel stupid you speak up and get bullied into submission

00:28:44[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.]

00:29:52To ensure a sound plan headroom should be 10% like the inspector's data for team bridges plan no guessing required the standard method calculation is a starting point then you consider MPPF 11b and footnote 7 constraints you have not done that and this is why you are struggling you should be reducing numbers due to the SAC SBA SSI pebble beds the national landscape it's all there in the policy and you have a failed mitigation strategy as unquestionable evidence. Use it. In February 25, councillors raised concerns of no supporting HRA. Those alarm bells should be deafening now.

00:30:29[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.]

00:30:56[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.]

00:31:24That's what the inspector will spend a year checking. The truth will prevail.

00:31:30Thank you. Boom. We are quiet and happy to take any questions at the chair's discretion. We have a meeting to get on with, please.

00:31:38Thank you. Mr Freeman. Question to be put to you, please. Does the LPA still believe that the reduced 80% transitional arrangements is a viable option?

00:31:54Thank you, Chair. In answer, I would say yes. The published plan complies with the transitional arrangements and the proposed timeline set out in the local development scheme before the committee today sets out a timescale to submit the plan prior to the cutoff date for these arrangements. While speaking, just to respond to something [member of the public] said there, I mean, I think it's important to note that if we were to adopt the new plan-making system, we'd also have to adopt the new standard method and the higher housing numbers.

00:32:21So you'd have to provide thousands of additional homes over what's in this plan, which would create an even greater need to allocate EXMO20. I'm just going to take a moment to respond to something that [member of the public] has said there myself, and that's the accusation at this authority. and it's interesting that [member of the public] has at least learned from his performance back in March when he decided to come in front of this committee and libel several public servants here.

00:33:02This committee has spent... Excuse me, excuse me, I am speaking.

00:33:34I'm perfectly satisfied. I will accept that perhaps the correct word that I should have used is slander rather than libel.

00:33:40Thank you for nitpicking that. This is not a conversation. Thank you. This is not a conversation. Thank you, [member of the public]. You have accused this authority of bullying, and I resent that implication. I resent it. I think it is wholly, wholly unfair.

00:34:02The volume of correspondence. It is wholly unfair. Yes, I agree. That we have dealt with, that we have responded to the frankly chameleonic nature of the allocation of the allegations that have been thrown at us time and time again, shifting every time we give you an answer to the questions that you ask because you are determined to achieve an end goal is just it never it never ends.

00:34:27[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.]

00:35:07Last Wednesday, I attended Stop EXMO20's meeting in Budleigh, Salterton. The meeting was very well attended with both constituents and their elected representatives, including members of this committee. The meeting was told during questions that the representative's duty was to represent the council and then the electorate. The response was derision. I believe members of this committee are undermining democracy. You have a duty above everything else to preserve the confidence in democracy within the constituency.

00:35:45That means responding to your constituents' concern and reflecting them first and foremost. To date, many have expressed concern that the housing numbers are too high, the Local Plan is not legal, the consultation process is flawed, and the promises of protections afforded by law passed by the House of Commons are being ignored. The housing numbers are crucial to the Local Plan and the five years' supply, and yet I have found no member of this committee who understands the calculations.

00:36:21This is unacceptable. Every member of this committee should be fully conversant with the main drivers of this process and understand the limited statistics employed. You need to knuckle down and work at it like your constituents have had to do. We have formed cogent arguments and so should you, not just parrot excuses that you think allows the committee to create a Local Plan that is not legal. It is undemocratic.

00:36:51These concerns must be addressed specifically and then published. even though we've been asking for the calculations and laws to be reviewed over months and years we only found out last wednesday that there are communications between eddc and central government asking government for their opinion on these issues and that's existence of which has not been disclosed to the members of the public all relevant opinion received by eddc should have been made public during the consultation and in full. Parties who expressed concerns should have been notified of the relevant opinions' existence. I demand that they are now published.

00:37:35They must be available to the public before the next committee meeting and in enough time to absorb and respond to their content. The details are important to avoid confusion. At the meeting Councillor Jung stated that a council was not allowed to deviate from the standard formula even though they had 95 percent national landscape. The highest proportion I can find is 82 percent and I don't know the state of their plans. Thank you. Thank you [member of the public]. Mr Freeman is there anything in there that you wanted to come back to please? Well I need to say to the committee I don't know what documents [member of the public] is referring to but if he wants to put in FOI requests and they explain what he's referring to. We'd be happy to investigate but I don't know what he's referring to. Apologies for the slight delay

00:39:21There members. We're just checking a constitutional point. The last public speaker we have please is [member of the public]. Wendy, do we just have a question on that one? Okay, thank you. Shall I read that out? I can read down. Sorry, thank you Wendy. As you are all aware now, contrary to the sustainability appraisals' false claims, EXMO20 did in fact fail HELAA. However, it was deemed to have failed being suitable or achievable, but confirmed as available.

00:40:05[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.]

00:40:48Through you, Chair, just to respond to that question, with regard to the availability of the site, we have reviewed land registry records. They show that from our assessment, the site, as allocated as EXMO20, is owned by just two parties. Agents are promoting the site on behalf of both of these parties. There is therefore no reason to question its availability. The report of the 3rd of September 2024, referred to by the Speaker, included some land in error that does not form part of the final allocation.

00:41:17As we have previously explained and corrected in subsequent reports to the committee. As previously mentioned in response to previous question, the allocated site failed the first HELAA assessment. However, further work identified that the reasons for this could be overcome and so the site was ultimately taken forward.

00:41:34Thank you. Thank you, Mr Freeman. The last thing for me to say on this is just in reference to Part 4, Clause 19.1 of the Constitution. just for the attention of a couple of members of the public in the gallery, please. This section of the Constitution refers to disturbances by a member of the public. This is your formal warning pursuant to that rule in the Constitution that if you continue to interrupt and disrupt the meeting, I will ask you to leave the room and I will adjourn the meeting if necessary until such a time as you have done so.

00:42:15With that said, we then move please through Agenda Item 5, Matters of Urgency, there are none. Agenda Item 6, Confidential or Exempt Items, there are none. Which brings us to Agenda Item 7, the East Devon Local Development Scheme and Local Plan Update Report. Mr Freeman, please.

00:42:36Thank you, Chair. So the main purpose of this report is to update the local development scheme, which, as members will be aware, sets up the timescales and work programme for planning policy documents in the district, primarily the Local Plan. As reported at the previous meeting, we're not currently able to progress the plan to the previously agreed timetable within the LDS, and so we're now looking at submitting the plan now in October of this year, whereas the published lds currently says in the spring which obviously as members will be aware it is a timetable we've not been able to stick to so we would now expect to submit the plan in october following discussion at Strategic Planning Committee in september and the yet to be arranged council meeting in october we would expect this to now lead to adoption of the plan in 2028 following hopefully a successful examination in public so as previously discussed the delay in the plan relates to a number of relevant evidence documents and assessment work that's still progressing there are updates of those within the report I won't go through each

00:43:48One in turn but there are some further updates obviously discussions particularly in terms of of Marlcombe viability testing are ongoing with the landholders and developers we're currently consulting them on the viability work that's been undertaken and those discussions continue the playing pitch and open space strategy has been discussed and ratified by the leisure delivery forum on the 23rd of june and by cabinet earlier this month so that is now resolved as an evidence document air quality impacts work as as detailed that work is is ongoing is looking much more positive in terms of the work that ricardo has done but there's still further work to complete that and therefore to feed into the Habitat Regulations assessment work that footprint ecology will be picking up once that's available as the report says we've now pulled together a full nutrient mitigation strategy for the river axe and consultants continue to work on the water cycle study to try and reach a point where we have an agreed version of the truth with the relevant parties particularly the environment agency in southwest water that is ongoing whether we can

00:45:03Reach a position where everybody agrees on the position by the time the plan submission is not entirely clear but I don't think that's an essential requirement in terms of submission the plan but we will certainly have a more up-to-date and accurate version of the water cycle study by that point all of this obviously feeds into Habitat Regulations assessment work as I mentioned so once we have all of that work footprint ecology will be updating their Habitat Regulations assessment work and hopefully we'll be in a position where we can have an acceptable Habitat Regulations assessment to accompany the plan the other issue that's addressed in in the report is the frequently asked questions that members asked for at the previous meeting so those are appended to this document and have already been added to the council website if there are further questions or issues with those questions I'm happy to take those and we can look at updating that as necessary so the report leads to three recommendations that the committee note the Local Plan timetable updates specifically in respect to proposal to submit the plan of

00:46:04Examination in October that late October it says that Strategic Planning Committee recommend that council the doctor proposed new East Devon local development scheme that sets out that timetable and the Strategic Planning Committee note the frequently asked questions and responses that are available on the website and in the appendix to the report thank you chair thank you mr Freeman and as usual we come to questions first please are there any questions from members outside of committee no okay inside committee I have four names already written down councillors Bailey faithful young and Davey are those questions or do you wish to speak on this item okay I hear a question from Councillor Davey Councillor Bailey you have a question given that your your combinations of both are usually statements followed by does mr. Freeman agree I will come to that during debate if that's okay thank you Brian and I will come to you I promise I will come to you Brian I always do Councillor Faithfull do you have a question please go ahead thank you

00:47:19Chair this whatever we're talking about is for the present East Devon District Council until we finish can you give any it's probably a question for tomorrow actually but I'll say it now how much weight with our Local Plan have after this time because the Local Plan goes until I mean it will exist but how much weight will it have I don't know if specifically depending on what comes up tomorrow I think we know what the subject is you know if we split into two halves and then you it's parts and pieces of I don't know how the weight works that's one question the other question is I'm not sure how it fits in with this what can we do I got involved with politics because of Cranbrook I've never made it a secret we were told Cranbrook was 2,900 homes and then it wasn't and I have some sympathy for the people of Exmouth quite honestly if we say they're going to be a buffer what how secure can we make that buffer because for me I want that wall a wall of

00:48:51Trees we need more trees anyway because it will lower it lowers the air temperature anyway we know that so I would want to what can we do to it's not specifically for Exmo but it as the subject is there you know when we have buffers how secure can we make those buffers thank you chair okay thank you council of faithful I'll come around the others who've got a question then we'll come back to mr. Freeman to take a few at once and Councillor Jung will you you swear to me that it is a question not a speech it is two points of clarity one is during the questions that it was we were referring to the 400 meter buffer zone now is that a boundary between the Pebblebed Heaths which is one boundary or the boundary between the triple SI I believe it is triple SI rather than the Pebblebed Heaths which is substantially different. The other thing is the clarity on air quality on the pebble beds. Some people think it's a risk to health, the air quality. And can we just clarify that? Because I believe

00:50:20It's a risk to rare plants rather than a risk to health. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Jung. Councillor Davey, your question, please. Thank you, Chair. In item 111 in the report, and thank you for that, under air quality impacts on the Pebblebed Heaths, it says that Ricardos have now refined their assessment and modelling work, and that's included incorporated incorporation of new data on higher levels of projected use and uptake of electric vehicles.

00:50:59And that then brings the pollution levels down, of course. And so there's a couple of questions that arise from that. The first one is, where did that data come from? Is it nationally produced data? Is it wishful thinking? Is it something we can actually rely on, and does it take into account the pollution coming from tires from electric cars? Because electric cars, although they don't produce the same levels of nitrous oxide and so on, they do still produce quite a lot of rubber particulates.

00:51:45And also it's pretty obvious to me that the only way we're going to improve the air quality generally is to reduce the amount of traffic and I'd just like mr Freeman maybe to just outline what measures in our Local Plan might actually reduce the amount of traffic generally but also specifically crossing the Pebblebed Heaths okay that's quite a stack of questions for mr. Freeman so I will come to I'll come back to you I promise I'll come to come to mr. Freeman and then we'll come back out thank you thank you chair so if we come back to council faithful's questions I think the first one was about how much weight the Local Plan would gain post LGR basically I I mean, my understanding of the situation is that once the plan is adopted, basically, it's part of the development plan for East Devon until such time as it's either withdrawn or superseded by a subsequent plan, regardless of any administrative changes.

00:52:56So our intention, I would imagine, as East Devon District Council, is that it becomes the development plan and remains the development plan for the area until such time as a new Devon plan or whatever the new geography is, is produced and supersedes it. but obviously there'll be a new authority coming in but I can't see any reason why they would do anything other than that so the intention would be that it's the development plan for the area until it's superseded I don't think LGR changes anything in terms of that fundamentally in terms of securing the buffer I assume we're referring to the 400 meter buffer to the that the power bed heaves I mean fundamentally it is protected in the Habitat Regulations because um as I mentioned I think in response on the previous questions you know we can't allow development that is going to harm the habitat fundamentally under the Habitat Regulations so that is a high level of protection in itself um and obviously the allocation is is clear about protecting that area as well um so I don't really see what further protection is needed

00:54:04In terms of Councillor Jung's question uh off the top of my head I think it's the 400 meters is is to the designated area fundamentally the triple si um I'd have to check to be absolutely sure but um that's my understanding um the air quality issue I mean obviously there are obviously some air quality risks to health from pollutants from vehicles as we all know um but in this instance the issue is is the impacts on the habitats um not just plant life but wildlife as as well and the habitats within those areas um this is set out in the report the initial report which is published in terms of the particular species that are impacted um and how that that happens I'm not professing to be any expert in terms of the ecological impacts of air quality but it's there in the ricardo initial report if someone if you want to understand better the the potential impacts and the habitats that are affected turning to Councillor Davey questions um I'd have to check in terms of the source of the data on either usage um I'm assured that it comes

00:55:14From a reliable source and can be relied upon in terms of this work um it may even be government data um I have to check obviously it's a prediction so um but I think it's still quite a conservative prediction but um it is uh predicting a higher level of uptake than the original data that was used which was particularly pessimistic um in terms of pollution from tires I think this came up in a in a previous meeting and uh it's not something that's come uh to our attention particularly in terms of being an issue in terms of additional rubber pollution from uh tires on electric vehicles I'm aware electric vehicles are heavier and therefore do wear through tires more quickly but I'm not aware of any issues in terms of rubber particulates and them impacting on the habitat um in terms of reducing the amount of traffic I mean I think there are a number of things uh we tried to adopt that form a core part of the strategy that's within the Local Plan

00:56:13About trying to locate developments close to services and facilities to reduce the need to travel uh about designing developments that are mixed use developments which is one of was one of the attractions, if I recall, to members of EXMO20 of developing a development of that scale enabled the delivery of community facilities, jobs and other uses within the development that, again, reduce the need to travel because we've got homes, jobs, community facilities all within walking distance of each other so that people could walk and cycle to those facilities rather than being reliant on travelling. And obviously locating development And in the larger settlements, which are better served by public transport and have better access to services and facilities that both reduces the need to travel, but means when people do need to travel, they have more options to do so, whether that be through walking and cycling to those facilities or using public transport where that's available.

00:57:09So the whole strategy has been around reducing the need to travel and encouraging sustainable development and obviously reducing that need to travel reducing emissions through car usage is a key part of delivering sustainable development thank you thank you mr Freeman I have Councillor Fitzgerald left on the list and then are there any other questions no okay Councillor Fitzgerald please. Thank you, Chair. I have three questions. The first one is regarding 0.1.6, Malcom viability testing. It states, in the absence of subsidy funding, the new community will struggle to be a financially viable development proposition. Could you unpick that a little bit for us I am aware that it was lined up for some central government funding as part of the new towns program which it then fell out of the agenda for that um it's touched on very briefly here but my understanding is that that is uh quite important for um ensuring the infrastructure-led success of this new development. So that's my first question.

00:58:29My second question is regarding 1.10 air quality impacts. I think Councillor Davey covered quite a lot of the questions that I had already but I just wanted to add in vehicle speeds on the Pebblebed Heath's whether or not that is something that is able to be considered because obviously we're not the highways authority we can't decide uh what speeds uh vehicles travel at but we do know that speed impacts the air pollution uh air emissions from cars and given that we're going to be unitarized with the highways authority before most of this development takes place is there any reason is there any way that we could be starting to have those conversations with the highways authority about highways measures to reduce quality impacts at the Pebblebed Heaths at this stage and my third question is regarding the water cycle study this is absolutely essential to this council for being able to put a break on development that can't be supported by wastewater treatment capacity I know this is a huge issue across the district obviously I'm mostly concerned with Maer Lane and with the lime kiln pumping

00:59:57Station in Budleigh I would like to hear more about what the plans are for southwest waters upgrade plans for for Merlin treatment plant and for well for the Merlin treatment plant to be coming through this committee ideally and to be able to understand what we can do as a council of ward members and what members of the public can do to help us if they can make this water cycle study as successful as possible thank you thank you Councillor Fitzgerald I could give half an answer to several of those questions but I will give and over to mr. Freeman who can hopefully give a whole answer to all I would try to so yes again back to mark and viability testing I mean to reassure you I mean new towns are not viable in themselves I don't mean any new town has ever been delivered without massive amounts public subsidy to help to deliver infrastructure to support their growth so no one was anticipating that marking would be viable without public subsidy we're obviously reliant on achieving

01:01:22That through some means and that is as yet unknown as to how that will happen other than obviously we have commitments from homes england and through government that there will be support of some description but we don't know what that means in terms of pounds and pence at this point in time um the new towns program I would say we haven't fallen out of it yet technically it was a consultation in terms of which um sites should be taken forward as part of the new towns program and obviously we've made a robust comment back to that um consultation to show why we think Marlcombe should be part of the new towns program so there's no final decision in terms of that as yet um all we can do is continue to have conversations with homes england and with mhclg about what funding and support may be there in the future um to help to support the delivery of Marlcombe I see the chair is itching to come in on that point thank you ed sorry to interrupt and

01:02:22Just to emphasize in relation to the new towns program point specifically government has never been and still has not been explicit about what support that program is actually going to offer anyway so in that respect the work that we are doing particularly with our colleagues at Holmes England on securing that that support you know absent whatever is is going on with the new towns program in some ways actually puts us ahead of where we would be had we been sort of stuck waiting for the Secretary of State to make his mind up.

01:02:55Mr Freeman. Thank you, Chair. So moving on to air quality issues, I don't think we've really looked at the issue of vehicle speeds and any correlation between vehicle speeds and air quality. What I would say is my understanding is the Highway Authority have to set speeds based on safety issues, not on air quality issues, so I'm not sure that they would even be able to reduce the speeds because of pollution issues um in any event um but I don't it's not been something that's been discussed or mentioned particularly as a mitigation measure so I'm not sure how effective it would even be in terms of mitigation uh and I'd question how achievable it is given the limitations on highway authorities and how they set speed limits um but I mean it's something I can raise with the consultants and ask them next time speaking to them um and get a more definitive answer on on that but it's not something that's that's been raised so far um in terms of the water cycle study um I agree we need to get to a position where we have uh an

01:04:01Up-to-date and accurate water cycle study particularly one to my mind that the environment agency are happy with uh as they've they've raised concerns with the work that's been undertaken so far um but we do have to recognize that our powers are very limited in this area um all our control relates to is the development that comes forward and when it comes forward fundamentally in terms of how it impacts on infrastructure we have no power over southwest water over what they do or when in relation to upgrading their infrastructure we can ask them and obviously we have been um and continue to try and understand their proposals and feed into their future proposals by setting out what our plans are in terms of what growth is planned in the district where that's coming forward when that would come forward to inform their investment in their network um to try and ensure that there's infrastructure in place as and when it's needed but I don't think it would be within the role of this committee to consider any proposals southwest water may have

01:05:00At Maer Lane that's for them and for them to get signed off through off what and um their funding mechanisms um they don't even need planning permission in most cases so um we simply don't have control over that all we can do through the water cycle study is understand the impact of growth on the wastewater network and all we can do through the plan is put in provisions to ensure that development doesn't come forward that will cause pollution of the water environment as a result of it coming forward ahead of the necessary infrastructure and that's exactly what we're doing you know we're trying to update the water cycle study so we have an accurate understanding of the position um at the time of plan submission um and we've got provisions within the plan that break clause in policy aro3 I think it is aro2 sorry uh water quality and efficiency measures um which means you know that the development won't be granted unless we are assured that there is adequate um capacity to accommodate flows from that development

01:06:05Or that there will be within the term of that permission, i.e. through the gramping condition mechanism that we've used elsewhere to ensure that the development, once granted, can't come forward and be occupied until there is capacity to accommodate the flows from that development. That is literally all we can do fundamentally within the planning powers that we have.

01:06:26Thank you, Chair. It's perhaps worth emphasising, just to add a little bit of colour to Ed's response on that last question, that there is a lot of work going on to bring the Environment Agency to bear and their regulatory powers on this issue, as well as partially through the Milkoon process, but more widely to an extent as well, to bring to bear the arm of government on actually getting these issues in the West End sorted out.

01:06:54We know there's a long and sordid history of promises made and not kept, and we know there are capacity issues. So with the contacts that we've been fortunate to make through the New Towns Programme in particular, we are trying to bring some of those contacts to bear in trying to sort out the mess. Obviously, that's not, you know, I can't sit here and say Southwest Water is going to build a new sewage works next year.

01:07:21That's not the stage that we're at, but the work is ongoing. And I hope Ed's not going to tell me off for saying anything I shouldn't have after the meeting at that point. So unless any members have any further questions to ask, you have already had a question, Councillor Faithfull. Councillor Bailey question, or is it a speech? Well, it's a question. I've listened carefully to what you and Mr Freeman have said, and the general public and our members, and I fail to see, with the evidence before me, regarding the HELAA, the air quality and the water cycle, that why with such lack of consistent and positive reports on Exxon's 20 in particular, why are we pursuing it?

01:08:15Because it appears to me that we're up against a brick wall. This does very much feel like a speech, not a question, Brian. and I'm happy to take the speech but speeches are in a minute if you let me finish I won't be much longer thank you very much for your indulgence now as I said why are we pursuing it are we pursuing it just to get the numbers up or are we pursuing it because Mr Freeman has been told he needs to do this give me and the public some justification because everywhere we look there are major problems which I appreciate [member of the public] job is to do his job. He is trying to overcome. But this has been going on for years. And these things aren't overcome.

01:09:02The water cycle is high in the sky, let's be honest. There's no definite time or date when they're going to start work. It's going to take about five or six years to plan it. In the meantime, unfortunately, if this was to go ahead, it would be too late. Excellent. Now, there's the slightest bit of rain. Everything overflows. Put all these properties in there, it can be overflowing on a daily basis.

01:09:25It's not viable, it's not practical and it's just not suitable for eczema, we're overrun at the moment we've got no facilities, try and get a doctor in eczema, you've got to wait two weeks because they can't cope with the amount of people, you're putting all these houses in with no extra facilities no infrastructure it's just an absolute mess and I can't I've failed to say that I can't support this at all, I appreciate it but if someone could give me some justification Can we have a quiet from the gallery, please? Thank you.

01:09:57I'd be very happy. Thank you for your indulgence. Thank you from the gallery. In fairness, Brian, that was a speech. There was no hint of a question in there. Yes, I did, which is why I challenged you. You have sort of taken the mickey a bit there, Brian. I take the point that you're deadly serious in what you've said, Councillor Bailey, but there wasn't a question in there so we will come back to that so we will come back, thank you thank you thank you from the public gallery that's a fair point, Brian so I'll go to Councillor Faithfull and then I'll come back to Mr Freeman in a second, Councillor Faithfull thank you chair I mean I could have made a statement rather This, is there any way that we can ensure with Marlcombe that it is an active town proper, because nothing against the people in Cranbrook, but we all know that the so-called town centre has got smaller and smaller with less.

01:11:36So everyone ends up going into Exeter and this is half the problem is the traffic if you've got less reason for people to go into Exeter you've got less traffic congestion so we need to protect the town centers so is there some way that we can secure things make sure that if Marlcombe comes about that it is genuinely things going on to keep people in Marlcombe rather than faffing boat going across the motorway that's a fair question to ask Councillor Faithfull I'm not convinced it's anything to do with this agenda item but it is a fair question to ask I'll let mr. Freeman come back to it in in this instance but please do bear in mind you know we have an agenda item to get through here and recommendations to discuss so mr. Freeman do you want to come back to those two questions and then I will move into debate starting with non-committee members um thank you chair they're big questions um obviously uh limited time to to respond um in terms of Councillor Bailey's question I mean I think at one point you you're saying about you

01:12:44Know the absence of air quality and water cycle evidence to show that they're going to be acceptable well except that that's being produced at the moment and that's the timetable issue that's that's on the agenda today and in terms of the broader issue I mean there is a wider issue in terms of the impacts of development on on infrastructure that we recognize and I think the committee has recognized exists across the district in terms of um you know the the rate of growth and development and the rate of delivery of infrastructure to support that has not necessarily kept pace with with growth and that's not just in this district that's probably a national problem um but fundamentally the government requires us to produce a local plant for the housing numbers that their standard method requires us to to meet and that's what we have to do and we have to meet those numbers in the most sustainable and appropriate way we can and that's what the plan does to my mind we've had lots of discussions at previous meetings about all of the different site

01:13:45Allocations and how and the strategy behind the plan but fundamentally the plan is the most sustainable and appropriate way of meeting the housing numbers that we have to meet including EXMO20 and we've deliberately gone through these transition arrangements to keep those housing numbers as low as possible in acknowledgement of the fact that there are issues in terms of the delivery of infrastructure in the district and that keeping pace with housing growth and the environmental constraints of the district as well so I think we've done everything we can to try and keep the growth levels down to the minimum we can justify by going through these transition arrangements and produce the plan that tries to meet those growth requirements in the most sustainable way possible that's not to say that there won't still be some environmental impacts and other impacts arising from growth there always will be wherever it goes um it's about trying to accommodate the growth that we are required to to accommodate by the government uh in the most sustainable and appropriate way possible and that's that's what we're doing um it's not an easy exercise by

01:14:56Any means um it's very challenging uh and and creates lots of controversial issues but we're we're you know we've spent however many years at this five or five years at this um however many meetings um discussing this and and this is where we got to and I think you know the plan is is the best it can be um we just need to carry this through through the examination process where it will be independently examined and those that still object to the plan will have their say and be heard um as they have been throughout the process um in terms of the question about Marlcombe uh the council faithful raised I mean our whole vision for Marlcombe is that it's a self-contained town um it's not intended to be commuter belt for Exeter um it will be a town with its own community, its own services, facilities, jobs, schools. And that's very much the aspiration that how that's actually delivered. It comes back in many respects to Councillor Fitzgerald's point about public investment in services and facilities and infrastructure at the town

01:16:05To make sure that infrastructure is delivered in sync with housing, such that we don't create a community that starts to rely on out commuting because it doesn't have those facilities within the town when they're needed and I think that's the key issue moving forward with Marlcombe that we need to address is having a strategy for how that investment comes in and how we deliver services infrastructure jobs schools health care facilities etc all in sync with the housing coming forward um and that's a big challenge um but that is the strategy that's what the plan sets out and that's is what will prevent it from being a commuter belt and fundamentally it it can't be in terms of its impact on the road network um we need to ensure that it's it's delivered as a sustainable settlement in its own right um and that's what we're we're working towards um and and will endeavor to make happen um but it does come back to that point about public investment in that infrastructure uh I appreciate I'm probably just scratching the surface of both

01:17:14Of those issues but they're such big questions um hopefully that gives a flavor of of the key issues thank you mr Freeman I I just wanted to add a couple of things uh in relation to to um your question Councillor Bailey um and I I think the main thing that I want to emphasize there and ed sort of touched on it but um these are not the the infrastructural points that you highlight in particular um are not just issues for eczema they are issues that have come up on I think it would be fair to say looking at the rest of committee pretty much every single site that we seriously considered for allocation when we went through that site selection process back in in the summer and the autumn of 2024 wasn't it Mr. Freeman was it that long ago you know these these are issues that crop up everywhere we have had years and years and years of underinvestment by government in both revenue and capital terms in terms of the people that we have to deliver our public

01:18:16Services and the physical facilities um that we have to deliver them out of um you know budgets have just budgets from from national government budgets given to to you know public services national public services like the nhs simply haven't stretched to to keep pace um with the level of development that has gone on let alone the level of development that that successive governments not just the current one um have have have wanted to see um and and you know we see the consequences of that literally everywhere um you know you go from uh from Exmouth um with with the sites there all the way down to you know small villages like like the one I live in in wimple where 350 400 homes we've got another what is it 130 or so proposed to this Local Plan that proportionally that that's that's more growth certainly than in next month for example and and you know our trains are regularly cancelled I can't get a doctor's appointment at our our GP surgery in the village for forget two

01:19:26Weeks it would take me six to eight weeks to get an appointment Brian you know these these issues are these issues are serious and pervasive everywhere and I take I take the point that you've made Councillor Bailey I ultimately we come back to we have a legal obligation as this authority as councillors on this authority to deliver homes we cannot get away from that you know we can argue till the cows come home about how many we're supposed to deliver and where exactly we're supposed to put them when it comes down to it we have a legal obligation to deliver those homes frankly we have a moral obligation to deliver homes in this district East Devon is an extremely expensive place to live that you know the housing affordability ratio in East Devon is is what nine ten times house prices cost nine ten times average incomes in this part of the world you know when when lenders will lend four four and a half five times income if you're lucky um you know that that that gap is huge housing here is

01:20:34Fundamentally unaffordable and unattainable for huge numbers of people who live in this part of the world um that gives us a moral obligation to do something about it I take I you know you guys have heard me witter on an awful lot uh about the infrastructural issues that we face and what we are trying to do to deal with them ultimately to some extent we're stuck with hobson's choice here you know we we have a job to do and we can do the best we can we are never going to be able to please everyone and solve every problem um I think it would be fair to say um so having taken chair's prerogatives to do that I'm now going to move us to debate uh and I will come around uh non-committee members first uh and I'm conscious that Councillor Martin you're welcome to stay you'll see Councillor Martin you don't need to go to the podium okay fair enough um so we'll go around non-committee members first and I have councillors uh martin collins and arnott who

01:21:34Have all asked to speak thank you for that and there's some very interesting questions there from councillors um so last week I was at the meeting in Budleigh about EXMO20. it was a room packed full of people who were worried about the effects of building on the St John's in the wilderness site next to the Pebblebed Heaths although it was a meeting of objectors the hosts gave a fairly balanced assessment of events to date residents were clear about what the consequences of not having a Local Plan would be but they passionately believe that building on this site will have a huge detrimental impact and that the EXMO20 allocation should be dropped I don't feel like I've done enough to support residents and it feels like time is running out and as much as I feel like time is running out to stop this or change it I feel like eddc are equally desperately trying to find ways to justify the development and make it fit into the plan the sad thing is it doesn't need to fit into the plan it could be taken out altogether as the

01:22:48Housing numbers would still be achieved when I became a Councillor One of my pledges was to protect wildlife and their habitats and it saddens me it deeply saddens me that this council are even considering allowing development near this critically important site I was astounded by sections of the Ricardo consultants report it says quote further assessment of these areas is now needed to understand what habitats exist in these locations and how they would be affected it seems perverse that the debate has become focused on identifying which species are present or attempting to quantify the impact of a housing development on a triple SSI rather than asking whether development can be made accessible through further ecological assessment starting point should be that this development is inappropriate unless there are truly exceptional circumstances and this development it isn't critical to East Devon or the Local Plan. I have a question. EDDC called a climate emergency in 2019 and is now proposing a development that is harmful to wildlife, trees and nature. How does the EXMO20 development align with the council's climate change action plan? It was great that

01:24:13We called this. EDDC do good things like rewilding, planting trees and no mow may, But these are the easy things. The tougher things are when you say, I'm sorry, government, but we called a climate emergency, and there will be reputational damage if we go back on what we say. And if you say, yes, you can tarmac over this ancient, beautiful habitat and put some houses up, the tough decision is standing up and saying no, and that is when you've called a climate emergency.

01:24:45I'd like to make it clear that I object to EXMO20 in the Local Plan but believe me when I say I want a plan that works for East Devon and I'll keep my mind open and see what evolves until the submission in october I'll finish by saying there is still time to listen and make changes thank you thank you Councillor Martin I may not agree but that's okay Councillor Collins Thank you, Chair. I did wish to speak at the public section, really. Anyway, I've got a little statement here. EXMO20, I went to Exmo last Saturday, and the town was absolutely full of people. People were everywhere.

01:25:51[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.]

01:26:4268% is classed as agricultural land. That equates to 1,725.36 acres. That's a lot of land there. Do you love our great Devon countryside? A land worth protecting. Just look at this. there is absolutely nothing in the world like our beautiful villages and towns and countryside traditions. It is the very soul of our nation. This has been this way for centuries. We should be protecting East Eben countryside for future generations and our grandchildren and their children for centuries to come not just dictating by what the government have told us that we've got to build these houses just because they cannot control immigration we've had far too much immigration in this country for the last 20 years it's done no good to us whatsoever it's just causing people to move from London up country other areas coming down here to Devon and taking our land to build on so that they can live here.

01:28:08You can't blame them. It's not our fault. But we should have stood up to the government and told them East Devon's full. We just do not want these houses. We need our land to produce food. We're in a drought now. The crops are all shriveling up. Where's the food going to come from? You know we've got all these different wars and troubles over the world. There's no food going to get here.

01:28:35We can't even get oil now. It's just ridiculous. Thank you very much.

01:28:46Thank you, Councillor Collins. I think Councillor Arnott. Yes, thank you very much, Chair. In relation to what Roy has just said, who can disagree with wanting to protect rural areas, I think he was saying about 2,500 acres might come under. Try living in Torridge, where there's an AI centre planned for 840 acres in one site. So we need to keep these things in proportion. I think it was said by the gallery earlier that just the people in this room have this decision in their gift.

01:29:16That, I'm afraid, is completely wrong, and I can help you, protesters. Or you could contact the man Simon Jupp, who's a media predecessor, Director of Corporate Affairs for Pennon, South West Water, if you've got problems around water issues. But moving on to the more serious points here, although I'm not suggesting that [member of the public] should be challenged by Count Buckethead but if I can borrow that thing off you later that might be useful Rick well thank you very much it doesn't look like it costs very much to be quite honest I think these these the other thing I'd like to just ask in a way it is a formal question tell me if I've got this wrong please chair and and mr. Freeman if we're forced to restart the Local Plan we lose that key transitional status don't we is that right we then have to go to the 1188 homes a year rather than the 841 so I think the previous target was a conservative target labor increased it in december 24 we have to start the Local Plan process from the beginning

01:30:24And as far as I can see that reduces our abilities to secure affordable housing infrastructure contributions could design environmental protections. The impacts on Exmouth and sites like EXMO20, which campaign groups have understandably argued they'd like to have removed because it would protect Exmouth and that site from development, but if it is removed, as I understand it, the government will say, the inspector will say, the plan has changed significantly. Those transitional arrangements would be lost, and East Devon would be forced to plan for thousands more homes and pressure for large sites including EXMO20 would increase not decrease in short removing EXMO20 would make development in experts more likely not less an EXMO20 would almost certainly come straight back on the agenda only under less controlled circumstances and really that's all I've got to say chair I you know if I've got that wrong please tell me if I've got it right then I think as I said earlier this is a heavy burden for you as chair and for this committee to bear to get through this as you said chair earlier in my own ward

01:31:38I have got sites for hundreds of homes one would rather not have but like you in Wimple I'm having to suck it up because if I don't we lose control completely thanks chair this was at the moment we're allowed to make speeches and the problem with this and your approach is if I may say so is you've just been too aggressive and you've lost the sympathy Ms. Freeman is there anything you want to add after those three comments you're allowed to say no no okay thank you very much we come into committee then please thank you glamorous assistant is that Councillor Jung or Councillor Blakey I should be calling Councillor Jung then Councillors Blakey, Haywood and Jess Bates Thank you, Chair. Hopefully I can provide a few answers. Tire effect on air quality was a question.

01:32:47Actually, tire wear is a water quality issue and not air quality. The tires are made of plastic now. They break up and go into plastic balls that go into our stormwater drains and then flows out into the sea. That's a big issue that we need to react to, and government are just picking up the issues on that. So that's that one. uh southwest water um it's with Exmouth it's it's to do with the permit capacity uh there's an argument going on right now about the permit for um Exmouth um um southwest water say there is enough um capacity um to to cope with their uh their permit capacity and the Environment Agency are questioning that and there's going to be a consultation on the capacity of the Merlane sewage works starting on the 4th of August related to the permit capacity of the system there.

01:34:22That covers southwest water um air quality report um it's not a it's not to do with the number of houses that are going to be built on or close to the Pebblebed Heaths because the air quality is being affected by rope traffic that is passing through and over the Pebblebed Heaths It's what is happening now is an issue. Hopefully we can resolve it and we'll be able to protect the Pebblebed Heaths, which is a requirement.

01:35:01And finally, the Local Plan actually gives Southwest Water and all the other people that provide the highways, roads, the infrastructure.

01:35:27That's the word I was looking for the Local Plan gives these people clarity of where they're going to have to invest to cover for these roads and that that is why we need to talk to all these providers to make sure that they react to where we are putting these houses when we started talking about Marlcombe we know one of the first discussions we had with was with the Southwest water and it's imperative that Marlcombe will have a sewage system because we know that Countess Ware can't cope at the moment so just that's providing a few answers to some of the questions that's come up thank you thank you Councillor Jung we come to Councillor Blakey then please thank you chair you'll probably be delighted to know that as a result of the address you gave us a little earlier which covered most of what I was going to say this is going to be a lot shorter than it will otherwise have been all right I think first of all I want to make the point as I have done

01:36:42[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.]

01:37:22We're all residents here. We all know the pain that people are going through and the displeasure that arises from seeing development where you don't want to see it. But it's a fact that we have to do what we're doing or else face a much worse consequence if the government were to take over the whole issue. I also wanted to make the point that for some number of years now, And the expansion of housing numbers in East Devon has had its heavy lifting done by the development at Cranbrook, and that is still the case, and will in future also be done by the development of Marlcombe.

01:38:06So the development of existing communities and let's take our largest one Exmouth as a for example have not had to actually accept massive extra development but everywhere has to do its little bit to help because you cannot put everything in one place. Now, development of a place, town, village, parish, whatever it may be, there's been talk of big percentages in increases of houses. I offer for you the experience at Cronbrook, which is going from 3,500 buddings, the original plan, to at least 8 000 that is a factor of 2.3 times the original somewhat more I think than pretty much anywhere else is uh going to have to put up with um but it's necessary there's no point in arguing and there's no there's no point in saying just say no to government because we know where that will lead it'll it'll just result in central government taking over the whole issue uh the other thing that I just wanted to say is that we'll have a new prime minister in a week or so who has already said that there will be changes to even the current housing policy which is to

01:39:33Include a massive program of council house building with no mention as to how it's going to be funded or where it's going to be done so I think we're going to be looking at further changes forced upon us before we know it get ready for it thank you yes no doubt we have another early Christmas present for the planning profession in the form of a new MPPF coming vice chair thank you chair I entirely echo what council Blakey says and actually it's covered a great many of my points I always find it in my involvement with this committee um incredible that any planning authority can actually get a Local Plan through to fruition and completion because it takes an inordinate amount of time we're here you know four or five years and the world moves on governments move on um infrastructure moves on technology moves on and you're always trying to catch up um you know and As Councillor Blakey says, each settlement in East Devon, a great many of them that aren't having the benefit of being inside a national landscape, are having to take their share.

01:40:49I fought an election on trying to stop development in Axminster. Now, Axminster is likely to have, in this Local Plan, 1,300 extra hounds, or thereabouts. that's far in excess of the burden proportionally in percentage terms being placed on Exmouth. We can't get, I mean, I'm slightly mindful of that sort of Monty Python sketch of the four Yorkshiremen each trying to double down on their woes about how long it takes to get an appointment and how long it takes to get a dentist and how long it takes to travel from one side of your town to the other um that's been this is a medieval town our infrastructure is crumbling and yet here in this plan because we're not protected by a national landscape we're taking 1300 extra houses um I come back to Councillor Collins point all of the sites that we had to go through we looked at we ruminated um all of them were put forward by landowners all of them so essentially the landowners themselves some of whom are farmers have decided to put their land into this

01:41:58They have volunteered their grade a their grade b farming land for money to build houses that's a fact and whilst we all know that there is a food crisis you know there is all an issues there is also a huge number of families who cannot live in the place where they were born where their forefathers were born because they can't afford it the chair alluded to that earlier so we do have a moral obligation to build houses but you're quite right we can go through this entire process and take it all the way to fruition give it to the planning inspector and then a new government can decide actually we want you to double that target that's what the government decides and we can say no we can build barricades they'll just legislate and say well you're going to you have to seven percent of East Devon is built on that's a very small percent if you in terms and if we look at this map I'm looking at the map here you know if in a multiverse there were an axe

01:42:59Minster 57 campaign group and a homileton 26 campaign group and a sigmoth campaign group and a Seaton campaign group and a cranberry campaign group we would be having these multiple dialogues backwards and forwards with lots of technical arguments you haven't done this you haven't done that which will be overtaken by time because new evidence come forwards yes some are opinions some are facts some are conjecture but each of those groups would want their own thing it's it's akin to nimbyism and I get it because I love living where I live I've lived in slough I've lived in a concrete jungle I don't want to live there but the government is in system so we find these multiple opposing factors but we still have to find a way through it and if we don't the facts are clear, and you can argue about the exact numbers and headroom and 10%, 12.8%, but the facts are if we don't take this through, which is a legal process, the government will take it out of our hands. We've already seen in the last few weeks the government taking away the powers of

01:44:03This planning committee, and each of us here who've served on the planning committee have seen applications in our own wards where we're vehemently against them. The planning committee looked at the law planning law weighed up harm versus benefit and made a decision and each of us held our head in our hands and went there's another field gone that's the nature of planning it will always be thus and it will always carry on so we're at the point that if we don't do this and the point is well made by the speakers this will go to the planning inspector and if the planning inspector finds it wanting they'll throw it out so we have to do the best we can but it's It's an impossible task to get a perfect Local Plan for all the ward members who've said I speak against it.

01:44:48Yes, I get that. But as strategic planning members, you're not concerned with the minutiae of towns. You're concerned with the overall impact to East Devon. And if, as has been mentioned, local government progresses, we'll get an announcement on Thursday. And if the Secretary of State makes a decision that favours Exeter, Exeter's plan is simple. We are going to subsume, says Exeter, vast swathes of land, all of Exeter, all of Cranbrook, Markham, the airport, all the bits that make money.

01:45:21We're going to grab north. We're going to grab west. We're going to grab south. That's to build houses. And our Local Plan will move into theirs. And then at some point, as Mr. Freeman says, they may decide, OK, we're actually going to rip it all up and do a new Local Plan because we need to deliver 50,000 new houses in here because that's the growth of the greater Exeter.

01:45:43And this isn't fear mongering. This is how politics works. So this committee, for the members who are here, we have to make the unamiable decision. And, yeah, it will be our legacy. And in years to come, when we're forgotten, it will still be on the Internet. councillors a b and c made this decision why did they do that because we had to that's our job and if we don't someone else would do it for us and we'll all sit here mute and go well well you know we did our best but we didn't get it over the line and this is the situation we find ourselves in Councillor Blake is exactly right none of us want this none of us want it none of us came into politics to build thousands of houses and allow development without infrastructure without water quality without air quality to pollute our seas we just didn't do it we know we didn't the members of the public here know we didn't but we have a job to do and that job is to deliver a Local Plan

01:46:38For East Devon not for Exmouth not for Exminster not for Honus and not for Wimple for East Devon and if you don't build it here you will build it somewhere else and I'm looking on the map and I've got the member here for Smeenthorpe is it in your ward Councillor Brown only part of it So looking at this, everything along the A330-303 corridor, it's in the national landscape, it's small settlements.

01:47:03So should we just take all of the housing being proposed, all of Malcom, all of Cranbrook Extension, all of Axminster's EXMO20 and say, I'm sorry, Stockland, you draw the short straw, we're going to put it all there. You've got 22,000 houses because you're on a main road, you're near a railway station. do we do that no we don't because it's not reasonable what can be accommodated chair I've said enough thank you very much for your time thank you members thank you Councillor Hayward I'm just going to take just a very brief second before I come to just before I come to Councillor Bailey I'm mindful that the report in front of us is an update on where we are with the Local Plan and while I appreciate members want to be heard on all of these issues the only actual decision that is in front of us today is about adopting an updated East Devon local development scheme everything else in the recommendations and in this report is just to note some progress updates and so at this point I'm

01:48:09Going to propose from the chair the recommendations that are in the report because I'm not hearing any controversy around those recommendations. I suspect I might do in a minute, given Councillor Jess Bailey's reaction, but the recommendations we can discuss and amend if we need to, just for good order. I propose those from the Chair, and just to remind members that that is strictly the subject of today's report.

01:48:33With that said, I have Councillor Jess Bailey, then Davey, then Faithful, then Fitzgerald, which is in alphabetical order. That's nice. Councillor Jess Bailey.

01:48:45Thank you. I wanted to talk about the water cycle study and the comment that it has the aim of establishing a single version of the truth. And also, [member of the public] comments, which were along the lines of we have very little power over southwest water and that we're doing everything we can. I agree with that to some extent, but I think that East Devon can do more. I think water quality is a top, top issue for residents, probably the top issue, I would say, for many residents in all the services and all the issues that we cover. And I would like to see whether at East Devon we can recruit an officer whose specific function is as a water quality expert, because I am concerned about the planning applications that are coming through and the grampian conditions that are being imposed and the lack of clarity around the responses that we get from southwest water and as a planning authority and this is after all the Strategic Planning Committee which sets the direction of travel we are consulted we do consult various people on our planning applications that includes

01:50:32Tree officers and a whole raft of other officers and I think that we should have a water quality expert that is consulted on planning applications because for instance and I just give this as an example, Gerway, the planning application for I think it was 140 houses at Gerway, that was recommended by officers for approval despite the fact that we know the sewage treatment works at Fluxton are at capacity. That's what our water cycle study tells us and despite the fact there's no evidence of Fluxton being upgraded. So as an authority we were recommending approval of that application with a gramping condition despite there being no evidence of the fact that the sewage treatment work was going to be upgraded. So I believe it would be really beneficial to this authority to consult a water expert as part of every planning application where there's a material impact on water. And I also believe that that person, whoever they may be should have take be involved in the finalizing of the water cycle study because we are not water experts I'm not a water expert and I I'm not sure that you know wouldn't be

01:52:01Reasonable for our planners to be water experts in the same way that we have ecologists and we have tree experts and we consult a whole range of people I think that for the finalization of the water cycle study and going forward for consult as an expert on every planning application particularly the large ones and particularly where there's question marks over the capacity we should as a planning authority have somebody in-house that can do that so that's what I would like to say and I'd like to make some kind of recommendation I know that we can't commit to that person you know that's not for this authority to decide today um but I believe that we could make a recommendation to cabinet to have a look at that um because I think that going forward water will I mean it's a massive issue already and I think it will will continue to be a massive issue for our residents thank you thank you for that Councillor Bailey and and I'm conscious mr Freeman might want to say something in a minute um it's it's sort of timely because we are looking at

01:53:10Precisely this issue in relation to the king's application um and and you know what what expertise do we and don't we have and what do we need to bring in and all of those fun questions um you I'm perfectly happy if you want to propose a recommendation mr Freeman may not be looking at his face um but but just to reassure those discussions are happening anyway um around how do we handle this going forwards um if you still want to make a recommendation fine that that's your call um constitutionally um mr Freeman did you have anything you wanted to say there I'm conscious you've been away and we're dropping you in it um thank you chair um I mean I I agree with the chair we do need to find a solution to this because it is um difficult not just in terms of the water cycle study and getting to this single version of the truth but I'm also very mindful that the water cycle study is going to be at a point in time

01:54:04So it's it's going to have a sell by date and um or best before date um and it's not going to be a very long one either um uh and then where you know even if we we get to that single version of the truth there's a danger maybe six months later where it's out of date because things have moved on and we're back to being reliant on what South for Swart to tell us.

01:54:29The difficulty is I'm not sure having an in-house officer would solve the problem because there's a huge amount of modelling work that's gone on, information about the capacity of individual serious treatment works, hydraulic capacity of the network between them, and all of this, and it's difficult to see how one internal officer would have the expertise needed have access to the information needed to do that assessment work when all of that information is is held by Southwest Water even our own consultants as you recall has going to struggle to get the information out of Southwest Water to do the work and then ultimately the work that they've done and the modeling that they've done Southwest Water have then disagreed with quite a lot of it and the quite a lot of the findings in their response to the Local Plan consultation um and I've now had discussions with environment agency who sort of have a different take on it slightly to both southwest water and hasconing so this comes back to this point of getting to a single version of the truth um as to how one internal

01:55:39Officer could be that single version of the truth it's difficult to see quite how that would work but it's an option to explore but I think as the chair says we need to look at a wider range of options in terms of how we're seeking advice on individual applications and in terms of impacts on the water environment do we need some kind of relationship with consultancy or something like that do have the expertise in house and access to the modelling information but how does that work what's the cost implications of that there's lots of things that need to be taken into account we have asked task owning uh who is still working on the water cycle study to advise us on a particular application um said that would be interesting to get costing from them to comment on an individual application as a starting point for that work um so yes I mean whether the committee wants to make a resolution about an individual officer or perhaps what might be a way forward would be to make a make it work for

01:56:46Myself here but make a recommendation about a report to be brought back to a future meeting about how we deal with this issue moving forward in terms of considering the impacts of development on the water cycle uh water environment sort of post the water cycle study how do we consider the impacts of individual applications how do we keep that our knowledge of the impacts up to date post the water cycle study those sorts of issues um as the chair says we need to do that work we are starting to do that work so I'm quite happy to bring a report back at some point I'm not sure when but at some point in in the future um to seek members views on on those issues and perhaps recommendations about how we take that forward in the funding that would be required so maybe that's the way forward thank you thank you yeah I'm certainly happy to be kind of flexible about flexible about it in terms of you know it doesn't have to rigidly be an officer but I think

01:57:49You know every day there are planning applications coming through and we need to kind of have that concept we need to try and get somebody to respond because otherwise we were left in a situation where we're in planning committee and people are looking at their phones to try and understand you know what the upgrades are so we need that that to be part of our planning process so um I'm really happy to um make a recommendation that um that we request that um the director of planning urgently brings a report on um identifying I think of some good wording um identifying how we um evaluate the impact on water quality um on planning applications and keeping the water cycle study updated something like that either with a individual officer or through a consultancy or through some other approach I have a wording if you like Councillor Bailey to help and and actually before I do that just one second good train of thought and so a suggested fourth recommendation to add to the ones that have already proposed requests that the assistant director planning

01:59:08Station development services explore and report back as soon as possible on options for support in dealing with water quality issues in the planning process and keeping the water cycle study up to date I think that's what you're saying Jess go on either with a officer or consultancy or some other approach I left it as support just to keep that option open but that could be like oh well we've got this we've got the requisite expertise we don't need anybody resources capacity resources and capacity okay so in that case then with apologies to Wendy I'll add that as a fourth recommendation I will I will send you the wording that I have written so that you have it so the recommendations therefore stand at four to include that one who's next is it directly relevant Councillor Jung okay go ahead yeah regarding what cancer Bailey's just said I would very much support that it it touches on to my portfolio and I'm as you know I've got a number of issues that I'm dealing with which would certainly help with having some more expertise on this so I'll be

02:00:48More than happy to support thank you Councillor Davey thank you chair and yeah I would also support that because I know Jeff has come to a number of meetings where Southwest water blithely said there's no problem with connecting to the sewage network and Jeff has come along to say yes there is because you're not even managing what you've got at the moment and it goes through anyway because there's nothing much we can do about it so I think that would be good so with your indulgence chair because you're quite right what we're discussing a lot of what we're discussing today is not directly relevant to what's on the agenda but I just wanted to say a bit about development site constraints because from some of the comments I've heard I think they're often seen as absolutes and I just want to say that many sites and no doubt a great many of those in this Local Plan are immediately going to give rise to input from residents they always give rise to concerns about traffic that's

02:02:02Always number one, the impact on health services, schools, the impact on the environment, sewage, the landscape, farmland, etc. And often some of those are from our own officers and statutory consultees. And those plans are sometimes able to be adapted until officers and consultees are satisfied, that the effects can be mitigated by various measures. So I think sometimes when we look at a site and we think, well, there's no way you can develop that, it's got all these constraints, and then you find, well, it actually can if you put these measures in place. And even then, as councillors, we can refuse them, but then we find that a planning inspector looks at them on appeal and decides that actually it's acceptable after all.

02:03:01I'll just draw attention to a recent decision which I read with interest, which was a development in the countryside. It wasn't actually housing. It was recommended for refusal, supported by us as councillors, so we refused it. It was against a string of our policies, and I read the inspector's report with great interest. The inspector accepted that it was in an unsustainable location, there was landscape impact, etc. It was against a whole load of things, but they then felt that all that was outweighed by the need for employment land and a lack of alternative sites, and it was passed by the inspector. So we can try, but there are often other factors and of course we're very familiar at planning and I've been on planning now for six years and I'm becoming more and more familiar with the term weighted balance as we debate yet another application that we really do feel and officers feel probably in other circumstances we wouldn't permit development here but because we have insufficient housing land supply, we have no option but to pass it, and those of us who are on planning know

02:04:26That only too well. So much as we resent the amount of development that's been foisted on us by government, all we can do is make the best of a bad job, and when it comes to specific sites, sometimes all we can do is make the best of a bad job there as well and accept that there are going to be impacts. But often, even if we don't accept them, an inspector will say, yes, there are impacts, but I feel it's outweighed by often East Devon's lack of a housing land supply. So I think when EXMO20 comes up, because it will have to come to a planning committee at some point, or at least I hope it will, if it comes forward in the time before the government abolish us all, and or we become part of a different authority.

02:05:21So I rather hope it will be during my tenure, and councillors will make a decision on that. But estimate 20 will come forward. All these things will be tested through the planning process. So it's not finished, and it's not a done deal. It's inclusion in the Local Plan does not mean It is a development site that is definitely going to be developed. It may come to planning, and we may decide, and officers may even decide, that the effects cannot be mitigated, and therefore it can't go forward.

02:05:58But we shall see, and there are many hurdles that such a site will have to overcome before it can be found acceptable. I think that's enough.

02:06:10Thank you, Councillor Davey. And for [member of the public] sanity, he's just asked that I seek a seconder for the four proposals that are in front of us. Thank you, Councillor Hayward. We have, yeah, there we go. I hope that assuages your worries, [member of the public]. And welcome to strategic planning, by the way.

02:06:32Okay so I have two further speakers listed this is your final call if you want to speak on this item because I'm going to take those speakers and anyone who sticks their hand up now and then we're going to go to a vote on those four recommendations okay so I have councillors faithful then Fitzgerald and then we'll go to a vote on those please thank you chair trying to stay on agenda item but somebody else brought the subject up of our Prime Minister to be this stuff about social for well council houses so much of the housing targets that we have as I understand it are determined that the thing that's really pushing is the need for social and affordable homes and we we have such a small proportion and the developers always fighting against it so whether how it will change if there's more council houses being built it's I don't know if this is a question whether this will impact the overall housing numbers because it's the social and affordable homes that we need but

02:07:53It's usually it's like 2575 or something stupid like that that we're so we're not getting enough of the what we need so the developers are getting away with everything else and it's whether we can get change the numbers overall by delivering the council houses that we really do need instead of all the other things that we don't need so I think it's worth highlighting it's not strictly the number of social council houses and the factors in it's the affordability ratio which I imagine is affected by because it's calculated based on average house prices and incomes right so there's going to be an element of affordable homes for sale that factor into that some people argue that this is you know people pay what they can afford and the market is not determined as some people are suggesting by the number of houses being built but by the way people can afford to pay and it's is to do with I mean basically the the way is central government have it basically devalued the pound because

02:09:08The instead of using the wrong was it the calculations that G do you mean earning P probably is that the different numbers and so that's why the value of the price for properties has stayed the same is people's wages have gone down is what the problem is anyway that's going somewhere else that as much as I would genuinely enjoy to have that conversation with you Peter because it's fascinating that that does feel like possibly a conversation for another day but maybe one that we should pick up sometime that brings us then to Councillor Fitzgerald please thank you we did speak at the last Strategic Planning Committee about having a sort of visioning agenda item which hasn't appeared this month and I wonder given the conversations we've just been having about the new prime minister that we're likely to have, the fact that we might have a different housing minister, the fact that we might be getting a new NPPF before the end of the year, A, whether or not it's worth coming back to that idea, B, whether it's

02:10:32Worth delegating authority to the chair at this stage to send a letter to the new prime minister and if we get a new housing minister to lay out some of our key concerns because we know that well we can I think we can safely assume that the version of regionalism that we're likely to see is not necessarily as heavily weighted towards the sort of particular local needs of southwest and rural and coastal areas as urban areas, and our needs are quite different, as we've established, and I think that there is potentially scope to talk about the fact that we have We have a population and a population growth that is largely driven by migration into our district and that quite a lot of the problems we have with bringing forward enough affordable housing is that a lot of housing is being taken up by people who, say, have made their money elsewhere than in this district.

02:11:56I would like to see this council be able to be much more proactive about bringing forward community-led housing, council housing, bungalows, truly affordable housing, and maybe having even discussions with major landowners. The church has recently talked about wanting to concentrate more on affordable housing on its sites. but we're not having we're working in such a reactive way um and I wonder whether at this stage with the changes that we foresee coming down from central government soon uh might be an opportunity for us to uh lay out our wishes and our particular concerns um either through a letter and or um having you know diarising a discussion for the next for the next meeting thank you I think that's probably one that we need to pick up outside the meeting just conscious that it's it's so I I've had to look at the minutes and I can't see anything in there so um as of course I wasn't here last time I was away um so I I think that's possibly a conversation we need to pick up outside just

02:13:12Conscious that it's it's I think it was the one prior to that you were definitely down right okay I don't recall that in that case but I not that I don't believe you that it happens of course that's so that that that's one that I'd suggest we just pick up outside does anybody else want to say anything about the recommend the four recommendations that were in front of us please which have been proposed and seconded I see no hands is everybody clear what the four recommendations are so the four recommendations are the three that are set out in the report plus a recommendation that asks mr. Freeman to explore and report back on options for additional resources and capacity to support us in dealing with water quality issues in the development management process and keeping the water cycle study up to date is everybody clear on those four recommendations please okay mr. Doherty do you want to take the vote or mr.

02:14:08Hunter normally lets me okay in which case then all those in favor please all All those against, and those abstaining. Okay, thank you, members. That is clearly carried. I'm conscious we've been going for two and a quarter hours now. We are going to take five minutes, so we will reconvene, please, at 20 past.

02:24:05Okay, thank you, members. We're going to pick up again with the next report, which hopefully will be slightly shorter than the previous one. But with that said, Mr. Freeman, please.

02:24:18Thank you, Chair. So this report is just to make members aware that Mid-Devon are currently consulting on a scoping exercise in terms of their new Local Plan. So they're proposing to produce a Local Plan under the new system. This is equivalent, I suppose, to the issues and options consultation we did at the very start, so five years ago now, of our Local Plan process to identify sort of key issues to be addressed, the contents of the plan, those sorts of things, the plan period that it should cover um and so uh they're proposing plan period of 26 to 2046 there's um suggestions that they include things like visions and objectives role and function of settlements as we have the usual sorts of things that you would expect a Local Plan to cover uh obviously their housing requirements employment needs so so basically the comment is that what they're proposing seems very sensible or fine uh from our perspective in terms of that there's a couple of things we've highlighted around the likely contents for example they make

02:25:21Reference to development management policies well the government's moving to national development management policies as we discussed at previous meetings so that will neither have a bearing on the scope of the plan in terms of that the other thing we've just flagged up obviously is that there is some strategic sites in their current Local Plan around uh columbton in particular and junction 27 um and that have not progressed during that but progressed but they've not started or delivered anything yet um so we're just flagging up um the potential need for discussion around those because obviously those are very close to our boundary and have an impact um that needs to be considered through their plan um so the suggested um response in at the in the sort of box at the end of section one of the report and the recommendation is that members endorse the recommended response to the Mid-Devon consultation and agree for its submission.

02:26:17Thank you. Thank you, Mr Freeman. Are there any questions on this report, please? Does anybody wish to speak on this report? Councillor Jung. I'd just say good luck to them. Is that a proposal, Councillor Jung?

02:26:38Thank you very much. Does anybody wish to second the recommendations are set out in the report I saw is your hand wafting to second peter or well I will take Councillor Bailey's seconding then thank you brian uh peter I suppose this is a question is it likely that they're not going to get it finished well until after the new council is it so it seems a bit of a silly exercise to me but um no they won't as we've identified in our response you know it will end up being adopted by a subsequent authority um in all likelihood um that's not entirely unusual uh I mean if I recall you've seen uh authorities in somerset I think are still pursuing district level plans based on their old boundaries because they started before became a unitary authority um and obviously somersets only just starting to think now I think about um a wider somerset plan um so these things take a long time as our own experience shows um and and so it's you know unlikely that the new

02:27:52Devon authorities will will be starting a new Local Plan at day one so there's a danger that they end up with a void in between that I think they're trying to fill by producing a Local Plan at the Mid-Devon geography now basically to make sure they minimise that that issue in the future Councillor Hayward thank you chair uh for the just for the recording the record the minutes um I'd just like to echo Councillor Jung's statement that we wish them well uh and as a hat tip to Councillor Brown that I wish the residents of the Mid-Devon side of Smithhorpe well in the future Thank you.

02:28:31Thank you, Councillor Hayward. Councillor Davey? Davie? Davie. Whatever. I'll answer to anything. Yes, I particularly welcome, I think, the comments on development of Junction 27 on the M5. I know that Junction well. I used to go and visit the school at Columpton quite regularly. It is just on the edge of Columpton, to be fair, but I think part of my issue, yes, is the questions that arise about sustainability, but I wonder as well if they're kind of pursuing a rather outdated model of retail provision there,

02:29:19And if what they would provide there would actually suck all the life out of Exmouth Town that would be a long way away Columpton Town Centre and it seems to me it's based on a rather slightly out of date model of retail provision and I wonder anyway, whether it would be viable, given what we were saying about Malcombe. I think that there could be similar issues in providing the required accommodation and so on to even achieve viability in an area like that, and whether developers and retail outlets would even consider that to be a viable proposition. And I just wondered if everybody would like to comment on the possible viability aspects of it not that it needs to go in there because obviously that will be a matter for them but I just I'm interested in development around that junction and what might be the parameters of it future yeah no I share your concerns it's never really made much sense to me and I think we expressed some concerns when their previous like problems going through shows how long I've been here I can't remember commenting on their plan

02:30:52Um so yeah I mean I think that's kind of why we've put that marker down as you say we've not expressed an opinion but I think it's because of its proximity to our boundaries and and potential impacts beyond their boundaries it's something that we would want to be involved with as a conversation with them as their plan progresses in terms of what do they do with those proposals but it's difficult to see how it's viable, and I do wonder if that's why it's not come forward.

02:31:23But we'll have to see as their work progresses and discussions progress. Councillor Faithfull. Can we... I don't know if they can do anything in the Local Plan regarding public transport, particularly between Honiton and Cullumpton. It's non-existent, and it seems, particularly if they're going to have in this new town, um can we do something about that please because it's it takes forever to get from honet to columbton at the moment I think that's probably beyond the scope of this consultation isn't it mr Freeman well certainly beyond the scope of this consultation and generally beyond the scope of a Local Plan to make any kind of provision for public transport is really an issue for Devon county councillors um and obviously the the providers um I guess all I can say is you know growth at clumpton along that corridor may make services more viable in the future and lead to an enhancement of service but um it's beyond the the planning system to control that okay thank you mr human any more relevant comments please Councillor Collins thank you chair people from

02:32:44Honington want to go to clumpton they go to Exeter on the bus and then they there's a good bus service on it from Exeter to Clumpton, Tiverton. I don't like much of the development which has already happened around Tiverton and Clumpton. They've taken an awful lot of good farmland, especially Junction 27. That would be very bad to take farmland around there because it's such high quality thank you anything else members no okay in which case and the recommendations are as set out in the report in front of you which have been appropriately proposed and seconded all those in favor please thank you members that's carried unanimously which I believe brings us to the end of today's agenda he said quickly checking yep that's correct. Thank you very much, members. We will see you next time.