Agenda and minutes

virtual consultative meeting, Strategic Planning Committee - Thursday, 29th September, 2022 9.30 am

Venue: Online via the zoom app

Contact: Wendy Harris  01395 517542; email


No. Item


Public speaking

Information on public speaking is available online



Councillor Alasdair Bruce spoke on behalf of Feniton Parish Council referring the Committee to the sites proposed for Feniton and the comments from the Planning Inquiry of 2014 where the Inspector had only passed one small site concluding that Feniton was not a sustainable location for new large scale housing developments. 


He advised the Parish Council believed the description of ‘modest’ for the services and infrastructure was grossly misleading and suggested with only one pub, one small shop, a school at maximum capacity and no medical services was best described as ‘low’ given the large size of the current population.  The road infrastructure in and around Feniton was inadequate for the level of traffic use and the number of potential jobs within easy access of the village was tiny with most employment opportunities requiring a car journey, contrary to EDDC policy to encourage less car usage.  With the exception of site Feni_05 which could enhance Feniton the Parish Council believed that the categorisation of the majority of sites as 3 and 4 was not supported by the facts.  He referred to the recent spate of sewage discharges into our bathing waters which only highlighted the glaring obvious inadequacy of our current overloaded system and any additional large scale development will not only serve to further overload the system but with its proximity to the River Otter would further endanger the water quality and environment.


Councillor Graham Long spoke on behalf of Upottery Parish Council asking for Members to consider to include the 2.3 acre housing site identified in Upottery village during the 2017 Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment which had been removed following advice from officers.  He outlined four reasons why the site should be included:

1.    The community supports additional housing similar in number to the growth the parish has seen over the previous 15 years.  Upottery has a much cherished primary school and young families in the village are needed for the school to survive;

2.    The role and functions of settlements report considered at Committee July 2021 showed Upottery to be a very slightly larger and more active parish than Broadhembury which is included in the Local Plan;

3.    The fact that Upottery has a peripatetic post office whilst Broadhembury has a shop/post office seems to be the only reason the site was removed.  The report did not take into account the neighbouring village of Churchinford, which is in Somerset and has a very active community shop, coffee shop and post office supported by Upottery residents;

4.    Whilst residents of Broadhembury remain dependent on broadband delivered over copper wires, all three Upottery villages have access to full fibre gigabit broadband since 2019 which has been extensively used during the pandemic but also enables residents to shop online at all the major supermarkets.


The following statement was read out on behalf of Councillor Colin Brown, Ward Member:

Upottery has a field in the middle of the village opposite the village hall, which is just over 2  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.


Minutes of the previous meeting pdf icon PDF 401 KB

Minutes of the previous meeting held on 6 September 2022


Members accepted the minutes of the consultative Strategic Planning Committee on 6 September 2022.


Declarations of interest

Guidance is available online to Councillors and co-opted members on making declarations of interest


Minute 35. Site selection for the emerging East Devon Local Plan 2020 to 2040 - findings for Tier 3 and Tier 4 settlements - small towns and larger villages.

Councillor Mike Howe, Other Registerable Interest, Bishops Clyst Parish Councillor.


Minute 35. Site selection for the emerging East Devon Local Plan 2020 to 2040 - findings for Tier 3 and Tier 4 settlements - small towns and larger villages.

Councillor Mike Howe, Affects and prejudicial Non-registerable Interest, Owner of a convenience shop in Clyst St Mary.  Advised not predetermined but had strong views.


Matters of urgency

Information on matters of urgency is available online



There were no matters of urgency.


Confidential/exempt item(s)

To agree any items to be dealt with after the public (including the Press) have been excluded. Thereare no itemswhich officersrecommendshould be dealtwithin thisway.



There were no confidential/exempt items.


Presentations from invited developers/agents/landowners promoting sites at Tier 3 and Tier 4 settlements which are recommended for allocation or as second choice sites for allocation by officers pdf icon PDF 140 KB

Running order of presentations.


The following presentations were presented to Members.


Alex Bullock, Grass Roots Planning representing Land Value Alliances (LVA)

Brcl_12 – Land West of Whimple Road, Broadclyst

·         Site boundary is circa 12 hectares (30 acres) consisting of 6 largely flat fields divided by mixed hedgerow and limited tree provision;

·         Opportunity to provide 160 dwellings including affordable housing and self- build plots;

·         The site has a collection of farm buildings;

·         Large frontage onto Whimple Road;

·         Public right of ways run through the site;

·         Ability to deliver off-site improvements to public open space, cycle and footpath links via S106;

·         Accessible to primary and secondary school and local facilities;

·         Vehicle access from Whimple Road;

·         Provision of pedestrian and cycle links to existing footpath network;

·         Structural planting to strengthen existing site boundary features;

·         Attenuation basins (sustainable drainage system);

·         Generous new areas of public open space with potential space for new playing field alongside new play areas;

·         Regular bus service linking Broadclyst with Exeter;

·         Cranbrook train station is located circa 3km to the south of the site;

·         Significant biodiversity net gain with an aim to exceed national target.


Richard Jackson, Senior Estate Manager, Killerton House

Brcl_29 – Land East of Town End, Broadclyst

·         Potential to accommodate up to 24 dwellings offering high quality design and layout located close to the village and facilities;

·         Approximately 1ha.

·         Low land sensitivity;

·         Key constraints include minor visual impact on surrounding properties, overlaps SSSI Impact Risk Zone, loss of productive agricultural land and vehicle access would need to be from Town End;


Nick Yeo, 3 West Group Ltd on behalf of Andy J Dyer Limited

GH/ED/73 – Land West of Strawberry Hill, Lympstone

·         Existing development borders the north and south of the site and existing roads to the east and west;

·         Retention of key hedgerows and mature trees within the site;

·         Positive biodiversity net gain;

·         Discussions ongoing with DCC Highways relating to appropriate points of access and to secure appropriate pedestrian linkages.


Questions raised by Members included:

Ø  What proportion of the houses built would be affordable?  Mr Yeo advised affordable housing would be provided with the expectation that it would be delivered in accordance with the council’s affordable housing policy.


David Seaton, PCL Planning

GH/ED/75 – Land off Grange Close, Lympstone

·         Site is adjacent to the Built Up Area Boundary (BUAB);

·         Planning consent granted for new dwelling and car port (reference 21/0490/FUL) on adjacent land also outside the BUAB;

·         Site is accessible from a private drive to the south, connecting to Grange Close;

·         Existing trees would be retained with the provision of sensitive and domestic scale landscaping.  All landscaping would carefully consider both existing wildlife and horticulture while attempting to establish


Sam Blight, Acorn Property Group

Lymp_01 – 22 Underhill Crescent, Lympstone

·         Key constraint: the site falls within the Green Wedge; 

·         Proposal for sensitive and bespoke design of individual dwellings with due consideration of storey heights, materials, form and landscaping;

·         Infill site – residential development to the north, east and west of the site;

·         Detailed consideration to strengthen existing trees and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.


Site selection for the emerging East Devon Local Plan 2020 to 2040 - findings for Tier 3 and Tier 4 settlements - small towns and larger villages pdf icon PDF 4 MB

This report specificially concentrates on assessment of potential sites to allocate for development at Tier 3 and Tier 4 settlements.

Additional documents:


Before inviting the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management to present his report the Chair addressed Committee Members and proposed to amend the recommendations in line with the tier 1 and tier 2 recommendations to read as follows:

‘Recommend endorsement of the preferred sites and 2nd choice sites as suitable for public consultation.’


The Committee considered the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management’s report that specifically concentrated on the assessment of potential sites to allocate for development in tier 3, Budleigh Salterton and Colyton and tier 4, selected villages that had a good range of services and facilities.  The sites in each of the tiers listed in the report were shown as preferred sites for allocations for development and 2nd best choices for allocation to ensure that sufficient housing was met to ensure the plan could be found sound by the Planning Inspector at examination.


The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management referred Members to the Chair’s proposed recommendation addressing a caveat to give consideration to the scale of growth in Feniton and Whimple and how to frame the level of growth for those two settlements in the consultation.


The Chair suggested the Committee go through the settlements alphabetically.


Councillor Ingham sought clarification on whether there was a percentage chart for tier 3 as detailed in paragraph 4.6 for tier 4.  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management apologised advising it could be produced in due course if necessary emphasising the general point was to discuss the scale of growth for Feniton and Whimple indicating the number of sites proposed for both these settlements as preferred and 2nd choice sites would be strategically significant for our strategy.  He also referred to other settlements that had in excess of 10% growth that Members may want to discuss and suggested that Members could still consult on all of the preferred sites and 2nd choice sites in those locations with a frame for the consultation about how much growth would be considered in those two settlements as well as other settlements if Members had concerns about the volume of growth.


A discussion took place on a suitable way forward for the meeting where it was addressed there was a very real risk that the plan would fail at examination as it was placing larger levels of housing in tier 3 and 4 settlements.  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management suggested the consultation could be framed in a way to suggest it was looking at ranges of level of growth in locations and gave Exmouth as an example, as tier one, which could be argued that the scale of growth proposed was an acceptable level but if you include all the preferred sites and 2nd choice sites in some of the villages it would not be an acceptable level.  This could be done in terms of developing the Spatial Strategy for the Local Plan  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.