Exmouth's new Strand is taking shape, and people were beginning to say nice things about it. Until the recent planning display and application for the Shard. Sorry, of course this is the performance stage or rather it was the performance stage but now is to be a two storey inside plus more seating outside cafe so that the existing traders have healthy competition and DCC can get some revenue back while the performance stage aspect becomes a shoebox on the side which limits its usefulness. At least people won't be tempted to stand on the war memorial to watch the entertainment, they wouldn't see anything.
We have posted before that work seemed to have started before the planning and consultation was complete, and here we have clear evidence that that is the case.
Now the existing proprieters are objecting; then the manager of the Bargain Booze store which shouldn't be there is complaining that the eyesore bus shelter shouldn't be there either, a point with which we would agree.
All this is happening while we are waiting for the private sector consultants to come up with their town centre plan and subsequently commissioned seafront plan, so everything is very coherent and joined up. The cart has arrived long before the horse. And the bowling alley is still incapacitated with piles.
Meanwhile EDDC are seeking to offload their responsibilities. They have already offloaded the flower
beds, taken on by the town council and currently seeking sponsorship. A similar thing happened, I believe to the seafront lights. Now they are planning to stop sand dune maintenance. Apart from the effect this would have on the essential tourism, what is to be gained from spending money on a seafront plan which could be produced by community organisations when the responsible authority is happy to let the beach invade the seafront?
One answer might be to explore any possibility within the Localism policy flagship to separate Exmouth from the rest of the district. Our council tax pays for the services of the wealthy folk in Sidmouth and West Hill. If they are to cheese pare off specific essential functions then let them see what it is like to go without.
The local elections are coming up. Perhaps we could tackle this ConDem coalition and our specific local problems with some truly locally focused candidates.
www.independentnetwork.org
Tuesday, 1 March 2011
Localism
An interesting development in recent months has been the willingness of Exmouth Town Council, in the guise of its Conservative mayor Darryl Nicholas to in the nicest possible way call a spade a spade with regard to the relationship between Exmouth and EDDC, as personified by Sidmouth. The particular areas in which it was manifest related to the disproportionate new housing burden to be placed on Exmouth in the local development plan, and the apparent unfairness in rates of snow clearance within the district. There was at one point even a suggestion that the impending departure of Sara Randall Johnson as council leader represented an opportunity for change.
The snow clearance claims were dealt with by a spokesman who defended clearing the council's headquarters as their duty of care to employees and clarified the minimal cost. Presumably there was also a duty of care to others who had to go to work such the carers visiting elderly people in their homes, one of whom fell and smashed her elbow. The spokesman also indicated that the County Council had responsibility for clearing the highways etc., but did not comment on the alleged preferential treatment given to some towns over others within the district.
The challenge over the allocation of new housing seemed to have borne fruit, as EDDC promised to reconsider in a further consultation process. However, the fightback has begun.
Despite the blight that EDDC decisions have brought to parts of for example Exmouth and Seaton, often overruling town planners, when a local TV programme makes a feature on new developments spoiling the environment it focuses on a development in an AONB just outside Sidmouth. I would agree that it is not a desirable development, but it is hardly a reflection of the bigger picture. And up pops our old friend Sara Randall Johnson to pontificate about the difficulty of complying with the council's obligations.
Am I too much of a conspiracy theorist in assuming that this is the first public step in reinforcing their original projections by emphasising the burden being placed on Sidmouth? And is not the main reason they have allowed this development out of town is that they are determined that they shouldn't have to do their fair share within its boundaries?
The snow clearance claims were dealt with by a spokesman who defended clearing the council's headquarters as their duty of care to employees and clarified the minimal cost. Presumably there was also a duty of care to others who had to go to work such the carers visiting elderly people in their homes, one of whom fell and smashed her elbow. The spokesman also indicated that the County Council had responsibility for clearing the highways etc., but did not comment on the alleged preferential treatment given to some towns over others within the district.
The challenge over the allocation of new housing seemed to have borne fruit, as EDDC promised to reconsider in a further consultation process. However, the fightback has begun.
Despite the blight that EDDC decisions have brought to parts of for example Exmouth and Seaton, often overruling town planners, when a local TV programme makes a feature on new developments spoiling the environment it focuses on a development in an AONB just outside Sidmouth. I would agree that it is not a desirable development, but it is hardly a reflection of the bigger picture. And up pops our old friend Sara Randall Johnson to pontificate about the difficulty of complying with the council's obligations.
Am I too much of a conspiracy theorist in assuming that this is the first public step in reinforcing their original projections by emphasising the burden being placed on Sidmouth? And is not the main reason they have allowed this development out of town is that they are determined that they shouldn't have to do their fair share within its boundaries?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)