Keen followers of planning within East Devon will know that four councils (East Devon District Council, Exeter City Council, Teignbridge District Council and Mid-Devon District Council) have been working closely for some years to produce an integrated plan for housing development within the area around Exeter.
The purpose of working together on the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan (GESP) has been to speak as one voice at Westminster to achieve the levels of funding required for infrastructure, mostly notably on the rail and road networks.
Government policy calls for ever increasing numbers of houses (full market and affordable housing) and employment land. Housing numbers are ‘handed down’ to districts from national Government and it is impossible to argue against the numbers in an effort to reduce them.
Planners working on GESP issued a ‘call for sites’ (basically by contacting landowners to see if they were willing to put their land forward for development) for sites of 500 homes or more.
Within East Devon, development is constrained by two-thirds of the district being protected landscapes (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty of the Blackdown Hills and East Devon AONB), which inevitably means that the ‘northwest quadrant’ of the district is the most suitable place for development.
In addition, transport corridors are a factor – in particular communities benefitting from a railway station were identified, the thinking being that people travelling to work can use the most sustainable means of transport possible. (Obviously within the hierarchy of sustainability working from home is the most sustainable, then walking, then cycling, then train or bus and finally the car.)
GESP will be discussed at length at Strategic Planning Committee on Thursday, 23 July. Members of the public are welcome to attend via Zoom and there is a 15-minute period at the start of the meeting to address the committee. The meeting will also be aired on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/user/eastdevoncouncil1).
I have long argued, and will continue to do so, that Feniton (and indeed Whimple) are not the most sustainable locations because the train service is infrequent. Plans are being formulated to build the ‘Whimple passing loop’ which would theoretically increase the number of trains using the Exeter to Waterloo line and provide a half-hourly service.
However, there are two significant issues with the passing loop, and until these are resolved I cannot see that Feniton can be considered a sustainable location. Firstly, the cost. This is absolutely crippling. Despite this project having been on the drawing board for well over a decade, with questions having been asked in the House of Commons, sources of funding have not been identified, and given the huge amount the Government has committed during the Covid crisis, it is to be wondered if it’ll be a priority. Secondly, the current proposal envisages that trains would not necessarily stop at all stations … in other words, Feniton is unlikely to benefit to any considerable extent from the new passing loop.
However, despite all of the above, Feniton is vulnerable. The sustainability of the village has already been tested at the super inquiry of 2014 and was not deemed a suitable location for large-scale development. However, there will inevitably have to be some development in Feniton, probably through the Local Plan process, rather than GESP. The GESP plan (www.gesp.org.uk/) runs to 2040 so can be considered to be a high-level, long-term plan. Running alongside GESP, each of the four Councils has a Local Plan. The current one for East Devon runs to 2031.
Meanwhile, the four councils, with their new administrations in place, are seeking agreement of Councillors to progress the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan by putting the plan out for consultation in September. If this is agreed, it will be another opportunity to make views known.
The following press release is being sent out this afternoon by East Devon District Council.
Councils to consider Greater Exeter Plan proposals
East Devon District Council’s Strategic Planning committee will meet on Thursday 23 July to discuss plan
East Devon, Exeter, Mid Devon and Teignbridge councils are all considering whether to begin the next round of consultation on the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan (GESP). Exeter City Council is the first of the authorities to discuss the proposals at a meeting next Tuesday 7 July and they published the GESP document today. (Monday June 29)
Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the first opportunity for East Devon District Council’s Strategic Planning committee to meet and view the proposals is on Thursday 23 July. The council has committed to nothing more than deciding whether to take part in the consultations on the plan which would take place from September.
The GESP proposals include draft planning policies and large scale development options across all four council areas for the next twenty years up to 2040. It will tackle big planning issues affecting the Greater Exeter area, of which East Devon is part. The GESP will also identify possible development sites across the area, including large regeneration sites in Exeter.
Cllr Paul Arnott, East Devon District Council’s Leader, said: “The last councils of 2015-19, and 2019-20, took part in an internal discussion with other councils about co-operating as a joint planning entity.
“With a new administration for 2020-21, this is to be considered at the Strategic Planning committee on 23rd July in the emerging post-Covid-19 context and we will need to assess it anew in light of the possible changed shape of housing need and the economy.
“Our friends at Exeter have begun to discuss the GESP document analysing the call for sites, but of course, until our own Strategic Planning committee discusses the next steps the district council’s position on going out to consultation is not yet decided.”
Teignbridge District Council will discuss the proposals on Tuesday 21 July, and Mid Devon District Council on Thursday 6 August.
The councils have been asked to carry out the consultation from September, which was originally planned for June, following Government advice that planning authorities should continue despite Covid-19. The consultation would ask for the public to have their say on the draft policies and site options, which would influence the next stage.
Further information about the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan is available on the GESP website which is www.gesp.org.uk/
Susie Bond 
Very little has changed in Feniton since the appeal, school is oversubscribed, GP appointments very difficult to get, flood aliviation scheme not completed, these were problem areas before Wainhomes estate was built and this estate has only added to the problems. I say no to any development until the flood aliviation scheme is finished and proved to be working ie four years after completion. Medical services need to be improved to cope with today’s needs let alone any further developments, opportunities for local employment would be good but more housing would not be welcome.
Thank you Susie for the clear details of future housing plans in our area. Kind regards and stay safe Christopher Burton
Road infrastructure into Feniton is barely sufficient for current level of vehicular traffic, and an increasing of this caused by additional housing will increase noise and air pollution, and undoubtedly will lead to serious accidents/collisions.
Sustainable transport… trains are impractical every two hours, bus replacement services that take over an hour to travel 12 miles to Exeter… and financially too expensive. More trains equals more noise and pollution… where is electrification of the line, trains already make houses shake and windows rattle!
Cycling (and walking) the current roads are barely safe without cycle lanes, how do they propose to resolve this? Cycling to Exeter daily the Old A30/London Road is passable, but road surface is a patchwork of previous bridges… if Cranbrook is the example… take a look, parking already an issue, ASB, increased criminality… that spreads to other local villages, the promised town centre never appeared, and back to cycles paths/pavements the mixture doesn’t work, the road is actually safer!
The primary school on current site has little additional option for growth, and is at capacity for the size of the site. Kings is pretty much at capacity on the current site…
The village is a lovely village, any growth should be on infill, brownfield sites within the current boundaries, not on the prime agricultural land surrounding.
I don’t blame farmers/landowners when you can sell a piece of land for hundreds of thousands pounds with little no effort, or growing crops/animals with all the costs and hardwork for a few thousand pounds, financially it makes great sense for them.
Flood relief that was promised… still to materialise.
The village needs to grow, but sustainably single/double figure increases each year.
Just my opinion.