North Devon Green Party

Join the Green Party and you'll receive our local quarterly newsletter, as well as invitations to Green Events. You'll be invited to attend meetings, join our discussion list, vote on issues, and contribute to our campaigns and policies for North Devon.

27th April '08

The latest newsletter from the Taw and Torridge Estuary Forum contains a short article headed ‘Proposal for a barrage across the Taw-Torridge estuary’. This idea is being floated, if that’s the right word, by Keith Apps, the same gentleman behind the Fullabrook wind farm development. He has already applied to the Secretary of State for a licence and has had talks with Torridge. The whole thing if built could create 36 full time jobs after employing 2000 building workers on its decade long construction. When up and running it would produce 99 MW of power and last for some 120 years. Tides would have a 2 hour time delay having been contained for 2 hours before being allowed to run through the turbines. There would be a lock or locks on the Appledore side allowing for the passage of vessels and survey work has already started on the possible impacts on silting, birds and migratory fish. A pipedream you might think but Mr.Apps is nothing if not persistent – and after many years of effort he has been given the go-ahead for his wind farm. This is actually the second time he has come forward with this scheme. On the first occasion many years ago now he approached both Torridge and North Devon councils seeking permission to carry out a feasibility study but North Devon rejected him out of hand and on Torridge I think I was the only councillor to vote in favour – on the basis that the more information we had then the better informed our decision would be. On that occasion I do remember that the problem of ponding up sewage in the estuaries (still then discharged direct into the two rivers) was a major stumbling block. Now this no longer happens it will be interesting to see where, if anywhere, this idea goes.

Bideford is currently undergoing a huge boom in house building. Most of it is occurring next to the new road in East-the-Water but whether it will sell is currently a moot point. With all such developments one has to ask whether we have the infrastructure to support it? Many would say no and point to the lack of services etc. The problem has always been deciding who is to pay for their provision. Certainly councils will receive more in taxes but only after the houses are built – and then on a ‘trickle in’ basis which doesn’t easily allow for large capital projects. The government is now addressing this with the proposed introduction of a ‘Community Infrastructure Levy’ which will be charged to developers and will not ‘just include large scale developments, but also the cumulative impact of small developments such as single dwellings.’ When this came up before councillors the general feeling was - ‘about time too’. Councillor Hugo Barton, the chairman of the Planning Committee, admitted that some recent moves to achieve similar results had not been as useful as he would have liked – a sentiment shared by many. I still await, for example, the large scale cash payment from the owners of the ‘Cobalt’ development at Westward Ho! which is earmarked for the provision of affordable homes. Mention of this particular site reminds me of one problem with such community payments – will they be ring-fenced to the area that generates them? In the case of the ‘Cobalt’ building the money can theoretically be spent anywhere within Torridge – so it may not be Westward Ho! residents who eventually get the benefit of subsidised homes. Given that most large developments are likely to be based in the Bideford-Northam area then I suspect rural areas will have to fight very hard to get a share of any ‘levy’ generated in the main urban areas. We shall see how it works out.

The last monthly question and answer session between town councillors and a county councillor concentrated on litter problems. I asked Humphrey Temperley if the verges of the Link Road could be cleared up around Bideford as there seemed to be more rubbish strewn over them than I ever remember before. The answer was simple and somewhat unexpected – it isn’t the county council’s duty (which only extends to cutting the grass and maintaining the tarmac) but rather Torridge is the responsible authority which was a surprise both to me and quite a few other councillors. Presumably this split in responsibilities will disappear with a new ‘Unitary’ council but the county councillor’s ideas on this were interesting. He found all the suggested approaches ‘uncomfortable’ and expressed worries about the size of redundancy payments for the various senior offices who would be surplus to requirements come re-organisation. Indeed he reckoned a ‘Unitary’ would not save any money at all – but could well deliver services more efficiently – not the same thing as Torridge’s Chief Executive told his councillors at their debate where those for a ‘Unitary’ only won by 17 votes to 15 with many apparently being swayed by the argument that a larger council will inevitably save money through economies of scale. I would add that the Chief Executive has also stressed that the Government has ordered all re-organisation will have to be achieved with no increase in the council spending levels – so presumably these large redundancy payments will come from current budgets – doubtless leading to cuts in front line services that are actually used by the voters/taxpayers. It will be exciting to see how popular councillors will be if this is to be the reality of the new set up.

Moves by the town council to develop part of the Pollyfield land in conjunction with Torridge progress slowly. The latest attempt to move things forward is to agree a 2/3:1/3 split between Torridge and Bideford town of both the development costs and the profits – and the provision of‘affordable’ homes. Currently the breakdown of these looks likely to be Torridge 40 houses, of which 16 are ‘affordable’, and Bideford 20 houses, of which 8 will be ‘affordable’. All well and good so far but councillor Brian Lacey did air his concerns about the very short period of time we had to consult with local people over our plans. Councillor Steve Clarke did ask if this was necessary pointing out that Torridge weren’t bothering – and in any case everyone could make their feelings known when the planning application is lodged. I did, however, recall my fellow town councillors making this consultation a high priority for what is, after all, publicly owned land. We have decided to put on a display at the Pollyfield Centre from 2 pm – 9 pm on Monday May 12th prior to our Annual Parish Meeting. Possibly more serious was councillor Andy Powell’s suggestion that all the ‘affordable’ homes would be gathered together as this would make the development more attractive to private builders. As you will have read in last week’s Journal I pointed out that this would go completely against the long standing principle of both Torridge and Bideford planning committees to ‘pepperpot’ such houses across new estates to avoid the ghettoisation of such home owners/tenants. We didn’t reach any final conclusions on this but it will be interesting to see if the two councils ignore a long standing principle that has been applied to all previous large scale developments. I should add that councillor Brian Lacey did seek, and was given, a cast iron promise that the Pollyfield allotments would be protected – which is just as well as he did promise that any sales would be ‘over his dead body’. Now that’s what I call dedication from a councillor!

The Bradworthy Wind Turbines

Councillor Christie's Weblog

Previous entries

27th April '08