The Trust is hosting this University event for students and residents to mark the beginning of the new academic year. Open to all, on offer will be various events including FREE ICE CREAM.
The Trust will be running its usual book and plant stalls and there will also be this:
Drum & Base Wokout!
On Saturday 29 June the St James community came together at the Trust’s annual summer fundraising event. Blessed with fine weather, friends and neighbours sought bargains at the plant and book stalls where business was brisk while home-made cakes, teas, coffee and squash were consumed at the refreshment stall.
There were also parachute games, giant Jenga and Connect Four for all to enjoy but perhaps the high spot was a visit from Minerva, the Little Owl.
An excellent, well-supported day which raised much-needed funds thanks to the efforts of our volunteers and the generosity of members who donated plants, books and cakes.
The AGM held on 2 July was attended by 33 members including Board Members Robyn Connett (Chair), Paul Layton (Secretary), Rebecca Bower (Treasurer) and Harry Temple.
Robyn welcomed members to the meeting and spoke to various aspects of the Annual Report concentrating particularly on the Queen’s Crescent Garden regeneration project and the Board’s continuing determination to secure a fair share of the neighbourhood portion of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funding. Other matters raised included the Trust’s communication with members through our biannual newsletter About St James, the website and regular mailings; monitoring ECC planning applications and responding as consultee in relation to the Neighbourhood Plan; and vigilance in reviewing the Trust’s resilience.
The Annual Report was adopted and the accounts approved. Harry Temple was re-elected to the Board but gave notice that he would be standing down in November.
At the close of the business meeting members were treated to a thought provoking presentation by Frazer Osment, Chair of LDA Design and co-architect of the Exeter St James Neighbourhood Plan:
“Our Neighbourhood Plan – its achievements and lessons learned for a future Plan“
Following his lost appeal against the refusal of an application for a 10 bed student block in the rear garden of his Union Road property, a 13 bed student HMO (advertised with double occupancy possible in all but one room) above a self-contained 2 bed basement flat also advertised for students, Mr Startup, the owner, submitted plans (23/1483/FUL) last December for a 6 bed student block on the same site (see our previous article here).
Local residents, including many Trust members, who submitted objections will be relieved and delighted that this application has been refused. The Planning Officer’s Report, which reveals appropriate consideration has been given on this occasion to the consultation responses including that submitted by the Trust, provides a comprehensive analysis and evaluation of the proposal against national and local policies, and concludes that it is contrary to a wide range of specific policies, including four Neighbourhood Plan (NP) policies relating to environmental matters, design and community (see Decision Refusal Notice here).
Each of these are equally important, but it is particularly encouraging that, on this occasion, community balance has been recognised by the Planning Authority as a valid issue and the refusal decision, citing NP Community policy C3 ‘Small Scale Purpose Built Student Accommodation’ includes the statement:
By virtue of the intensity of use, the overdevelopment of the plot and the location of the development, the scheme would prejudice the objective of creating a balanced community in St James, Exeter
Time will tell whether the owner decides to accept this decision, or to submit an appeal as he did following refusal of his original application on the site, and which he has now done in the case of 70 Pennsylvania Road, another HMO property that he owns, where his similar proposal to develop the rear garden as purpose built student accommodation was also refused (see here).
All members are cordially invited to attend the AGM to be held on Tuesday 2 July 6.15pm St Sidwell’s Primary School York Road Exeter
6.15pm Registration 6.30pm Business Meeting
followed by
‘Our Neighbourhood Plan – its achievements and lessons learned for a future Plan’
a presentation by Frazer Osment Chair of LDA Design co-architect of Exeter St James Neighbourhood Plan
Click on the headings below to view/download documents:
THE ANNUAL REPORT & FINANCIAL STATEMENT
Please print documents; no copies will be available at the meeting
Please note:
Director Nomination Forms must be returned no later than Tuesday 25 June
Online Proxy Forms must be returned no later than 6.15pm on Monday 1 July
If you are unable to attend please use the Proxy Form to appoint your voting representative.
The Trust has learnt that the refusal of the application 21/1014/FUL for a 26 bed student accommodation block (PBSA) on the former Maximum Motors’ site in Howell Road (see News Archive for previous coverage relating to this proposal) has been overturned at appeal, although the related application for award of costs against the Council has been refused. Despite the permission being contingent upon 18 conditions including a pre-approved management plan, this is not only extremely disappointing, but baffling.
Amongst other grounds, not least the threat to sustainability presented by the worsening of the existing community imbalance, with temporary student residents comprising more than half of the total resident population, the Trust and Exeter St James Forum before it, with the full support of our city councillors, had argued that the proposal was contrary to the Neighbourhood Plan’s Community Policy C2a.
The preamble to Policy C2, which serves as guidance for the interpretation of the policy wording, explains that in St James, with its largely intact residential character with tight pattern of streets and spaces, there are few areas apart from Sidwell Street where large scale (10 or more bed) purpose built student accommodation (PBSA) may be appropriately integrated.
Policy C2, worded positively as required, then states:
Large scale purpose built student accommodation will be permitted in areas where it can be properly integrated into the urban area
before listing three location descriptions which must be met for such integration to be deemed acceptable.
C2a sets out the first location description as follows:
locations a) that are not predominantly characterised by intact streets of traditional terraced, semi-detached and detached forms of 2-3 storey residential development;
The Inspector acknowledges that ‘the location around the appeal site comprises some intact streets of traditional terraced, semi-detached and detached forms of 2-3 storey residential development’ yet concludes this large-scale PBSA is compliant with Neighbourhood Plan Policy C2a, apparently by focusing on the one street, Howell Road, and even then solely on the few non-residential elements, noting the former garage site itself, the brick wall surrounding (residential) Horseguards and the nearby prison wall.
It is hard to comprehend how the various intact residential streets in the immediate vicinity of the development site, Danes Road, Hoopern Street, and Horseguards together with the predominantly intact residential Howell Road itself, could have been dismissed when reaching this verdict.
It is a serious concern that the sustainability of the community will be further threatened, and regrettable that an opportunity has been lost for development of much-needed homes for local residents on one of the relatively few windfall sites likely to arise in St James owing to closure of commercial premises. However, residents will draw some comfort from knowing that one of the 18 conditions upon which permission is granted states:
No part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied until a management plan has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
The management plan will include:
i) occupation/letting criteria,
ii) staff support/control,
iii) student discipline,
iv) car ownership/parking,
v) security, and,
vi) an arrival/departure procedure.
Immediately upon occupation of the development, the developer shall implement the management plan. Following implementation of the management plan, there must be no variation of it without the prior written agreement of the local planning authority.
The Trust will urge the local planning authority to insist that, under this plan, management contact details are made available to local residents to facilitate swift resolution of any issues that may arise.
This disappointing outcome will provide useful food for thought should residents come forward with the vision and determination to prepare a new neighbourhood plan to replace the current plan which in any case is due to expire in 2028. The Trust very much hopes that this will be the case, with other areas of the city already considering the merits of neighbourhood planning for their own areas.
See the decision notice for the Appeal here and the Application for Award here.
What do YOU say? Have the revisions successfully transformed an unacceptably ‘poor response to the setting’ into a well-designed development St James’ needs?
The original proposal, shown above, was highly and widely criticised by professionals as well as local residents in the many responses to the consultation last August / September, identifying it as ‘over-development’, ‘poor response unsympathetic to its context’, ‘fundamentally unsuitable for this site’, ‘overbearing on nearby properties’ etc.
A damning verdict – and the applicant was advised by planning officers they would not be able to recommend approval. So, pre-empting refusal, a revised proposal has been submitted.
How does this compare? (see below)
Unless you are of the opinion that this is the kind of development St James needs and believe that some tinkering with specific design issues has responded satisfactorily to the overarching design objection, and that the proposal can no longer be described as overbearing and fundamentally unsuitable for the site, and in addition are not concerned there would be a worsening community balance caused either by the proposed co-living use, nor the implicitly evidenced intended use as student accommodation ……… please add your response to the outcry, whether or not you objected during the initial consultation. Click for further information and commentary here.
Closing date for comments now confirmed as 5 May
The need for a camera in this position has long been considered very important by Exeter’s Community Safety Partnership and Dennis Cavanagh, ECC’s CCTV Control Centre Manager, is impressed by the far better coverage made available by this camera, not only of the Garden, but of Queen’s Crescent, Longbrook Street, and York Road, including the Mosque and St Sidwell’s Primary School.
Two stills taken from the CCTV covering Queen’s Crescent Garden
Dennis says, “As a key transit route for university students and Exeter residents in the North of the City this addition further demonstrates the Council’s commitment to the Safer Women at Night initiative.”
Inspector Simon Arliss, with whom the Directors have been working since 2018, specifically identified QCG as a key site for a camera in the original Safer Central Exeter funding bid and hopes are high that as well as providing evidence for dealing with any serious incidents, it will act as a very useful deterrent to the low level ASB including fly tipping and vandalism that has been occurring from time to time.
We know that many residents across St James appreciate the architectural heritage of the area and are keen to see the conservation areas enhanced. If this is you, this second application will certainly be one to which you will want to add your voice to a call for refusal.
Application 23/1424/FUL, seeks to replace a private garage on Oxford Road at the rear of 5-6 Well Street, with a two-storey, two-bedroom dwelling for three persons. It is one of a number of similar one-storey buildings, mainly private garages, at the York Road end of Oxford Road, directly facing the important Grade II listed Georgian terrace of 4-18 Oxford Road, but which are identified in the St Sidwell’s Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan as ‘buildings that do not make a positive contribution to the character of the area’.
Replacement of the garage would therefore be welcomed if this enhanced the townscape, but sadly the proposed design is such that it would, to the contrary, have a detrimental impact on Oxford Road and the St Sidwell’s Conservation Area.
By failing to enhance the conservation area the design does not meet the criteria of NP design policy D1 or the Local Plan Design Policy D4 for many reasons, including sub-standard provision of internal and external space for the proposed occupants, as well as negatively impacting the privacy, daylight and outdoor amenity space currently ascribed to existing flats above 5-6 Well Street, creating an overbearing, hemmed-in outlook for the existing residents.
The NP states:
The best way to ensure heritage is protected is through good design as required by Policy D1, in particular with regard to build scale, form, massing, setback and materials.
In this case the design fails in all these matters, so is also non-compliant with NP Heritage Policy H1, which states:
Heritage Development affecting heritage assets within St James must pay special regard to the need to conserve and enhance their settings and any special architectural or historic features of significance.
Comments to this application may be made online or by email to the case officer, Matt Hall, [email protected] As above, if you wish your comment to be counted as an objection, please mark it as such to avoid any doubt, and again copy to the planning department and councillors.
Exeter St James Community Trust Ltd is a charitable Community Benefit Society
registered under the Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies Act 2014 No. 8372
Registered address: 15 Powderham Crescent Exeter EX4 6DA
