The Hoopern Valley “is the largest open space in the ward and is a valuable asset not just for St James but for the city as a whole” [Exeter St James Neighbourhood Plan]
Exeter University is currently considering the use of this space and is keen to understand what the local community think this land should be used for. Some residents have received a letter (view here) about the consultation with a link to their website (here) which has details of an in-person exhibition on the Streatham Campus on Tuesday 16 May and an online feedback form.
The importance of Hoopern Valley is recognised in this specific policy of the Neighbourhood Plan:
EN2: Hoopern Valley
Development which would detract from the landscape or ecological value of the Hoopern Valley Park will not normally be permitted. Proposals that would enhance the accessibility, understanding or enjoyment of the biodiversity assets of the park may be considered provided its distinctive character, biodiversity and recreational value is retained and there would be no harm to its special qualities including its wildlife habitats, corridors and any other features of ecological interest including those related to protected species. Where appropriate, development should also restore, conserve or enhance the biodiversity value of the area, for example through the incorporation of biodiversity features into buildings and landscape.
During public consultation leading to the formulation of policy the overwhelming consensus of local residents was that the valley should be kept open for the general public and there was a strong desire to see improved access. The Trust believes this remains the case and would urge all interested parties to respond to the consultation to ensure the University is made aware of just how much our community values this green space.
We are pleased to report that the 26 bed PBSA application on the site of the closed Maximum Motors garage was refused at Planning Committee on 27 March, though it is unlikely that this will be the end of the matter as an appeal is expected.
The planning officers had been minded to approve the application under delegated powers, but our councillors’ request that the application should be brought to Planning Committee was agreed, in no small part because of the large number of objections that had been received.
Well done to all who made their views known and brought about this action! According to the Planning Officer’s Report a total of 77 of the 80 representations submitted during the original or subsequent consultation period were objections, two neutral and only one in support.
Previously reported opposition to the conversion of Beaufort House in New North Road to 107 room student accommodation has been approved by officers’ delegated powers without being presented to the Planning Committee for consideration despite residents’ objections and the opposition of our local city councillors.
The key issue on which refusal could be argued – community imbalance in St James – was dismissed by the Officer’s Report for the Delegation Briefing with this astonishing admission:
The City Council does not currently define community imbalance in any planning documents. … The lack of definition makes it difficult to provide evidence that the proposal fails to comply with policy.
The relevant policy, H5 of the Local Plan (2005), was designed to ensure diversity of housing provision but over time the development of student housing in St James has far outstripped that of all other demographic groups. Far from ensuring a sustainable diverse community, planning decisions have been leading towards further student ghettoisation in direct contravention to the central thrust of our Neighbourhood Plan: the desire of residents to have a diverse population which includes people at all stages of their lives and which is not dominated by a single group.
The Planning Officer’s Report suggests consideration is to be given to a new definition of community balance in a forthcoming review of policy. Dismayed at the failure of the City Council to stem the tide of community imbalance the Trust would urge residents and other interested parties to make their views clear whenever consultation over this promised review takes place.
We are grateful to the Safer Exeter Community Sparks Fund for the award of a grant which has enabled the Trust to source and purchase a replacement noticeboard for Queen’s Crescent Garden. The old one had seen better days and was no longer fit for purpose. Now we have a brand new splendid noticeboard, an imposing feature to the garden’s Longbrook Street entrance.
In this prominent position it is visible to all pasersby and will serve to inform the public of the Trust’s work in enhancing our local community. Another improvement to the garden environment, we hope the noticeboard will further help to engender a sense of pride in the public ownership of this green haven at the heart of our city.
At its meeting on Wednesday 8 February the City Planning Commitee met to consider the application to develop a 26 bed purpose built student accommodation block on the old Maximum Motors site in Howell Road (detail here). Each of our three Ward Councillors as well as Trust Chair, Robyn Connett, spoke in turn to argue the case for rejecting the Officer’s recommendation that permision be granted relying on the key aim of the Neighbourhood Plan “to ensure an appropriate balance between student resident and permanent resident population to ensure the sustainability of the community”.
Thanks to all who submitted comments as the large number of individuals objecting to the proposal was noted by the meeting and played no small part in helping to inform Members’ decision. In the event they voted convincingly not to accept the recommendation but a decision was deferred to a later meeting to allow the Planning Officer to prepare a revised Report with robust rationale for refusal. We await the application’s return to Planning Committe when confirmation of the decision to refuse is eagerly anticipated.
Watch this space – your support may well be needed again!
For a pleasant change the Trust has been able to welcome a recent planning application to alter the use of 49 Longbrook Street from a 6 bed HMO into three separate flats.
This listed property will require careful restoration to reflect its heritage value but we are delighted at the proposal to return its use to good quality residential housing for people wishing to make St James their home. Moreover, it is a step in the right direction of restoring a balanced and vibrant neighborhood consistent with the Exeter St James Neighbourhood Plan. The preamble to the Plan’s Community Policies states:
“a key aim of the plan is to ensure an appropriate balance between student resident and permanent resident population to ensure the long term sustainability of the community. This will be achieved by restricting further HMO development and encouraging an appropriate range of services and housing types to meet the needs of all sectors of the community.“
Hot on the heels of the proposal to convert the former Maximum Motors building in Howell Road into purpose built student accommodation (see here) comes yet another application. This time conversion of the office building at 51 New North Road, known as Beaufort House, into a 107 bed PBSA in 23 flats.
In defence of our Neighbourhood Plan which seeks to ensure that “St James is a vibrant neighbourhood with a balanced and diverse community” please oppose this latest application. Deadline for submissions is 5 February 2023 and details can be found on the council website here.
Exeter City Council is currently running a planning consultation on proposals to amend Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) rates in the city.
CIL revenue from development, first introduced in Exeter in 2013, is used to fund infrastructure and community facilities in the city.
The Council states: ‘Although this is a technical subject, the consultation is a public process and is important to inform the review of CIL rates for Exeter.’
The Trust Board agrees with this view and would like to encourage all members living in Exeter to set aside a little time for this, at least completing the sections over which you have a view before the consultation closes on 25 January 2023.
As we know to our cost, CIL is especially important here in St James where developers of purpose built student accommodation (PBSA) have been attracted by a charge 50% less than for other types of residential accommodation. Now a new kid on the block, Co-Living, has emerged where the Council also proposes a low rate of CIL for such developments. Could Co-Living become PBSA by another name?
Please read the background to this with a link to the main consultationhere.
NO more PBSA (purpose built student accommodation) in St James!
Already saturated with high numbers of temporary student residents, the Trust will continue to defend our statutory Neighbourhood Plan’s vision of a balanced and vibrant community whenever planning applications threaten to worsen the existing severe community imbalance. A recent application for the development of yet another PBSA in the back garden of 47 Union Road, itself a 13 bed house in Multiple Occupation, was robustly opposed with over 60 residents submitting objections. Thankfully, with the support of our city councillors, the application was refused.
Now another! This time a revised application to convert the old Maximum Motors site in Howell Road into a 26 bed PBSA and, worryingly, a planning officer has confirmed “the principle of purpose built student accommodation in this area is considered acceptable”. This is contrary to Policy H5(b) of the Exeter Local Plan First Review 1995-2011 which makes clear the use of the site for student housing would not be appropriate here as it would result in a further imbalance of population within the local community.
26 bed PBSA proposed here
Significantly it shows a complete disregard for a key policy of the Neighbourhood Plan:
Policy C2: Large Scale Purpose Built Student Accommodation
Large scale purpose built student accommodation will be permitted in areas where it can be properly integrated into the urban area. This means locations:
(a) that are not predominantly characterised by intact streets of traditional terraced, semi-detached and detached forms of 2-3 storey residential development;
(b) where the servicing and parking requirements could be achieved with no unacceptable impact on the amenity of the adjacent area for residents;
(c) where the scale and massing of any purpose built accommodation would be broadly similar to that of the surrounding buildings.
The Council’s deadline for submission of comments has now passed but many local residents concerned that such proposals threaten the sustainability of our community have submitted objections. You can read the Trust’s formal submission here.
