Beara Down Farm consultation responses and summary

Summary

A community consultation held during April 2022 highlighted the following top three priorities for residents in Bratton Fleming with regard to potential development of Beara Down main farm site. The full response and comments from residents is detailed below however the priorities were highlighted as:

1. Affordable housing (with priority for local people)
2. Priority purchase for local people (open market homes)
3. Pedestrian links through the village to the primary school (in addition to the Recreational Ground path)

Over 50% of those prioritising affordable housing selected the need for more affordable housing even if increased properties were built on the site (over 10 properties).

Having consulted with the Parish Council and local community, we now intend to consult with North Devon Council and seek pre-application advice.

Full detail

In discussions with the Parish Council regarding development of the old farmstead at Beara Down, it was agreed a consultation of residents of the parish of Bratton Fleming would take place to understand the priorities for consideration of development of the site.

The questions and approach were agreed with the Parish Council and the consultation took place throughout April 2022 and was available via an online form with hard copies provided within the village. The consultation was advertised online via Devon Council ‘Have your say’ pages, the Parish Council webpage and notice board, the online Bratton Fleming news and via posters in the village.

The initial questions clarified the respondent was a resident of the parish and that this was their only response to the consultation. As made clear within the question only responses where these two questions stated a yes would be included in the consultation. 3% (2) respondents answered no and their feedback has been removed from the following analysis.

64 completed responses were received from residents of the parish.

Question 1

The first question was selecting priorities for the site.

48% (31) of the responses provided valid responses, with the remainder selecting multiple top priority responses. Given that the survey was to identify the top priorities we were unable to use responses which did not give any level of prioritisation.

Examining the responses that were prioritised correctly, the top three priorities were:

• Affordable housing (with priority for local people).
• Priority purchase for local people (open market homes).
• Pedestrian links through the village to the primary school (in addition to the Recreational Ground path).

These priorities were consistent when examined via percentage and when ranked via weighted scores (5 points for top priority down to 1 point for fifth priority).

These priorities were consistent when examined via percentage and when ranked via weighted scores (5 points for top priority down to 1 point for fifth priority).

‘Other priorities’ ranked equal third for this group of recipients, however there was no consistent theme in these responses. Comments are shown below:

Top priority

Comments:

• Safe access.
• Locals prioritised may have a negative effect on the economy/attracting skilled workers. Better to refuse/deter second home buyers.
•  Social housing with a proper back garden
• Minimise visual impact, maintain trees and hedges.
• Site should have been offered to the owner of the White Hart pub in order to maintain a pub in the village.
• Opportunity to provide a house with downstairs accommodation for child/adult with physical disabilities rather than having to adapt an existing property.
• Actual affordable housing rather than just building more houses for northerners.

Second priority

Comments:

• Get on and build up there Bratton needs more housing we have to grow
• Smaller houses (1 bedroom) or flats aimed at cheaper first-time buyers or single people.
• Houses should be available to local people or people who have grown up here and had to move away.
• Purchase to full time residential use only.

Third priority

Comments:

• The build does not impact in any way on the green recycling centre and does not enable the council to sell/build on the land at the back of this land at a later stage.
• The whole development needs to be affordable housing.
• Solar and sustainable heating to be essential. Query heat pumps as standard if suitable for the geology/ efficiency.

Fourth priority

Comments:

• More than normal parking so that the Glebe recycling area doesn’t get used as overflow parking.
• Preservation as much as possible of current biodiversity e.g., mature eucalyptus trees and hedgerow adjacent to road (A399) The plan and vision imply these will be removed.

Fifth priority

Comments:

• Enforceable speed limits on the main road.
• More industrial units are need to bring work to the area. The pub is needed to bring people to the area.
• All houses must have solar panels are the roof and electric car charging points.

When considering all responses received (including respondents selecting multiple top priorities) the top three priorities remain unchanged.

1. Affordable housing (with priority for local people)
2. Priority purchase for local people (open market homes)
3. Pedestrian links through the village to the primary school (in addition to the Recreational Ground path)

Question 2

Question two gave those who selected affordable housing in their top three priorities the opportunity to select the greatest need for affordable housing in the area. Over 50% selected the need for more affordable housing even if increased properties were built on the site. 30% selected other priorities, detailed below. Themes here reflect the desire to enable good quality, small family/starter, affordable homes to those with a local connection.

Other priorities:

• Bungalows for retiring parishoners.
• As this is Council owned land, give it freely to North Devon Homes and build 10 affordable homes on the site, Or at least have a higher percentage of affordable vs open purchase ie 50/50 or 80/20.
• More affordable housing for locals purchase only or part rent/ buy.
• So long as they are for locals not sold to the highest bidder.
• Affordable for local people only.
• Some provision (other than shared ownership) for first-time buyers and/or single people earning local wages. This may include smaller properties/flats.
• Smaller properties (e.g. 1 bedroom houses, or flats), for first-time buyers or single people with a smaller budget.
• They should be smaller starter homes 1 or 2 bed maximum.
• The agreed 30% of properties to be affordable housing is adequate. This site should not support additional development.
• Because the site is away from the village not too many children.
• All houses should be heated by air source heat pumps not oil or gas. All houses should be highly insulated. people on low income in social housing will not afford expensive energy bills.
• Affordable housing includes affordable social housing as well as affordable to heat (i.e. insulated, no oil or gas) but does not mean too small to live in properly.
• Daughter is on low wage, disability unable to afford private rent, doesn’t want to leave village she knows.
• Higher proportion of the dwellings to be affordable given the need to retain and recruit younger families for e.g. hospitality/industry.
• Provision of accommodation for child/adult with physical disabilities.
• Sticking to stated number of affordable (2-3 bed) homes i.e. 30%. More homes or larger homes would mitigate against many of the stated aims of the development.

Comments

Finally there was an opportunity to leave any additional comments. Responses are provided below. General themes are affordable housing for local people, safety on Grange Hill, environmental sustainability considerations and the need to develop the site.

Additional comments:

• Open spaces within small developments like this often get left unmaintained or have to be maintained by the parish this could be an added expense on an already stretched council with so much open space in the immediate area maybe including some in the development is unnecessary.
• A larger visibility splay will be required due to the speed of vehicles on Grange Hill. All homes should include Solar PV and Solar Water heating within the design.
• We fully support Bearadown Farm as being the best site for all village housing needs
• Local families must have access to homes in this village first and foremost. There are enough houses to buy here bus way out of price range for our young people who want live in their own village.
• Whatever development is put on the site it must only be sold to local village people to allow them to remain within their family settings.
• With gardens we prefer back gardens and to have car ports for parking in the front of the property’s.
• As many 2/3 bed house for starters and young families as possible.I will object if these 10 houses are to enable Devon County Council to be able to sell off more of their land to the rear of Beara Lane in the future.
• These houses should be for people who live within a 5 mile radius of the development and have lived there for a minimum of 5 years. They must not be brought to rent out by private people. If the houses are sold by owners within 5 years again the conditions must be that they are re-sold to local people. 50% should be social housing, the developer must contribute to traffic calming measures n the village as already we have drivers exceeding the speed limit and more houses means more cars.
• The situation with regard to our pub and sports club, neither of which is currently active, needs urgently to be addressed.
• It is time this development went ahead as the farmstead is an untidy blot on Bratton.
• As a parish Councillor I feel its time this development went ahead.
• Connecting paths should be well-lit and open, so that women and men alike feel safe traversing the village by foot at nighttime.
• I do think this a very good site for new housing.
• For local/and people who have connections to the village, ie who has lived in the village for 37 odd years, paying stupid amount on rent that would like to be able to buy an affordable house in the village, and that parents have also life in the village for 65 plus years. So to offer to the residence of the village to be able to buy first.
• Don’t do it in the first place. The site can easily be retained without the need to build a whole estate there.
• Pavements are a priority. It is dangerous walking through the village with small children where there are no pavements. Enforcement of the speed limit would help too.
• Not to be sold as second / holiday homes. Whoever buys them must live in them
• We would be willing to pay a reasonable price for plots 1 and 2 to build a 2 bed bungalow and garage (self build) to retire in. Looking for a property with no steps / stairs.
• To be sold to local people. must not be allowed to become second homes or air b n b.
• My concern for any building development is the original one that comes up everytime new housing is considered. The sewerage system will be unable to cope and to my knowledge it has not been updated at all.
• For local/and people who have connections to the village, ie who has lived in the village for 37 odd years, paying stupid amount on rent that would like to be able to buy an affordable house in the village, and that parents have also life in the village for 65 plus years. So to offer to the residence of the village to be able to buy first.
• The road outside this site is a prime overtaking spot, with cars travelling regularly at excessive speed on the wrong side of the carriageway; consideration needs to be given to the danger this development could pose to road users. Consideration also needs to be given to protecting the Dark Sky Reserve, which is seeing ever more light pollution through development across the local area. Consideration also needs to be given to the fact this is a prominent, elevated site in an area of great landscape value, and the visual impact needs to be minimised, as well as the impact on wildlife that is definitely present on the site. The site is definitely not well connected to the services in the village, and should not be considered suitable for a large volume of housing, although a small amount, sympathetically designed, may be preferable to the current derelict barns.  If development goes ahead, consideration should be given as to how the development may be able to support the village in getting its pub back, the loss of which has ripped the heart out of the village, as well as how it can protect other services (eg the shop) which may be at risk.
• Pavements are a priority. It is dangerous walking through the village with small children where there are no pavements. Enforcement of the speed limit would help too.
• All the houses need to be affordable, there is a housing crisis in North Devon.
• Consideration to be given to the sites close proximity to Exmoor National Park Dark Sky Area.
• Why can the whole site not be affordable considering the lack of affordable properties in the area and the land is owned by the council?
• A traffic calming measure is needed if these new houses are built. A mini roundabout at Grange Hill Industrial Estates would cut the speed of traffic as most cars exceed the 30mph limit.
• No more agricultural land be used in Bratton Fleming for housing developments or industrial development. The fields should be farmed or wild.
• Before you start sticking more people out here I think you should look at the recreational facilities there are and they are very limited in a village that loses its youth they say the village has lost its identity. There is only one shop and that is struggling. Bus service is limited and the last bus from town is 6.50pm. Psychologically recreational facilities are very important to prevent boredom.
• There is an opportunity here to tackle some of the serious local housing issues. However any houses built should be of a good standard so that young families can have a good life here. If we end up with more luxury houses i will be very cross.
• Some form of traffic calming to be installed on Grange Hill (query mini-roundabout at Industrial unit) Also wide ‘sweep-ins’ to access road from Grange Hill to improve visual accuracy for drivers.
• I’ve been looking for an affordable rental to stay in the village for so long.
• If this is what’s being built in place of the farm what do we expect to see is planned for the fields – more houses!!! Think they should have solar panels for the village.
• The footpath to the village is essential not using the main road but once someone has reached South View there is no footpath and people need to walk on the road. This is an excellent opportunity to connect the new foot path to an existing one further down on the main road. The Lynton to Barnstaple bus stops just before the bend in Grange Hill therefore anyone going to or coming from the stop has to walk on the main road. I don’t think they will go to South View and pick up the footpath.  Perhaps consideration should be given to an official bus stop by the Industrial site.
• I do question whether any of the non social housing will sell to local people as it will be too expensive and end up selling to people moving down or buying second homes.
• While any consultation is to be valued this one does not allow feedback on underlying assumptions eg, what exactly is a sustainable location? What exactly is, and underlies, the identified shortfall in the local area?
• I do not think the council should be putting a footpath in the recreational ground. I do not think it belongs to the council it belongs to the village.