Family business ‘devastated’ as major educatering plan refused

The Devon family behind a major proposal to build an educational facility and distribution centre have said they are “devastated” after planners narrowly rejected the scheme.

Goosemoor wanted to develop a site that would have provided a classroom where children could learn about the provenance of their food and cook meals, as well as open space where crops would have been grown to provide ingredients.
The majority of the site would have been dedicated to a food distribution centre that serves its school meals business, and the applicants claim it could have created around 100 full-time jobs.
Planners debated the economic merits of the scheme against the potential harm the development could have due to its location in open countryside and within a coastal preservation area.
Planning officers were recommending the plan be refused, largely because of the “significant landscape harm” they thought the plan could cause, and the belief the applicants had not exhausted all other possibilities.
Supporters of the scheme, which included members of the family behind the business, emphasised the potential economic benefit of employment, the importance of the educatering aspect, and the holistic benefits that nutritious meals can bring to education by helping children concentrate in lessons.
But opponents raised fears about the impact on the rural location, and highlighted concerns about the 24-hour nature of the distribution centre, and the potential for increased noise and traffic movements.
East Devon District Council’s planning committee (Tuesday 21 October) debated the plans for nearly two hours, and the proposal was narrowly defeated by seven votes against it and five for. One member abstained.
Speaking after the meeting, Jamie Walsh, the founder and director of Goosemoor Educatering, said: “We are obviously, as a family, devastated as we have been in the area since 1957 and have been growing the business over that time, and we are at a stage where our current facility doesn’t suit us and is not big enough for our growth.
“We were hoping to stay in East Devon where we all live, but the proposal has been refused. Our educatering business is growing at a rate of knots, and because of that we do need a new site. The preference was to stay in East Devon as a lot of our employees are from the district and some have worked with us for 20-25 years.
“We know a relocation could put those jobs at risk, with additional commutes required, but we think the eductering part of our business will be national in 10-15 years’ time so we will need to move to continue to grow.”
He added that alternative sites had been searched for in a 12-mile radius, but that none were commercially available.
During the committee meeting, Councillor Eileen Wragg (Liberal Democrat, Exmouth Town), said the proposal was “dressed up as an education facility when clearly it is a distribution centre”.
“I believe it is totally in the wrong place,” Cllr Wragg said.
“All our policies go against this development, and if we allow it to go ahead, then that could open the way for a development near you in the countryside, and if you want to kick against that, a planning inspector might refer to this decision that we make today if we grant approval.”
Various other councillors, including Councillor Stuart Hughes (Conservative, Sidmouth Sidford), Councillor Ian Barlow (Independent, Sidmouth Town) and Councillor Kim Bloxham (Independent, Cranbrook) emphasised the potential economic benefits.
“I’ve been on this council far too long – this is my 35th year – and advice I was given when I first joined is that policy isn’t written on tablets of stone, policies change and here we have a golden opportunity for 100 new jobs to be created and I think whatever objections there are, I give my full support,” Cllr Hughes said.
Cllr Barlow added that he shared this view, and echoed the perspective of the council’s own economic development manager, who backed the potential economic benefits of the scheme.
“Is it right that a company built here and the people who work there are told ‘sorry, you can’t grow here’, and so they have to move out of the area?,” Cllr Barlow said.
He added that a “community need” could be argued in favour of the development, which could provide a reason to support the scheme in spite of it jarring with several planning policies.
“The community need is jobs,” he said.
“The community need is education, the community need is all the things they are supplying locally that we are trying to build.”
However, Councillor Bethany Collins (Liberal Democrat, Ottery St Mary) said: “I don’t think anyone is questioning the value of the scheme and the effect food has on children’s attitude and learning.
“But that’s not a planning consideration, and I tend to agree with officers that there doesn’t appear to be policy support.”