Residents Urged to Oppose Victoria Street Tower block
Duryard & St James Liberal Democrat councillors are raising serious concerns about a planning application submitted for the redevelopment of the former garage site on Victoria Street. The proposal includes the demolition of existing buildings, the removal of mature trees, and the construction of a range of buildings from three to six‑storeys that could house over 100 people.
Councillors Tammy Palmer and Kevin Mitchell are formally opposing the scheme and are encouraging residents to submit their views before the consultation deadline on 9 August 2026.
Councillors have many concerns with these plans, including:
Protecting the Character of St James
The proposal would see the demolition of the current garage buildings and a detached Victorian villa. Planning documents indicate that all 22 trees on the site would be removed, along with the wildlife habitat they support. The planned six‑storey block would significantly alter the character of St James, dominating the local skyline and directly overlooking homes on Prospect Park, Victoria Street, and South View Terrace.
Housing Affordability
Councillors note that similar developments in Exeter are being rented for £2,350 per month, excluding bills. Even the limited number of “affordable” units in the proposal are expected to cost up to £1,800 per month, excluding bills—levels far beyond what many local residents and families can reasonably afford.
Community Balance
The application states that the development is primarily aimed at younger residents. St James already has a high proportion of people under 25. Councillors argue that the neighbourhood needs a balanced mix of housing suitable for key workers, families, young professionals, and older residents looking to downsize—supporting long‑term residency and a stable, thriving community.
A Better Alternative
Councillors Palmer and Mitchell acknowledge that the site is likely to be redeveloped. They state that they would welcome a scheme that delivers genuinely affordable homes and a diverse mix of housing types that reflect the needs of the St James community. They believe the current proposal does not meet these needs, prompting them to speak out.
Statements from Councillors
Cllr Tammy Palmer said:
This proposal is completely wrong for St James. A six‑storey building is not in keeping with the surrounding Victorian homes and would permanently damage the character of our neighbourhood. It could house more than 100 residents in an area that is already densely populated, putting further pressure on local streets and community spaces. St James deserves better‑quality development that protects its heritage and respects the residents who live here.
Cllr Kevin Mitchell said:
“Residents have been clear for years: St James needs genuinely affordable homes and a mix of housing that supports long‑term community life. This application delivers none of that. We need family homes in St James, and this development will not meet local needs. We are standing up for a better alternative—one that strengthens our community by providing a greater balance of residents and homes local people can actually afford.”
Cllr Michael Mitchell, who sits on the planning committee, remains neutral on planning applications in accordance with committee requirements.