General Discussion
here at the minutes for the Overview and Scrutiny meeting held at TDC on 12.1.15. You can see the questions asked and the answers given re Warren Farm and the coastal park SANGS. http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=43016&p=0
I've just been looking at some of the objections to this proposal http://gis.teignbridge.gov.uk/TeignbridgePlanningOnline/Results.aspx?Type=Application&Refval=14/02780/MAJ Have a look at one of the objections dated 12th Jan.2015. It is from Plymouth City Council who point out the economic importance of having this rail line open and operating for the further south west (suspect they ...
@stephen15 - yes i did give my full address. as it happens she has, today, and since my reminder, got back to me via e-mail. Words to the effect of: she has taken this matter up on behalf of the landowner but can't give me details because of data protection (fair enough). That she cannot get involved in individual planning matters but she has been in contact with TDC to make sure that the ...
So, in yet again an attempt to bring this thread back to its original topic, I'm posting to let you know that I have now sent that e-mail to Cllr John Goodey. I copied in all 5 of our Dawlish district councillors (three of whom are also Dawlish town councillors) and also Cllr Bob Vickery (as he chairs the town council planning committee) and Cllr Mary Lowther (as she chairs the town council civic ...
Back at the beginning of last month I sent the e-mail below to our MP. @ today's date I have had no response back. So I've just sent her a reminder. If I ever do get a response I'll post it on here. Dear Ms Morris, I have today received the local Conservative news sheet. I note that on the back page under the heading “A real voice for local people in planning decisions” you say ...
Homophobia. A subject for discussion most certainly. But on a separate thread perhaps?
Okay - in the hope of bringing this thread back to its original topic I am posting this. I intend sending an e-mail to Cllr John Goodey who is the portfolio holder for housing and planning at Teignbridge District council asking him to clarify some things conncerning this "deemed not to be required" statement in the EIA report. The e-mail is ready to go. Should anyone have anything they would ...
Therefore I suppose the question to ask is why is a nearby (how nearby is nearby to this proposed development?), and presumably additional SANGS to that proposed at what is presently Warren Farm, deemed to be not required? And to whom should that question be posed?
If you take a look at the document referred to on the Gatehouse Development thread and scroll down to page 8, take a look at 2.5.2 - where mention is made of provision of an extra care unit for the elderly and infirm being part of this development.
I wasn't sure just what it is that it is deemed (by whom?) isn't required? The SANGS? the £350 per dwelling contribution? or both? Plus I wasn't sure when I would and when I wouldn't infringe the copyright (wouldn't want to give anyone the opportunity to shut me up would I. Well, would I?!). Thank you Mcjrpc for posting that link. I can access it quite easily. If others can also do the same ...
