General Discussion
Perhaps I should have written "Not necessarily affordable to all" rather than " at all" I don't know that I am alleging anything. More that I am making a statement of fact concerning new developments of under 14 dwellings and that under a certain number of new dwellings proposed for any one particular site, there is no need to provide any 'affordables'. Note that in the Core Strategy TDC ...
Just been looking at TDC's proposed Core Strategy. On page 36 it states that in the more urban areas of the district, like Dawlish, it would be looking for a 30% target of 'affordable' units on sites of 4 dwellings or more and then on page 37 it also says this: "The Council reserves the right to calculate the capacity of the site to accommodate dwellings where it considers that the development ...
Yes I know all about the different types of 'affordable' housing and I will continue to put inverted commas around that expression for the simple reason that 'affordable' housing is not necessarily affordable at all. My point about the 14 max is, as I have stated in a posting above, that that is the magic number for not having to provide any 'affordable' units. It has been known, I am told, that ...
Just been looking at the online information about this new planning application at Gatehouse Farm. Outline permission is being sought for 11 dwellings. 9 x 2/3 bed houses and 2 x 1bedroom flats. The applicants have been told by TDC that if they build more than 14 dwellings then they will become liable for an 'affordable' quota.
Have it in the back of my head that a development of under 15 dwellings need not have any 'affordables'. And if I'm correct, then lots of under 15 dwellings developments all added up together could produce lots of market housing but with no 'affordables'. Which would be a bit pointless as I was under the impression that the driving factor behind all this open market house building is that this ...
http://gis.teignbridge.gov.uk/TeignbridgePlanningOnline/Results.aspx?Type=Application&Refval=12/01147/OUT
Like you MoH I'm a lay person when it comes to all of this but this is how I see the situation. The Dawlish Neighbourhood Plan is not legally binding (and was never going to be) because the public consultations/steering group meetings etc all took place before the Localism Act came into force. Along with other similar schemes (some 200 or so I think) in the country it was pilot scheme designed ...
Just seemed an appropriate time to post this info. Be aware that despite it being TDC's policy that on housing developments over a certain size and in the more urban areas of the district like Teignmouth and Dawlish, that at least 30% of the units should be 'affordable' this does not always work out to be the case in the end. We presently have three large housing sites with p/p in Dawlish in the ...
Shutterton Park now have this website giving details of their proposed development. http://shuttertonpark.com/
For info. The professional planner who made the suggestion, and as it was made in public there are quite a few who can vouch that he did indeed say what he did, is a professional planner who works for a private planning consultancy. He's not a TDC planner. This private sector planner was at the Hearing representing landowners who have land out Gatehouse way. To throw this local plan in the bin ...
