Dawlish News

The town council planning committee gave several reasons for its refusal of the scheme by Joe and Margaret Adams for two houses and a garage in the garden of their property, at Channel View, off Fordens Lane.

They said that the development would be dangerous on highways grounds, because of poor access, and that it represented overdevelopment. It would mean a loss of amenity through the destruction of trees and the overlooking of neighbouring properties in Rosyl Avenue.

Although the decision is not binding on Teignbridge Council, it is a first victory for residents of Rosyl Avenue, who fear that their privacy would be destroyed by the scheme. Before the debate, Jacqui Tyler, of No 7 Rosyl Avenue, told councillors, that the larger of the two proposed houses - an eight-metre-high, five-bed-room dwelling only one metre from the boundary fence - Would loom over their gardens, destroy trees along the boundary, and reduce their light.

She said that nobody wanted a repetition of the distress caused earlier this year when planners had allowed a similar development to destroy the
privacy of Lawrence Morgan, their 98-year-old neighbour at No 5.

Berenice Moffitt, of No 6 Rosyl Avenue, said that the proposed entrance off Fordens Lane would be far too narrow. The development would also interfere with her and Mr Morgan's right of way to Fordens Lane.

Cllr Margaret Dickson, chairman of the town council's planning committee, said that they had studied the plans carefully, and she did not have a problem with the smaller of the proposed houses.

`But we were of one mind that we didn't like the larger one, because of its bulk, shape and sire, and its effect on adjoining property owners, particularly the bungalow owners,' she said.

Cllr Humphrey Clemens said that there was a good case for turning down both houses, because of poor access and overdevelopment.

`But the larger house is also up against the neighbours, and is right on the line of the village envelope, and threatens the coastal protection area,' he said. `It would also damage trees of high amenity value that can be seen all over the village.'

Cllr Val Jeffery said that the committee could not split its recommendation to Teignbridge, since there was only one application.

Cllr Mary Mugford declared an interest, and did not take part in the debate or vote.

• After the meeting,
Terry Tyler, one of the protester, against the development said: `We are pleased with the decision by Dawlish Town Council to reject the planning application for the proposed development at Channel View.

`Teignbridge Council's Local Policy Plan states:

"All new housing development will be expected to not prejudice the amenities of existing occupiers of adjoining development by reason of noise, loss of light and undue overlooking:"

'We hope that Teignbridge Council take the same view.'