I see from the DCC Youth Services site that -
Red Rock in Dawlish is held by Devon County Council on a long lease. The proposal is to withdraw services from the building. The lease may be open to adoption by third parties subject to discussions with the landlord.
Does this mean the centre is now or will soon be closed?
https://new.devon.gov.uk/youthreview/locations/red-rock-dawlish/
See the front page of the Gazette. Whilst DCC are pulling the rug from under the feet of our young adults, it doesn't mean that it's closing down All being well.
Dawlish Action for Youth are looking to take over the building in partnership with Dawlish Community College and South Devon College
Discussions are continuing to get the arrangements right. In the meantime Dawlish Action for Youth has been given an additional grant of £10,000 from the Town Council to support their important work.
The £10,000 grant came from a special fund set up by the Town Council last year. The "Community Infrastructure Fund" has a set goal of helping ensure that key organisations in Dawlish that we rely on for a strong community continue during this time of Austerity when funding from larger councils such as Devon County is being cut back.
Other recipients of grants from this special fund include Dawlish Community Transport and Assist Teignbridge (Formerly called the Dawlish Volunteer Bureau)
Thanks both, I hadn't logged into the Gazette yet for this week's issue. I find it hard to understand how DCC could completely walk away from this building. What a waste. Good on the Town Council for the £10k grant but it would seem this won't be enough to keep it going after 12 months if the staffing costs are £29k not including building maintenance. What a travesty for our young people.
We are assured that with other funding they have in place, the 10k is sufficient for the next year.
And of course we will look to continue helping them in future
Looking longer term they definitely will need volunteer help to keep everything going, so if anyone out there wants to help please do get in touch with Dawlish Action for Youth
http://www.dawlishaction4youth.btck.co.uk/Contact%20us
This is the trouble with DCC they should be working with TDC as the DA2 allocation need need not only a new community building, but also early years provision building. Dawlish doesn't need more new buildings for the community which will need funding to build and then run when they have the Red Rock a nearly new building which is used by the community , but not enough. Many I know have parties there for their children (under 10s), therefore the building lends itself for use as an early years centre or a community building or both. DTC need to force TDC to stop wasting the towns money on things that Dawlish doesn't need and use that money to fund the buildings the community do have and cannot run properly due to budget cuts! Let us have some common sense! The DA2 also needs a new doctor's surgery, so why can't they build one behind Sainsbury's and convert one of the new industrual units due to be built, there is a denstist working from the Shutterton Industrial Estate, so it could be done. This would mean that people could visit the doctor and if need be grab some shopping, it is also on a bus route as the bus stop is next to Sainsbury's, so when the new housing is built it will be served by public transport. and it will also be easy to cycle to as well which Sustrans will ensure. Let us look at what we want and what we really need and let TDC know our views and not let them dictate, as do they live here, no, but we do!
agree @Kaz. anyone know what happened to the original plan re the housing opposite gatehouse school, wasn't there originally a doctors on there?
I'm not sure why Red Rock is so underused. It lends itself to great community use, see Dawlish Cookery School - fantastic idea!
@michaelclayson - would love to volunteer but already do a lot of youth volunteering and have no extra time. i wonder if dawlish youth 4 action have thought of approaching large companies to advertise their need for volunteers. i know, i work for a large organisation who allow 3 days off a year for volunteering as well as the ability to apply for grants.
re doctors' surgery opposite Gatehouse School - my cynicism re the gen. public's influence on planning matters is now such that I have stopped closely following what is happening re planning applications. So this is from memory - believe that NHS Devon said that they could accommodate extra patients created by all the new build by expanding the surgery/hospital site at Barton.
Also, developers will say they will build this and provide that so that they tick whatever boxes they need to tick to get planning consent. Then once planning consent is given guess what.....yeah you got it - whatever it was they said they'd provide they now say they can't provide as it would make their planning proposal unviable.
But like I said - I do now have a very jaundiced and cynical view about the whole planning system.
I know what you mean, they do lie to get what they want with no intention of fulfilling the requirements. That is why if we already have buildings that need extra funding then knowing this the council should put in appropriate CIL charge to compensate. The council have to look to the future, unlike when they allowed the builders to build up to Gatehouse School when Mr Goodridge said to leave 2 acres beside it for expansion! How short sighted was that and now they want to expand, but have no where to expand on site, especially since they have taken in the preschool! I feel Dawlish needs a new school to take the children of the future which is walkable, even if it is a funded free school and it needs to be north so the children next to Sainsbury's could walk to it as well as DA2 children, with enough room for expansion. After 2033 then another plan would be drawn up and who knows how many more houses and children will come from this, so a new school is as important as anything else discussed. If we want children to have enough room to learn and run around at playtimes which is what more and more schools cannot offer after building on playgrounds, then now is the time to say what we want for our community and get our Councillors to back us and make our views known.
The doctor's surgery has appeared to become flats, as the allocation has gone up from 76 to 96! The point is Barton Surgery say they can cope with additional numbers, however you try and make an appointment sometimes, hence many going to Dawlish Warren to see a doctor! They are like the schools who want to absorb the new housing for dawlish and so gain additional funding whether it is in the long term good for Dawlish or not!
The Red Rock Centre has received a temporary reprieve according to todays Gazette. One thing though that occurs to me is that the £500,000 that Farmer Weeks is reported to have been offered for part of his estate, would fund the Centre for 15 years. What a legacy that would be in exchange for what is, in my opinion, little more than scrubland.
Nice idea JC trouble is though that the Red Rock Centre wouldn't lend itself to becoming a SANGS, would it? It is SANGS (suitable alternative natural green space) as per a European Habitat Protection Directive that TDC have to provide given as how near all the new housing is/will be to Dawlish Warren NNR and the Exe Estuary.
So..........when push comes to shove what holds the trump card in terms of planning vs what the community wants? European/Westminster/Teignbridge planning legislation/policies or what is best for any one community as wished for by that community?
I think we all know the answer to that one.
Localism eh? Hah!
Thanks Lynne. Though all the lovely land beside might make a glorious SANGS? With part of the Red Rock becoming a visitor hub / cafe perhaps?
Maybe Farmer Weeks might consider giving the £500,000 he'll receive, towards the upkeep of the Centre? Why should he of course but I'm just throwing it out there.
I've no idea how much money Richard Weeks has been offered for his Warren Farm land. Is that gossip or is there documentary evidence somewhere? If you can prove how much he has been offered then please post the link to it on here.
Anyhow, if Richard were to sell his land/have it compulsory purchased (whatever the amount) then he may well need whatever it is he receives to buy other land/diversify into other ways of earning a living.
As far as I can ascertain TDC need to have SANGS that are in addition to open green spaces already in existence therefore that would rule out the playing fields at Sandy Lane being turned into a SANGS.
But I can totally see your argument that money made by local landowners/developers from the increase in the value of their land/profits made from all the house building that has already occurred and will occur in the non too distant future, that some of that money should find its way towards the upkeep and running etc of Red Rock. After all, those landowners and developers aren't having their livelihoods threatened are they? Indeed, they are the ones making money from all of this whilst, conversely, Richard could lose a source of his income.
I cannot comment on your last remark (Judith Chalmers), so I will not. I just want to point out £500,000 sound a lot of money, but in reality for 50 plus acres, it is an insult when you take into account he would gain no earnings from that land from the day it is gone. A building plot on Exeter Road is on the market in excess of £275,000 to put it into context! Also he has Grade 1 land and that is rare in these parts, anyway that is not the point his farm cannot function without the land and there is no land of that quality to replace it in this area. Gatehouse offered land behind the DA2 development when they applied for the first phase 75, and the council has turned that down for a contribution to the Coastal Park. That area meant most of Dawlish could access it. The Country Park had far reaching views to Haldon and over to Exmouth, is not exposed to the cold winds coming off of the sea in the winter or the stink from the sewerage treatment works in the summer/warmer weather. It is not next to the busy Warren road that is the only way to and from Dawlish Warren if coming from or going to Dawlish, is a larger site and meets ALL the SANGS requirements.
Hi Lynne,
The £500,000 reference was originally in the article linked below. However it has subsequently been edited out - at whose request I wouldn't have a clue.
http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/Campaign-save-farmer-s-land/story-24569287-detail/story.html
Kaz has made some very interesting and illuminating points don't you think?
I agree that she does. She has a lot of inside information which I'm pleased she's sharing with us. For the record and for what it's worth, I've already signed the petition that's doing the rounds.
Everything is online somewhere, you just have to be lucky enough to type in the correct wording that unlocks the documents that you need! Since most things have to be in the public domain a little research unlocks a lot of information, for better or worse! A bit of local knowledge also helps and talking to people points you in the right direction.
A vested interest also helps. Your first posts on Dawlish.com were negative towards a rival farmland owner, yet here you are promoting Farmer Weeks' interests. That's just an observation on my part and makes little difference to the general principle at play here.
This was posted by Kaz on another thread about a year or so ago.
Hi Andysport let me clarify who owns what in the Jeffery family. Lady's Mile farm was bought by old Mr Jeffery (deceased) when camping was becoming popular. His son's George and Alf joined them in the trade at the hight of the industry and they went on to marry and have children themselves. There appeared to be a dispute and next the business was split with George running Cofton and Alf Lady's Mile. Since then they appear to be objecting to each other on planning and legal grounds, sometimes ending up at the High Court. Since the 1990s they have also bought both the farms that are due to be developed in the expansion of Dawlish with Alf having Secmaton Farm and George owning Gatehouse. So it will be interesting to see how the DA2 in the emerging local plan pans out since 2 of the main land owners have been working to undermine each others for years. I hope for Dawlish's sake that they put their grievances aside, else we will end up with sites being passed in places which are not beneficial for residents or for the future of Dawlish. However, if they can't work together then Dawlish residents will not get what they need, more housing to allow the children of the future their own homes in the town the were brought up in!
An interesting synopsis from Kaz. Could it be that TDC have chosen Richard Weeks's Warren Farm for SANGS so as to appease these rival factions? Or is it that the other sites examined may be considered for further development at some point in the future??
BTW JC, the sum of £500,000, which has been speculated as being on offer for Warren Farm, is merely the going rate for farmland - and you couldn't earn much of a living from having that invested in the building society. But Richard Weeks is not the only one that Teignbridge is trying to short-change...
TDC will receive £436,000 in S106 developer contributions for the purchase of SANGS from the Shutterton Park Development, plus a sum of £264,000 for its ongoing maintenance. The 860 houses to be built at DA2 would add an (estimated) £1,000,000 to the TDC war-chest (via CIL) towards the purchase of SANGS land. Enough in total to turn Richard's head? Well that's a question for him and his family - but it would be at the expense of the public purse.
On the other hand why not re-instate the ridge-top Country Park / Community Park, adjacent to the west of DA2? This large area of public open parkland has been quietly dropped by Teignbridge since it was first proposed (and consulted upon) as part of the Dawlish Parish Neighbourhood Plan. The site also made an appearance later as an element of the first application for 75 houses at DA2 (Gatehouse Farm, 12/03797) and - importantly - is available/deliverable, as it forms part of one of the DA2 developer's land-holdings.
If this site were chosen instead, Richard could keep his farm as it is, while Dawlish would benefit from an equally large (but far more convenient) area of SANGS parkland, without our District Council having to resort to Compulsory Purchase, or dipping into reserves (no houses are built yet so it is unclear how much SANGS funding is currently available).
Would it too much to go on to suggest that the CIL cash saving thus realised is then used for other community projects - such as Red Rock??
on this issue of CIL, SANGS, Costs and thingys - thought I'd drop this little gem into the pot (my emphasis in bold)
"2.6.7 The mitigation strategy includes an estimated total SANGs cost (£14.4 million), in recognition that, as each authority completes the detailed costings of its own SANGS, more accurate costings can be substituted. The required funding can then be drawn down from CIL as required to deliver the SANGS in step with development. It may be appropriate, for the South West of Exeter SANGS in particular, to secure funding of on-going SANGS management via an annual, per-house, maintenance contribution, as is increasingly happening with other public open spaces.
From: http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=41483&p=0
Thank you for that little beauty, Lynne. So to be clear, Teignbridge is saying it may be appropriate for residents to pay for the future maintenance of SANGS land via an increase in (or a supplement to) Council Tax. Would this be because the authority is going soft on the developers regarding CIL contributions (the old viabilty arguement is already being wheeled out despite the Local Plan being recently found 'sound') - or would it be simply another stealth tax (like the forthcoming £35 green bin charge) to help plug the revenue gaps left when the current New Homes Bonus funding dries up? That's a hell of a mitigation strategy!
Don't forget not every house of the 860 would pay CIL eg. Social housing, Self build, and some are reduced fees. This is the easiest document I found to clarify. http://www.norwich.gov.uk/Planning/Documents/CILGuidanceNote1.pdf. I hope this helps to explain a bit.
Please 