Ah! Now perhaps this is what localism is all about? (Provided of course that whatever the group suggests complies with European and UK National planning regulations and Plan Teignbridge!)
I understand that the incentive to draw up one of these Neighbourhood Plans is that communities that do so receive more CIL money from TDC. This money can then be spent in the community. To be spent on what though? Maintaining what we already have or to finance the building of more er........buildings?
Final bit (for the time being) of me venting my spleen on all this planning and localism nonsense. I saw this about 18 months ago. Can't remember where now so can't give its source. It is a slightly edited version of the original.
"Neighbourhood planning has been made a formal part of the planning system under the NPPF, and it allows local communities to plan for specific additional development that they themselves want (such as a new village hall, or Youth Club) which may not be provided under the more general and wider planning considerations of the region-wide "Local Plan".
Lynne, I would not presume to take issue with anyone in Dawlish on matters relating to the previous (rejected) pilot Dawlish Parish Neighbourhood Plan as the experience of being involved in that process would have been a painful and sobering one. Call me a naive optimist (or just plain bonkers if you will) but I do feel there are ongoing, non-financial benefits for Dawlish through a new NP, just as there would be for the many rural villages and settlements within the District currently unaffected (barring additional traffic) by the recent adoption of the Teignbridge Local Plan.
I disagree with Chairman Ros Prowse however that a resurrected NP should only be about wrestling an additional 10% of the CIL payable by developers to TDC into DTC hands. Welcome though it would be to have these funds spent (wisely) locally, any new Dawlish NP should be able to bring forward policies on housing and land use AS LOCAL PEOPLE SEE FIT. This COULD (for instance) include: additional areas of SANGS or ANGSt (yes, really!) in the vicinity of the town (we appear to be short of these commodities currently...); or small pockets of additional homes (rural, affordable, self-build, elderly accomodation, etc); or space for additional health facilities (on NHS land at Langdon Hospital in the extended 'mixed-use' zone, perhaps?). Whether developers would welcome the inclusion of policies on housing density, layout and design is a moot point, but such initiatives would be a matter for US. After all, what is the point of a Neighbourhood Plan that has no Planning element? Would such initiatives not smooth the path to a less adversarial local planning system??
A new Dawlish NP should not only help us put flesh on the bones of the Local Plan, it would become in my view a vital tool to help steer developement over the next 20 years and beyond. It is for this reason that I have volunteered my services to the Parish - and I hope many others will consider doing likewise.
Well let's see how it all pans out then. For starters it could make 'noises' about Warren Farm NOT being turned into a SANGS!
Good!!And I'm sure many would be grateful if you could keep us up to date on that particular issue.
And talking of keeping people up to date. Are there minutes of these meetings and if so how can they be accessed online?
Other than the initial meeting to kick things off, I have not been informed of any further progress. I will enquire...
I agree with SoulofDawlish the people should have more imput. We live here and know where we want things put and if we actually need them. Regarding another community building as an example, people who I talk to would rather keep the Red Rock going and if that means the council charging the developers the cost of a new building and then ring fencing these funds soley for the future funding of the Red Rock I would not object. I feel for the young people of Dawlish, they waited so long for the Red Rock after the Leonard Lamb Centre closed down and now that may not be safe. My grandchildren have so much to do in Exeter, whilst the children of Dawlish have less and less opportunities to spend time with friends in a safe environment, it is a real shame.
Therefore, I would welcome the Neighbourhood Parish Plan giving the people of Dawlish a proper say, as they know what is best for the town and will spend the money carefully to ensure the projects the towns folk want have a fair chance of being brought forward and continuing in the future for the people of Dawlish.
How to save Red Rock is being discussed at Town Council on Wednesday. Also recommendations from a Consultant on how a NP steering group might proceed through the work required to draft a plan for public approval
The meeting is at the Manor, starts at 6:30
Thank you Michael, you are a gent. It should be an interesting meeting!
Any chance of feedback from that meeting being placed on here?
I will certainly write a report, but it will be a brief summary of what could be a long discussion. Much better to attend if you can.
The consultant says in his report
My keen interest at the moment MC is Warren Farm and what happens to it.
On the whole I don't go to meetings (my appearance at the Red Rock one last Monday week being a rare exception). To all intents and purposes I don't drive. And I am not walking, at night, this time of year, when it is definitely dark and could quite easily be pouring with rain from where I live to the Manor House and back. Hence I asked for written feedback. I am sure others who would also like to be aware of what is going on and who for other reasons may not be able to, or wish to, attend that meeting would also appreciate being kept in the loop.:)
This link will take you to the agenda for the next Dawlish Town Council meeting http://www.dawlish.gov.uk/edit/uploads/1410.pdf
Note agenda item 13 which is concerned with the new Dawlish Neighbourhood Plan. Note in particular item 13D which says
“ To appoint members who accept the Teignbridge Local Plan 2013 – 2033 to a Steering Group to produce a Neighbourhood Plan for Dawlish.”
Note the wording “members who accept the Teignbridge Local Plan 2013-2033”
I take it members means councillors. More to the point they have to accept the Teignbridge Local Plan in order to part of the new group. No dissenters allowed it would seem. Wonder if that will also apply to citizens of the parish who also wish to be members of this Neighbourhood Planning group? Just thought I would flag this up as it might be the case that any talk at its meetings of more SANGS needed but definitely not at Warren Farm or any other form of challenging/questioning Plan Teignbridge and how it impacts on Dawlish might be ruled out of order.
To quote Gordon Hook it’s very hard to “buck the system”, and “the system” wanted that plan in place.
I think it needs to be clear to everyone that as far as future planning decisions go, the key document is Plan Teignbridge. There is no point in putting in anything that contradicts that document because PT trumps everything.
Once a draft NP has been written, it has to go through an examination by an Independent Examiner before it can be put to a public vote. There is a serious risk that it would fail at that stage if it materially differs from PT.
The reason why the Dawlish NP mark one failed was because as the first NP in the country to get to examination stage it had been prepared before PT, and the Examiner said it could not therefore be seen as consistent with the Local Plan. I agree this makes a nonsense of "Localism"
It's not that you have to support or agree with PT. Rather understand that the reality is that it is an Adopted Local Plan that has been approved by the Planning Inspectorate.
A neighbourhood plan is still worth having because it gives Dawlish citizens the opportunity to influence investment in the Town. Not least by the Infrastructure Board which is being set up by TDC to spend the 75% of CIL money that they will retain.
It also is an opportunity to influence other decisions such as future planning of education and health services.
Totally agree that Plan Teignbridge trumps everything. What is in it- will be.
What hope then for the person who finds themselves at the wrong end of all this planning legislation, let's say for example, being on the wrong end of a compulsory purchase order. Nowt I would say.
And how are those who have no knowledge of planning procedures, you know your average run of the mill a.n.other citizen, your nurse, your plumber, your taxi driver and so on and so forth how are they to have any idea whatsover how to fight back? That to have any chance whatsoever they need to make lots of noises when things first start getting mooted and not wait until the Local Plan has been adopted.
But they won't know that will they? Do planners know how to nurse? How to be a plumber? How to be a taxi driver? No. And by the same token how on earth are those not in the least bit familiar with the planning system supposed to know how to fight their corner?
Sunday sermon over.
And amen to that, Lynne.
BTW, thank you for the agenda for this coming Wednesday's Council meeting (a 6.30pm start I note) and I take your point about the appointment of members (to a new Steering Group as I understand it). My view is that it is not incompatible to be a supporter of a fair deal for Richard Weeks and an advocate for more SANGS/ANGSt in Dawlish while at the same time accepting that the Local Plan provides the cornerstone for a new Terms of Reference document that will be expected to be signed off by the SG. If you cannot be there, I hope to meet others who are of a similar disposition.
This little snippet from the Dawlish Post earlier this year sums things up for me:
Although ‘Plan Teignbridge’ is now adopted, much remains to be done to ensure local needs and housing numbers are properly balanced with infrastructure and the environment. Considered unachievable through piecemeal development, resident groups and Town and Parish Councils are already looking to this fresh challenge though Neighbourhood Planning and associated Localism Act powers. These groups and public bodies need broad community support to enable the character of our area, its countryside and its facilities to be best maintained for future generations.
It looks like the time has come for the town to rally to the cause once more.
I fail to see why land behind Seven Sisters (what used to be Dawlish Common) is designated Coastal Protection Zone when it is miles from the sea and is the obvious place for development (allowing the skyline to remain undeveloped) for any Dawlish expansion.
It's nowhere near the coast compared to other land that is being developed - perhaps it's because it's Luscombe land!
I'm quite glad though as I have a small piece further down which I don't want developed.
This still doesn't answer the question as to why the common (as was!) seems to be a sacred cow.
It's also the bleeding obvious place for the SANGs!!!
Huw, you know you said you've got land that you don't want developed well...........should the authorities ever decide that it is an ideal spot for housing or a SANGs or an electricity station or whatever then 'they' can, and will, invoke a compulsory purchase order.
As promised, a report on the discussion about this at Town Council last night.
The various reports were accepted, so the steering committee can begin to form.
There was the opportunity for 6 councillors to serve on this group, and as 6 people had volunteered they were appointed:
Cllrs Bloomfield, Clemens, Mary Lowther, John Petherick, Prowse and Swift.
The terms of their appointment was clarified as Members who accept that nothing can be added to the NP that is in direct conflict with Plan Teignbridge.
So, no need to agree with PT, just be aware that the Examiner will fail the NP if this is not observed. It would be a crying shame for the community to engage in creating a Neigbourhood Plan only for it to be ruled out for breaching the government guidelines.
Volunteers are now being sought from the general public to serve on the Steering Group. Anyone who is interested should contact the Town Council office (email@example.com) to express their interest.
Thank you Michael for the update.
Just for those not who may not know; Cllrs Clemens, Petherick and Prowse are also Teignbridge District Council councillors. Cllr Clemens chairs the TDC Planning Committee and I believe Cllr Prowse is a substitute councillor on the same committee so she will occasionally sit on it.
Cllrs Clemens and Prowse are both Conservative members and represent Dawlish South West on TDC.
Cllr Petherick is an Independent councillor and represents Dawlish North East and Central.
Should anyone wish to contact any of the councillors appointed to this new Neighbourhood Plan committee/steering group then click on this link http://www.dawlish.gov.uk/edit/uploads/1332.pdf and keep scrolling down. You will come to a list of all the councillors that represent Dawlish, on which council they sit, which areas they represent and, importantly, how they can be contacted
Lynne - I hope you're putting yourself forward for the Steering Group.
My problem Mcjprc is that from the way I am reading what Michael has written, and it confirms what I suspected, is that whatever is proposed in the new NP has to conform to what is already in the Teignbridge Local Plan. Which, amongst other things, is that there should be a SANGs coastal park where Warren Farm is presently located. As I don't agree with that it follows that I don't agree with the Teignbridge Local Plan. Ergo I cannot, even if I wanted to, sit on this new group.
That is a mis reading of the situation Lynne
What was agreed last night is effectively a conscience clause, respecting the right of everyone to agree or disagree with PT but recognising the restrictions govt place on what can be written into a neighbourhood plan because the local plan trumps it.
It would be a remarkable document if absolutely every element met with universal support.
Okay - let me ask this question. Can the current Teigbridge Local Plan, the one that was adopted in May of this year, can it now be altered in any way? Not necessarily by any of the Neighbourhood plans that may come forward but by other ways?
In other words, is what is writ in the Local Plan, the word, as it were?.
In other words, can the Local Plan be altered so that Warren Farm does not become the site of a Coastal Park SANGs? Yes or No.
see new thread
Can a Local Plan be altered?
This is important: will it be a matter for Dawlish Town Council to chose (from the volunteer members of the public) who is best qualified to join the new Dawlish Parish Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group - or will the 6 town Councillors who have already put themselves forward to the Steering Group (a group which includes 3 District Councillors) be making the selection instead?
The 6 councillors have been asked to make a recomendation based on the people who offer their help. The expectation is that we will end up with a balanced team making best use of the knowledge and experience available.
The decision about who to appoint will be made by the Full Council.
Say, just say, that more than 6 citizens offer their services.
On what criteria will the 6 be selected? Knowledge and experience? But of what? Will they have to do a c.v? A presentation? Other?
Sorry if that sounds facetious. I don't mean it to be.
There is an expression of interest form so volunteers can explain what they feel able to offer to the process.
So, please can volunteers email firstname.lastname@example.org
Thank you very much, Michael.
So let me get this straight, the 6 Town Councillors who put themselves forward to the DPNP#2 Steering Group (including the 3 Teignbridge District Councillors, Humphrey Clemens, Roz Prowse and John Petherick) get to select their short list (a list of 6 presumably) to put before the full Council for recommendation? Has it not been considered that a more transparent arrangement would encourage more people to consider applying?
Dawlish does not only need a new Neighbourhood Plan - it needs new blood in its decision making bodies. In my view, we should do everything in our power to allow that to happen.
Which days and what time of day is it envisaged these meetings will be held? I ask because this will impact on whether or not an individual puts themselves forward eg if meetings held during a week day and someone who would like to be part of the steering group works 9-5 Mon-Fri then they would be excluded.
Also, as this is about the future of Dawlish, how can our young people be involved?
Our dialogue on this subject has gone on for some time, and I am beginning to feel that I will never be able to answer enough questions to satisfy your concerns. Every answer leads to another set of questions, and we are in danger of becoming a double act that tires the paitience of everyone else.
A politer version of Judith and Margaret.
If you have views about how the steering group should work, please volunteer and become a part of their discùssions, or otherwise wait for the full panel to be assembled and make representations to them.
All: for info - I've just sent this:
Lynne makes a valid point regarding the timing of the meetings. It is an issue some councillors face as more and more meetings, such as the budget setting meetings, are held during the day, disenfranchising the 50% of councillors who are in paid employment.
The budget setting meeting is at 7pm on February 5th.
The timing of meetings is increasingly a complex issue as work patterns change. Margaret has described her own problems in attending evening meetings due to working away. Some of our other colleagues have employment that stretches into evening shifts.
Other colleagues have Carer responsibilities that are even harder to adjust because of the love and attention we want to give to our vulnerable relatives. Others have volunteer duties that we feel are as valuable as paid employment because the customers are people that depend on that support. As I say, an increasingly complex issue.
Margaret is one of the six councillors on the NP steering committee, no doubt she can ensure that Lynne's concerns are addressed.
It really is good to see that at last one budget setting meeting is in the evening, progress. Many councillors who are in paid employment also have caring duties and volunteering duties but it really is important that meetings are placed so as many can attend as possible, the same applies for the NP steering group.
According to the Gazette report (see page 3 of this week's edition) the steering group will consider things such as health services, leisure and schools but not housing, land or the proposed country park (country park = coastal park?).
BTW I'm still awaiting a reply from the town clerk re what time the meetings will be. 3 working days and not even an acknowledgement.
The budget setting meeting MC refers to on 6th December at 13.02 is the Town Council meeting in February. All the work has been done by then by a small group of F&GP members who can attend afternoon meetings, which of course precludes most members who are in paid employment. So far, one meeting held in November and one being held this week, both afternoon meetings.
Councillor Swift you advise that the budget, our taxes, is determined by a small group of your councillor colleagues; if this is the case surely the majority of you councillor colleagues (those who like yourself, are not part of the budget setting process) must be of a similar opinion to yourself? Are you not able to rally the support of your fellow councillors and address this imbalance?
You have previously advised on a number of occasions that you represent the people of Dawlish, surely the time has come to reattach the swords to your chariot wheels and address the matter?
@Likeablerat, the point i was making is that all the meetings to discuss and firm up the budget are organised by the chair of f&gp and, at his choosing, are held during the day so those of us in paid employment cannot normally attend. i have on several occasions voiced my concerns but to no avail. as councillors we do get to see a draft of the budget in papers issued before the february meeting, where we have to agree it, but the decisions are taken by a small working group who are available to meet during the day.
On the contrary, I attend numerous evening meetings, a good example is the planning meeting I attended tonight! I use the term paid employment to differentiate from voluntary employment, I assume you know and understand the difference.
I certainly do understand. I'm curious as to why you feel the need to differentiate it. Do you think the paid element makes it more significant than other unpaid responsibilities? Is it a more worthy excuse for not attending meetings? And just so I'm clear, could you quantify 'numerous'? I intend to ask the same of every councillor whose attendance appears to be below par.
Well it isn't astro physics! I attend all the meetings I am able to when not working, ie, being paid by my employer to be at work. When doing voluntary work I make sure it compliments my duties as a councillor to enable me to attend meetings, but as a paid employee I have to attend work to meet the employer's demands. Those councillors who are retired or unemployed do not have the restrictions placed upon them in quite the same way as those who have their salary paid by an employer. But then again, I though that was obvious.
The only thing that's obvious is your smokescreen around your dismal attendance record. I don't need to hear the whys and wherefores, if your 'paid employment' stops you turning up to council meetings make a choice.
How we set the Budget for Dawlish Town Council
In May, the committees of the council were appointed. There is a particular sub-committee that deals with the early detail of the budget, simple grunt work such as looking back over the past experience of the year to see how much we need to spend on on current commitments and looking ahead to understand what new costs need to be provided for. 7 councillors volunteered for this duty and all were appointed. No-one was excluded.
As Chairman of the sub-committee, I have a duty to set out a programme of meeting dates so that this sub-committee can operate. I do this in discussion with the council officers and take into account the known commitments of my elected colleagues and the workload in the office. This timetable is circulated to the members involved, who can of course suggest alterations. If still not happy, they should insist on the timetable being put to a vote.
Councillors who are not on the sub committee are encouraged to submit suggestions for inclusion in the Budget
As in previous years, a draft of the full budget will be circulated to all 16 councillors before the office closes for the Christmas and New Year Break. We hope to do this before December 19th this year, and so far we are on course.
Councillors are asked to feed back any concerns or suggested alterations by January 5th. This is so the sub-committee can look at any such representations and make changes before a revised draft of the budget is sent to all councillors.
There is then an evening meeting of the entire Finance Committee on January 20th. 10 members of the Council are on this Committee and get a vote. The other 6 are welcome to attend and give their opinions. The draft budget is debated, and changes can again be suggested. The Finance Committee then recomends a final draft budget to Full Council.
On February 4th the Full Council will meet, debate the Budget and if it wishes make further changes. It is then put to a final vote of all 16 councillors before it becomes official.
I understand Margaret has a job which involves her working away from home on a very regular basis and makes it difficult to attend meetings. She is not unique in this. A fellow councillor also works away from Devon on a regular basis. Some councillors have paid employment in the daytime, others work regularly in the evening. Many of us are Carers whose time commitments are shaped by the needs of relatives, others are volunteers who may not be paid but equally feel that their other commitments are valuable and shouldn't be sacrificed to a council timetable.
To suggest that simply because volunteers are not paid they are free to cancel their working arrangements is outrageous and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the value of those commitments. Volunteers make a difference to other people's lives, often the most vulnerable in society, and we can't just not turn up. Our mortgages may not depend on our voluntary work, but people do.
21st century lives are complicated, and there is not a right solution that fits everyone's individual needs. We do the best we can, and I think the process outlined above shows just how many opportunities there are for all 16 councillors to be involved in the preparation of the budget.
@Dorian, define dismaI? I present my apologies to the Town Clerk with a valid reason and my attendance across the board stands up to scrutiny, which cannot be said for every councillor. I don't see you sitting on the council and giving your time, or do you?
Michael's post is plausible but does not detract from the fact that many of the additional F&GP meetings, including those for the budget sub-committee, are held during the day. That is a fact that can be checked by looking at council records.
Councillor Swift, you were elected in good faith to represent the electors who voted for you within your ward, please stop the whingeing and backstabbing and get on with the job you were entrusted with.
‘’If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen’’
President Harry S. Truman.
In all fairness Margaret, you should also have said that when we have had additional evening meetings, you've complained about these
I totally get that your work commitments impact on your ability to attend meetings, and I've never criticised you for that. Nor do I criticise others who can't attend for other reasons. We are all people with busy lives, doing our best.
I do think it reprehensible that you are trying to stir up a dust cloud around this issue to make your colleagues look bad just because "Dorian" and you are engaged in an argument, which actually started on an alternative thread about building work at Dawlish Warren and has nothing to with Budget setting or the neighbourhood plan.
Councillor Swift, you have frequently mentioned that you are in paid employment and as a consequence you are subject to extremely tight time restraints which preclude you from attending council meetings that are held during the day.
However your post on this website dated 8th June 2014 would appear to be contradictory.
8th June 2014
‘’Michael was very supportive of my proposal and in fact was my seconder to the proposal. He had done his own research and thought a visit would be worthwhile. I have only started posting since I semi - retired in April and so have the time to read about what is concerning and interesting people in our town. In that short space of time I have found the people who post to be genuinely interested in ...’’
And as such I am now able to attend more meetings in the months I am not working but the months I do work I work full time. However, even in my working months I attend as many meetings as I am able.
@Micheal Clayson, I am not in anyway trying to make my colleagues look bad and I really do not know why you would say that. I think all our councillors work very hard and attend as many meetings as they can. This started from a post by Lynne when she made a perfectly valid point about the timing of meetings, particularly those linked to the NP, so your comments regarding an argument between Dorian and me are completely off the mark.
That's a bit disingenuous Margaret, this started when, on another thread, you said that Council planning meetings were barely quorate, which was an obvious dig at your fellow councillors. It's not the first time you've done that and it's not surprising threads go off topic when people challenge you on your remarks. As it is, it raised a very interesting issue and the subsequent posts have been enlightening.
Well said Mcjrpc.
so.........to return the subject of the Dawlish Neighbourhood Plan #2
I e-mailed Ros Prowse earlier today asking her questions like where and when would the steering group meetings be held. I pointed out that
I was asking on behalf of others as well as myself and that I would let them know her response.
I therefore put here, in the public domain, her reply.
I see from TDC's website that the following locations in the Teignbridge District area have already submitted, and have had approved by TDC, their particular
Neighbourhood Plans : Ide, Exminster, Teignmouth, Bishopsteignton, Newton Abbot, Abbotskerswell, Ashburton, Haccombe with Combe, Buckfastleigh.
Please can someone who knows about these things tell us why Dawlish is so far behind those areas mentioned above?
Just to ensure we are all at the same point of understanding, these neighbourhood plans are still in the development process. As I understand it, none have been through a referendum yet (Exminster is likely to be the first as it has passed the Independent Examination stage).
Dawlish has already had one Independent Examination, and was rejected because it had been produced before the Local Plan (Despite the Government asking us to do this, usual changing of the goalposts by central government wasting massive amounts of time and a considerable amount of money). Unfortunately, as a community we can't legally just look at the bits criticised by the Examiner and amend those. The whole process has to start from scratch.
There are websites out there which may be of interest to you Lynne. For example the Newton Abbot plan site.
If you look at the Exminster site you will see how brief their examination was, and how little the Examiner had to consider in terms of public comment.
Thanks for that Michael. I agree the terminology used can be confusing. I was convinced that not one neighbourhood plan in the Teignbridge area had already been
Adopted by TDC but got confused by the use of the word 'approved' Neighbourhood Plans (and quoting those places on my post above) on TDC's website.
Approved? Adopted? and the difference is? (because I imagine there is one).
Anyhow, it seems there are other towns/parishes in the district that are in advance of Dawlish in terms of formulating their Neighbourhood Plan. So I guess my question
still remains - why is this?
I think you need to look under the headlines Lynne and question how far each of these NPs has got in practice.
For example, Teignmouth Councillor David Cox wrote these comments on Twitter (3 December 2014)
"Dawlish Council well ahead on neighbourhood plan - putting Teignmouth Council to shame. #procrastination"
"Abbot'k legal challenge does not seem to have stopped Dawlish council moving ahead on neighbourhood plan. #Teignmouth council get a move on"
So.....to be clear then. Not one Neighbourhood Plan in the Teignbridge area has got as far as being adopted by TDC.
All are still in various stages of development.
I have been trying to clarify this because I have had it put to me that the reason for the silence on the matter of
Warren Farm by the majority of our councillors is that they are afraid that if they upset TDC by creating a fuss about it then
TDC will retaliate by delaying for as long as it can the adoption of the Dawlish Neighbourhood Plan (#2).
As the extra 10% CIL that Dawlish can receive only comes into action after the Dawlish Neighbourhood Plan (#2) has been adopted by TDC
it follows that our councillors do not wish any unnecessary delay as they want the extra CIL asap.
As I say - that is what is being alleged. Whether or not the allegation has any substance............
It also follows (at least by my reasoning) that any and all of the other towns and parishes in the Teignbridge district could also
be slow footed by TDC should TDC so wish. But that hasn't shut up certain other district councillors in these other towns and parishes
has it who are making noises in defiance of TDC and in defence of Richard Week's and his wish to keep his land in his ownership.
So why are our Dawlish councillors maintaining their silence when these other councillors are not?
Lynne, how much is this CIL money? I'm playing Devil's Advocate here but, Weeks Farm aside, it's surely not unreasonable the Council wants, indeed needs the money ASAP, not least of all because of the endless complaints about reduced services and withdrawal of grant funding. The money's got to come from somwhere. If £35 to TDC for green waste collections kicks off a riot, it seems they're damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Not sure which council you have in mind Mcjrpc - Dawlish Town council (and all the other parish councils in Teignbridge) or just the District council or all of 'em.
They all need money.
I'll look up how much the CIL money is but I know it varies around the district, and for different sizes of buildings and for different types of building. For certain
types of new build housing I believe no CIL money is payable such as social housing and self build.
But.......to get back to the point of my post timed 14.38 of today's date - I am querying why some district councillors are prepared to make a public stand about the
Warren Farm issue whilst others are not.
All I'm trying to do is make sense of what seems to me to be non sense.
This link http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=41827&p=0 should give you info on the amount of CIL being charged around the district.
From my experience, that just isn't the way ot works. There has not been a single word from anyone (Politician or Officer) at Teignbridge to exercise any kind of influence on town councillors to keep quiet about Warren Farm. Rather the opposite, we have been left well out of any briefings and are no more informed than anyone else.
So, hand on heart there is no question of any kind of duress being brought to bear on us.
Why the silence? I'm sure it is a host of reasons because you are talking about 16 individuals, but emphatically not because of Black Arts at work.
I am only reporting what has been said to me now by 3 or 4 different sources. When I first heard it I didn't really give it much credence (still don't) but the
point is that I have heard it from more than one source indicates to me that it is 'doing the rounds'. Hence I looked into it. Hence I put it on here. And hence
its veracity has now been undermined.
I'm beginning more and more to think that really I am called Alice and that I must have stepped through a looking glass..........
If anyone wishes to be considered as a participant in the Dawlish Neighbourhood Plan #2 Steering Group you might like to know that completed application forms
should be returned to the town council no later than this coming Tuesday 6th January 2015. Item 11 on the town council agenda for the following day is
"Neighbourhood Plan for Dawlish - to receive a progress report and to consider recommendations for public membership of the Steering Group."
Been told the meetings will take place in the evening.
Anyone know who will be sitting on this Steering Group #2? I believe it was on last night's town council agenda, in the public part, so
I'm not asking for anyone to divulge anything they shouldn't. Was it made public how many applied?
This is what I've been told:
The 5 chosen are: Carolyn Ballard, Christine Marsh, Chris Swanwick, Francine Tullis and Martin Wrigley. A place was kept open for somebody with retail,
commerce and business sector experience. John Simon Principle of Dawlish Community College will be co-opted on to the steering group to advise on education
aspects of the plan when needed.
Interesting information to be found from this link
I understand the minutes of the steering group meetings will be placed on a webpage on the town council's website
(not on yet though). The steering group will be meeting again this coming Thursday.
Cllr Prowse chairs this steering group.
On a separate thread on this website someone (Kaz I think) mentioned the lack of bungalows and other types of accommodation
such as retirement homes/nursing homes that are specifically aimed at, and for, the elderly. I have e-mailed Cllr Prowse about this concern
but please don't let that stop anyone else doing the same thing! Affordable housing I understand is within the remit of this steering group.
An exert from that link I have given above concerning Neighbourhood Plans
Community Right to Build
The Localism Act also allows for community organisations to bring forward a ‘community right to build order’ which is a type of neighbourhood development order.
This allows certain community organisations to bring forward smaller-scale development on a specific site, without the need for planning permission. This gives communities the freedom to develop, for instance, small-scale housing and other facilities that they want.
Any benefit from this development stays within the community to be used for the community's benefit, for example, to maintain affordable housing stock or to provide and maintain local facilities such as playgrounds and village halls.
Community right to build orders are subject to a limited number of exclusions, such as proposals needing to fall below certain thresholds so that an Environmental Impact Assessment is not required. Proposals are subject to testing by an independent person and a community referendum.
Exminster residents have voted YES for their Neighbourhood Development Plan by a margin of 978 to 52. Great engagement there from Exminster residents - I wonder if we would get those sort of numbers voting in Dawlish?
So what happens if the majority of those voting give their particular proposed neighbourhood plan the thumbs down?
Does the whole thing get mothballed or is it a question of starting again?
Erm, it wouldn't come into legal force. That would be it. Opportunity gone.
Is this what they voted on?
That's right. More precisely:
The referendum on Thursday 12 February 2015 will be held to decide on the following question:
"Do you want Teignbridge District Council to use the neighbourhood plan for Exminster to help it decide planning applications in the neighbourhood area?"
People who are registered to vote in the Exminster parish can go to the polls. If more than 50% of the votes cast in favour, it then becomes part of the development plan for the area and a statutory consideration in determining planning applications.
And so we await to see just how much clout, in reality, all these NPs will have when it comes to the LPA making planning decisions/recommendations.
It's a legal requirement Lynne for NPs to be taken into account when making planning decisions. Have you not read any of the documents that you've provided links to?
Oh yes JC I know what it says should happen. I am just waiting to see what actually happens.
Perhaps you should have put yourself forward for the Dawlish steering group then...
Why? What difference would that in any sense shape or form make with regard to TDC officer planning
recommendations/TDC councillor decisions on planning applications?
It will only be a matter of time before a TDC planning officer recommendation will be for a part of an NP to be ignored because
of this reason or that reason. And to compensate they'll ask for mitigation - money no doubt.
Because then you could have helped shape the NP! Its contents have to be taken into account when recommendations are made in the future. Think about it, you could have actually done something rather than just moan about it on here and in the local paper. Seeing as you started this thread, I have to say that I'm really surprised that you've failed to do your research. Lynne, to be absolutely clear, it's a legally binding document that has to be adhered to - there are no shades of grey.
I can help shape the NP, as can anyone else, without having to be a member of the steering group. That is what making sure that all the meetings etc are put
into the public domain are all about.
As I say.........let us await and see what happens when, sometime in the future, TDC planners want to do something that contravenes a particular NP.
@JC You only have to look at what is going on with the Secmaton Lane planning application 14/01577/MAJ this application sits within DA2 of the local plan. THat part of the plan was highlighted by the inspector "Principally the need for sufficient number of homes to help fund the necessary link road, this would be an estate road capable of being served by buses, leaving Secmaton Lane as an attractive cycle and pedestrian route". Teignbridge Planning Dept have not thrown out this application until the plan is fixed for DA2, they have stated that it does not say that all new builds will have there exit to the new link road. So they are already modifying the local plan to suit developers, take that into account with the problems in the lane with regard to sewage smells caused by the new developments built already that are discharging through Secmaton Lane to a pumping station at the bottom of the lane that regularly has tankers parked outside because it gets blocked or the pumps fail. The infrastructer cannot cope now, the schools are over subscribed, the doctors cannot cope. Is there any planning to address these problems, not that I can find.
Ken, I completely understand and appreciate where you're coming from. The infrastructure isn't up to the job and permission shouldn't have been granted without the infrastructure. The same could be said for all housing estates over the years - possibly even like the one that you might live on that was built xx years ago?
Invest in the infrastructure first not the other way around. We all know what councils and services are like , delay spending until the very last minute and let us the tax payer put up with the problems that arise.
@Judith Chalmers 1207, perhaps you could let us know what you have done to help shape the NP?
To be fair, Lynne's posts are generally to do with planning issues, something she obviously cares about.. Why not take it to the next level and make a difference by influencing matters. She's clearly committed and prepared to dig deep rather than other who would pay lipservice to the issues.
Dorian, I think you'll find that all of the seats on the DPNP#2 Steering Group are now spoken for. At least until May 7th, that is...
@ SoD - Welcome back! You have been noticeable by your absence!
Talking of May 7th and things.
I have mentioned on another thread the issue of pre election purdah wef end of March. There are 6 councillors who
sit on the DPNP#2 Steering Group. Do they cease their Steering Group activities from end of March to after May 7th? (assuming of
course that they stand for re-election as councillors and are successful).
Thanks Lynne. The DPNP#2 Steering Group Terms of Reference allow for 6 Town Councillors and 6 members of the public. While there would appear to be no provision in the ToRs for the removal of any public member of the Steering Group, Town Councillors who are not restanding for election on May 7th (or those who are not returned to office) would - unless I am mistaken - be precluded from continuing in that role.
@Lynne, the steering group meet the first tuesday of each month. they will be meeting in april but not in may until after the election. any councillor who is not re-elected or decides not to stand for election will be replaced at the first council meeting following the election.
This post has been removed due to too many reports.
@Margaret Swift - Margaret, as you are on the steering group and you also post on here could you tell us please how the steering
group envisages engaging with the Dawlish public? I have heard that the steering group members will each lead a
working party concerned with one particular policy of the Neighbourhood Plan. Is that correct?
Any other info would also be very useful as I cannot as yet find any trace of steering group meeting minutes being published.
@Lynne, there are going to be task groups to lead on each aspect of the plan and these will fully engage with the public. there will also be other opportunities for engagement with the public and the chair has made it absolutely clear that the steering group will be seeking the views of the people of dawlish on every aspect of the plan. the minutes of all meetings will be published, i understand that the best place to do this is still being investigated.