This site uses cookies Learn More

General Discussion

ZIGGY
ZIGGY
02 Dec 2014 19:29
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
02 Dec 2014 20:13

Hijack Alert!

 

Thanks for the photos Ziggy. These look far better than the tatty old sheds that were ther a few years back. 

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
02 Dec 2014 21:28

Well, those tatty sheds were in place for over 50 years! I bet you looked a bit tatty after 50 years! The difference is those sheds were loved and cherished by everyone. 

5 Agrees
Cassandra
Cassandra
02 Dec 2014 21:44

I wonder if there will be another clairvoyant; perhaps they will tell me.

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
02 Dec 2014 21:59

That is weird! I assume Cassandra your post is in response to my question. - do Pinder Fashions own the ugly retail outlet in DW, but my post has mysteriously disappeared. Perhaps the clairvoyant is already in post and doing his/ her magic! 

Andylufc
Andylufc
02 Dec 2014 22:06

I was going to ask what the building work was at the warren as i've been looking on the webcam,i know its early days yet but does anybody know when it

will open?

 
Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
02 Dec 2014 22:11

And what is it going to be, who owns it and when did it go before planning? Loads of questions to be asked, which I am sure there will be reasonable answers to but ............

michaelclayson
michaelclayson
02 Dec 2014 22:24
Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
02 Dec 2014 22:33

It might if the link worked! But thanks for trying. 

michaelclayson
michaelclayson
02 Dec 2014 22:38

If you cut and paste the link into your browser it should work

 

alternatively, you can go to the Teignbridge planning portal and look at 12/01491

 

good night

 

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
02 Dec 2014 22:45

Thank you, I will do as you suggest and hope all the worrying questions are answered  in full.

Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
02 Dec 2014 22:52

So Margaret. You're on the DTC planning committee yet you're ignorant of planning applications?? I can only assume that those pesky FGW trains from London get you in too late to represent our interests at planning committee meetings...

This post has been hidden due to too many reports.

Show post

Please report the post if you also feel it requires moderation.

Hide post
1 Agree
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
02 Dec 2014 22:57

Thanks Michael. Your original link worked for me.

Margaret, maybe you metropolitan types should learn copy and paste. Instead of expecting everything on a plate...

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
02 Dec 2014 23:02

Mrs C you are soooooooo boring! 

4 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
02 Dec 2014 23:13

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

2 Agrees
Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
02 Dec 2014 23:14

Mrs C, the DTC planning meetings are barely quorate at any time they meet and this has been the case for the last three and a half years. I have my own theories as to why that is but I am too professional to air them on this forum. I am a member of planning but I am also a professional  working woman so cannot attend all meetings. FGW do a fantastic job of getting me from Dawlish to London and a whole variety of other places on their network but, sadly, cannot guarantee that my professional working schedule will allow me to attend the planning meeting every three weeks! That really is way beyond their scope! 

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
02 Dec 2014 23:29

Please, explain the false pretences. Even I am baffled! 

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
02 Dec 2014 23:33

And where do I mention bullying? Is that glass empty again?????????????

2 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
03 Dec 2014 06:50

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
03 Dec 2014 08:16

What a cop out! Read your own post at 23.13. And you still have NOT explained the false pretences. 

1 Agree
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
03 Dec 2014 08:41

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
03 Dec 2014 12:13

False pretences - explain. 

Mcjrpc
Mcjrpc
03 Dec 2014 12:41

Margaret, why bother agreeing with my thread then continue with your bickering?  Why don't you take it to the Lawn and pull each other's hair out like two hormonal teenagers.  I'm sure you'll pull a bigger crowd and at least they can choose to avoid it, we're forced to read this nonsense. 

 

WEBMASTER - would you consider moderating posts before they are published?   I'm guessing, like me, plenty of users are drifting away as they can't be bothered with it.  Your stats might improve if the windbags are reined in. 

7 Agrees
flo
flo
03 Dec 2014 13:46

I must admit I can't remember seeing anything about this previously being mentioned but as Michael's link is from 2012 perhaps I've just forgotten!  Does Dawlish Warren really need anymore retail units?  How many bucket and spades do we need?  Seriously, I wonder who will take up these units and if they've been rented out already.

roberta
roberta
03 Dec 2014 13:58

on the plans it says Pinder Fashions,  believe they already own the present retail unit 

burneside
burneside
03 Dec 2014 14:16

When that part of the Warren was redevloped a few years ago the council said the present grassed area would be turned into a recreational area, whatever happened to that idea? 

 

Dorian
Dorian
03 Dec 2014 15:16

So according to Margaret Swift, our elected town Councillors can barely scrape an attendance at the planning meetings but she is too professional to air her views.   That's a first so naturally my alarm bells started ringing.  This needed further investigation.

 

Here's the attendance record for the planning committee members at the 6 meetings since June (per the planning meeting minutes on the Town Council website)

Howard Almond 6 (Deputy Mayor)

Bob Vickery 5

Pauline Bloomfield 3

Mary Lowther 3

Rosalind Prowse 3

Gregory Fenne 2

John Petherick (Mayor) 2

Linda Petherick 1

Margaret Swift 1 

Harrie Burrows 0

 

Clearly some people are not taking their responsibilities seriously enough. 

 

4 Agrees
burneside
burneside
03 Dec 2014 15:31

@Mcjrpc

Who's forcing you to read this forum?

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
03 Dec 2014 15:40

@Mcjrpc I have been accused of falsely standing for the council and I want to know the basis for that accusation. 

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
03 Dec 2014 15:45

@Dorian, four of the nine councillors above are in paid employment so are not always available to attend meetings. 

Dorian
Dorian
03 Dec 2014 15:51

If you can't manage the job don't put yourself forward for it.  Let's have more committed people representing us. 

4 Agrees
michaelclayson
michaelclayson
03 Dec 2014 16:33

I don't want to get involved in this argument

 

Just for the record, Cllr Burrowes has found that her paid employment requires her to work on the evenings that the Planning Committee meets.  She therefore resigned from the committee some months ago.

 

i think it only fair to make that clear.

4 Agrees
Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
03 Dec 2014 16:54

I didn't say I can't manage the job, I said I could not get to every meeting. About 50% of the town councillors are in paid employment, which I think is good. 

Dorian
Dorian
03 Dec 2014 17:58

Turning up to meetings IS your job, good on Harrie Burrowes for doing the responsible thing.   Then there's the Code of Conduct for Councillors.   How do you think you score on Obligations 1 and 2? 

http://m.teignbridge.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=35570&p=0

 

6 Agrees
HowardAlmond
HowardAlmond
04 Dec 2014 14:23

Please note, just for clarity. The plans are for a single retail unit designed to look externally like a row of indivdual units.

burneside
burneside
05 Dec 2014 21:34

I am curious to learn how Pinder Fashions Ltd came to acquire the lease on this piece of land, given that the council had stated that it was earmarked to become a recreation facility.  How was the decision made to give the land over to commercial use?  

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
05 Dec 2014 22:43

@Dorian, I think I score highly on points one and two. I certainly do not cave into bullying tactics from you or anyone else. I attend as many meetings as possible and make positive contributions. For the record, when the recently agreed proposals for Dawlish Warren were presented to DTC in 2012 I was NOT a member of the planning committee. 

Purrrrrfect
Purrrrrfect
18 Jul 2015 15:58

I see the new building is just selling the same overpriced merchandise the one further down does, certainly doesn't add any variety to the retaler who is already there.

1 Agree
burneside
burneside
18 Jul 2015 16:18

Given that both units are owned by the same retailer I'm not at all surprised.  Nice work by TDC to hand over so much of the Warren to one trader.

5 Agrees
A Frame
A Frame
21 Jul 2015 10:19

I thought the land has been leased to them for a long time, TDC just gave approval for the recent development - were they expected to confiscate it?   What merchandise they stock is surely up to them and if no one wants it they will soon change it.   In my opinion the whole area is livelier and looking much better (apart from the portaloos).   Good for them, they're doing something positive.

1 Agree
burneside
burneside
21 Jul 2015 11:48

It doesn't alter the fact that the council originally stated that part of the Warren would be used as a recreational facility for beachgoers, but then I guess it had other ideas.  KA-CHING!

A Frame
A Frame
21 Jul 2015 11:57

Ka-ching for who?   What recreationsl facilities would you like to see that the coastline and the existing ones don't provide?

2 Agrees
Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
22 Jul 2015 19:32

So much for Princesshay outlets coming to sell their goods at Dawlish Warren! 

1 Agree
Lynne
Lynne
22 Jul 2015 20:05

An anecdote.

A relative of mine who was staying down here was very keen to visit this new shopping area.

He was, however, very disappointed to find that instead of it being different shops (as per the building's

appearance) it was just the one. Then, to add to his disappointment "it was selling the same type of goods as the large shop

further up" (his words not mine).

Still, time will tell if there is sufficient demand or not. 

burneside
burneside
22 Jul 2015 21:20

@A Frame

Ka-ching certainly for the council from the lease fees, and most likely for Pinder Fashions too if they can persuade the punters to buy their tat.

I have no strong feelings either way as to what kind of recreational facility should be at the Warren, I am merely pointing out what TDC promised back in the day (a volleyball court, I believe), and what they have delivered (more tat).

 

 

1 Agree
OurSoul
OurSoul
22 Jul 2015 21:41

Superdry 

Vans 

Animal

Joe Browns (a personal fave of mine). 

 

Just a small number of the High Street brands that I can remember seeing (and buying lol)  in there

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
23 Jul 2015 12:43

Not seen any of those in Princesshay! 

Netiquette
Netiquette
23 Jul 2015 13:12

So Ka-ching for the Council and ka-ching for the council taxpayer.    Or would you rather have a council tax rise to increase council revenue. 

Those brands are definitely in Princesshay, maybe if you don't buy for teenagers you wouldn't know.  And if they're tat they're expensive tat!

3 Agrees
A Frame
A Frame
23 Jul 2015 15:06

Who cares if it's tat anyway, it's a caravan holiday!  If Pinder Fashions are investing and expanding, Teignbridge are earning rent and rates and the punters are buying more flip flps, that's win win win in my book.

burneside
burneside
23 Jul 2015 15:35

It just goes to show you can't trust TDC to keep its word about anything, whether it be creating a recreation facility, or keeping the toilets open.  And if they are coining it in, surely they should be putting some of that money back into the Warren, not closing things down.

1 Agree
Netiquette
Netiquette
23 Jul 2015 15:54

I agree on the trust issue, but then I didn't vote for a Tory council.      I doubt they're 'coining it in' though, more like cutting their cloth accordingly.

1 Agree
OurSoul
OurSoul
23 Jul 2015 17:08

None of the brands I listed are tat! And all either have their own stores in Princesshay (I.e Superdry) or are available in stores there...

 

In fact I've just dug out the carrier bag from "Boardwalk", which lists the brands (these won't all be familiar to most who post here, granted, but they will be to most under-50s):

 

Roxy

Quiksilver

Reef

O'Neill

Billabong

Weirdfish

Gummies

Dolce & Gabanna

Hey Dude

Flossy Style

Down To Earth

Carve

Santa Cruz

Hype 

 

image

1 Agree
Netiquette
Netiquette
23 Jul 2015 17:44

I don't recognise all those brands but the ones I do know are most definitely not downmarket.    You get more overpriced tat in M&S these days.

2 Agrees
OurSoul
OurSoul
23 Jul 2015 17:53

A number of them are skatewear and surfwear brands. Some are also available at Warren Traders but most aren't. 

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
24 Jul 2015 23:03

I'll pop over and look at the tat for myself this weekend and then do a comparative visit to Princesshay! It's a hard life! 

Comment Please sign in or sign up to post