This site uses cookies

General Discussion

Lynne
Lynne
22 Mar 2016 09:27

Just to flag up (again) to the residents of CW that they too may also be on the receiving end of site traffic going past their doors in the not too distant future.

Here is the text of a letter concerning CW published in the Gazette back end of 2015.

 

"Although the contents of this letter should be of interest to many, it is particularly aimed at those residents living on the new Cavanna and Strongvox estates whose homes are located beside Carhaix Way.

In his letter last week calling for the early completion of the link road between Sainsbury’s roundabout and Elm Grove Road, Cllr Gary Taylor made a passing reference to traffic being able to use Carhaix Way as a through route.

Just when exactly Carhaix Way will be open to through traffic is still unknown although I’d guess sometime around about the end of this year /beginning of next as that is when I understand Cavanna will complete building all the dwellings located either side of its bit of Carhaix Way.

I imagine also that by that time, if not sooner , the mismatch in levels between the Cavanna part of Carhaix Way and the Strongvox part of Carhaix Way will also have been resolved because until that happens the road cannot be a through route, can it? (for those of a technical bent I understand that this height mismatch was caused by a difference in datum levels used on the two developments).

So, sometime in the New Year, and all things being equal, it looks like Carhaix Way will be opened up as a through road. That’s when residents living along its route will swop the noise, dirt and potential danger of the site traffic for the noise, dirt and potential danger of through traffic. For those residents not bothered by that future scenario the prospect of it will be no big deal. For other residents however it might be of great concern – hence my writing this letter so as to alert them.  

Now, I don’t know about anyone else but for the life of me I cannot see why it will be only those living on the Cavanna estate who will use Carhaix Way as a through route. Yet that is the assumption that appears to have been made by Devon County Council’s Highways team in their briefing paper concerning traffic movement in the Elm Grove Road area.(see Dawlish DA2 Development Framework: Briefing Note on Elm Grove Road Junction improvements and Link Road to Sainsburys Junction. This can be read online http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=45539&p=0).

I quote: “Northbound traffic from Site A (that’s the Bovis/Cavanna site) towards Exeter will use Carhaix Way” .Yes, I’m quite sure it will. But so too surely will northbound traffic going toward Exeter (and Sainsbury’s supermarket don’t forget!) from other nearby locations such as The Buntings, The Gatehouse area, Newlands and the top end of Elm Grove Road near Secmaton Lane. And don’t forget all those other homes scheduled to be built around there. Will the occupants of those yet to be built dwellings also use Carhaix Way as a through route? Of course they will. In the absence of the link road from Sainsbury’s roundabout, Carhaix Way will be their nearest through road to access the A379.

 That’s an awful lot of actual and potential traffic.  And, of course, if such traffic is north bound outward it’s going to be southbound homeward. So it’ll go there and back again and all via Carhaix Way!

But hey! let’s not just look at the immediate vicinity in terms of traffic generation and the use of Carhaix Way as a through route. What about all that potential traffic originating from the other side of town via Stockton and Gatehouse Hills. I mean, why go through town with all its traffic hold ups when you can nip around ‘the back’ and access/exit the A379 by way of Carhaix Way?  

So, it looks like a lot of traffic could end up cutting through the new Cavanna and Strongvox housing developments in order to access and exit the A379.

I am not a traffic engineer but I’ll hazard a guess that if the road from Sainsbury’s roundabout scheduled to link in with the top end of Elm Grove Road/Secmaton Lane area was to be in situ and open to through traffic, then a huge number of vehicles would stop going along Carhaix Way and would use this new road instead.

And given that assumption, I know that if I lived along Carhaix Way I’d be pushing for the Sainsbury roundabout link road to be constructed as a matter of urgency. Self interest by Carhaix Way residents maybe, but I’m sure many others in the town also feel that there is a clear and overwhelming need for that link road to be built and open to through traffic not only as soon as possible but certainly before anymore housing development takes place in the Gatehouse/Secmaton/Langdon areas of the town.

Oops! Oh dear! I’ve just noticed what Teignbridge District Council planners are saying about this Sainsbury roundabout/top of Elm Grove Road link road. Seems they aren’t thinking of it being a through road at all. I wonder if Devon County Council Highways department know about that? Perhaps someone should tell them.

Here is what TDC planners say about the function of the link road. (my emphasis in italics and bold)

 “The vehicular access through DA2 should be in the form of an avenue. ‘Secmaton

Avenue’ should be designed as an accessible continuous link through the

development, and it could be described as a ‘primary street’. It will be designed in

such a way as to achieve accessibility for residents within the site, however, detering

others from using it as an alternative to the A379. This will be achieved through

careful design.”

I wonder if Carhaix Way was also designed to deter through traffic?

Perhaps the residents of CW could let us know. After all it won’t be so very long before they’ll start finding out."

 

 

4 Agrees
BEE9
BEE9
23 Mar 2016 11:30

I walk along a track that sits some height and distance from this car crash they call a 'housing development(s)' on a daily basis. It is just a peice of land the developers have maixmised their profit potential buy cramming as many properties into a limited space.

Their seems to be little in the way of additional infrastructure to support this large volume of properties, schools, etc. South West water haven't even bothered to increase the sewage capacity of the local station. Which I know overflows when we get a heavy downfall, long before these monopoly houses were built.

I had a walk around the development(s) last summer and heard several of the residents moaning about the lack of parking and poor build quality of the properties. The way the properties on the development(s) are advertised is a far cry from reality. I certainly would not invest £300k + to live within spitting distance of a £150k ish property owned by a housing association with the potential issues/nightmares that ensues.

4 Agrees
Lynne
Lynne
24 Mar 2016 09:53

Well now, here’s the thing.

It would seem from looking at TDC’s statements that they (the planners?) still do not see the link road aka ‘Secmaton Avenue’ as being an alternative means of accessing/egressing the A379 at Sainsbury’s Roundabout other than for those residents who end up living on what is presently DA2 (that’s the area due for 100s of new houses north west of Secmaton Lane). In fact, from reading TDC’s comments it would seem that car usage along the link road to be known as ‘Secmaton Avenue’ let alone through route car usage, is to be discouraged.  Is DCC Highways Department aware of, and in agreement with, that?

Which then begs the question of how will northbound traffic in the Newlands/Buntings/ Cavanna/Bovis estates areas of town  access/egress the A379 if they cannot do so via ‘Secmaton Avenue’? And bear in mind of course that outward northbound traffic will become inward southbound traffic on the way back so presumably will use the same route.

Via Carhaix Way perhaps? After all it will be the nearest through route.

 

ken
ken
24 Mar 2016 15:28

And yet they talk elsewhere in the document about diverting the route 2 or 186 bus along the avenue.

ken
ken
24 Mar 2016 15:31

Still no actual Framework Plan posted on Teignbridge Website, oh but then they havent gone home yet.

Lynne
Lynne
24 Mar 2016 16:22

@ken re your first post above - yes i agree. it does seem that the proposed traffic usage of 'secmaton avenue' is completely contradictory but i think, from what i have read, that it will be okay for buses to use it as a through route but not cars.

So how will that be enforced then?  

 

 

  

Barbarawils68
Barbarawils68
24 Mar 2016 18:51

No the Framework is hidden, as it only appear on the Agenda for the 5th April (see bottom of this post).  Also on the Public Consultaiton Comments is this showing at least one party within the DA2 was concerned:

 

Wadderton Park Ltd on behalf of the NHS (Langdon in other words)

 Para 3.6 the DCC Highway Capacity Assessment concludes there is limited capacity on Elm Grove Road. Even with the junction improvements, it must be the case that there are capacity limits and/or highway safety concerns relating to the amount of development which can take place without the full link road in place. An additional trigger should be introduced therefore. As drafted there is nothing to stop the entirety of areas 1, 2 and 3 and 5 as well as all the permitted development being developed and all with access only to the south via Elm Grove Road/Sandy Lane. As highlighted previously we would expect this to be technically and politically unacceptable.

 

TDC response

Elm Grove Road – The DCC Junction modelling Report concludes that Elm Grove Rd and Sandy Lane are able to accommodate the additional traffic levels with 50% of the development completed, and 100% completed when the link road is complete. 

 

The link Lynne posted.

The agenda and reports for the 5.4.16 TDC planning meeting are now publicly available

Click on this link https://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/article/22194/5-April-2016

Comment Please sign in or sign up to post