“Councillors will be asked to approve an eight week consultation on where thousands of new homes across Teignbridge could be built.
More than 100 sites across the district have been identified as places where future housing provision could be provided as part of the Teignbridge Local Plan that will run until 2040.
The consultation on Part 2 of the Draft Plan, which Teignbridge District Council’s executive are recommended to launch when they meet on Tuesday, June 1, focuses solely on where development could take place. It includes site options for housing development, employment land, secondary schools and considers evidence relating to renewable energy provision.
The proposal is to give residents eight weeks from June 14 to comment on a range of site development options to meet future local housing and employment needs for the next 20 years as well as seeking views on locations for a new secondary school in Newton Abbot.
Not all the site options will be required, and the consultation is seeking information and comments back from the public and statutory consultees, particularly those comments focussing on planning issues relating to the site options.
Indicative number of homes factoring in sensitivities and requirements: 696 - 922 homes
Location: The site lies to the north of Dawlish and includes land to the west and east of the A379 and immediately north and south of Dawlish Countryside Park.
Comments: The site lies adjacent to Dawlish Countryside Park, providing opportunities for recreation and healthy lifestyles and the large scale of the site offers opportunities to provide good layout and design, incorporating sustainable travel links and open spaces, but the site would extend development along the A379 and could reinforce the linear form of development, and the site lies within the recreational buffer of Exe Estuary SPA/Ramsar Site and Dawlish Warren SAC
The Teignbridge Local Plan Allocations for the area in and around Dawlish
Indicative number of homes factoring in sensitivities and requirements: 839- 1,084 homes
Location: The site lies to the north west of Dawlish, extending from west of Langdon Hospital south westwards to Langdon Farm
Comments: Part of the site lies adjacent to the existing development site of DA2 and the site would be able to link into the sustainable travel networks of the adjacent development and would be sufficiently large to provide for active travel through the site, but development of the higher or north facing slopes of the site would be more conspicuous in the landscape. The development of this site depends on the timing of construction of the adjacent development at DA2, including the construction of the link road, and therefore, this site may only be deliverable in the later stages of the Local Plan period and may be limited to the areas of the site closest to this development.
Indicative number of homes factoring in sensitivities and requirements: 93 - 128 homes
Location: The site lies to north east of Dawlish, between Dawlish and Dawlish Warren
Comments: The site lies between 700m and 1.5km away from a station (it is approximately equidistant between Dawlish and Dawlish Warren railway stations) and there would be easy access along an existing footway to the A379, but it is within a Rebuilding Devon Nature area (although development may provide opportunities to improve biodiversity). The site lies adjacent to the Undeveloped Coast designation.
Indicative number of homes factoring in sensitivities and requirements: 220 homes
Location: The site lies at southern extent of Dawlish, adjacent to the settlement limit.
Comments: Only half the site is developable due to land that slopes greater than a 1:6 gradient
Indicative number of homes factoring in sensitivities and requirements: 7 homes
Location: 13 Weech Road comprises a Grade II listed farmhouse and farm building, enclosed by brick walling along the road and is bordered by residential development.
Comments: Development of the site has the potential to involve a sensitive restoration and conversion of the existing listed buildings into small residential units, but unlikely to be suitable for new build homes.
DAW VALE NURSING HOME
Indicative number of homes factoring in sensitivities and requirements: 18 homes.
Location: The brownfield site lies within the built up area of Dawlish between Westcliffe Road and Barton Lane.
Comments: The site has full planning permission for 18 dwellings
Indicative number of homes factoring in sensitivities and requirements: 5 homes
Location: It comprises a grassed area with some trees immediately east of the car park serving 1-50 Lanherne.
Comments: The development of this site would utilise a brownfield site close to the town centre of Dawlish and existing access could be used
Indicative number of homes factoring in sensitivities and requirements: 5 homes
Location: The site lies close to the town centre of Dawlish, to the east of Hospital Hill.
Comments: Due to the potential harm to the setting of the listed buildings at Haldon Terrace that would result from developing the grassed area, only redevelopment of the commercial buildings is considered suitable.
BADLAKE HILL/WEECH ROAD
Indicative number of homes factoring in sensitivities and requirements: 5 homes
Location: The site lies within the western part of Dawlish, to the east of Hospital Hill and south of Haldon Terrace.
Comments: The development of the site would result in a more efficient use of land within the built up area of Dawlish but it is not known if the site is available for re-development.
Indicative number of homes factoring in sensitivities and requirements: 3 homes, although this could be increased if apartments were constructed
Location: It is a large residential garden enclosed by mature trees,
Comments: The development of the large residential curtilage of Lyme Acre would result in a more efficient use of land within Dawlish. A higher number of homes could be achieved if apartments were constructed.
For all sites in Dawlish, the proposed level of development in Dawlish (c.1000) could help to generate the funding and numbers required to justify a new primary school (site of 1.9ha will be required) rather than an expansion to the existing one and should be provided as part of new development in the north of the town.
The level of development proposed will require additional secondary facilities, and an expansion at the existing secondary school will be required.
This is the thread that contains the information.
There was a glitch on this website earlier this morning hence the three headings.
Thanks for letting me know. I've removed the other 2.
Note no mention of the Bridge House RCH site.
Lynne: isn't that because a planning application hasn't been submitted yet for Bridge House?
@Cassandra: that might well indeed be the case, yes. I was just making the observation that the site is not mentioned as one having been put forward for development according to the newspaper report.
Where the fock do although these house buyers come from to live in Teignbridge? Less businesses due to the scamdemic, less jobs but more new builds! No increase in infrastructure. Oh I forgot all those lovely rates coming in.
This whole wooden hut building scheme, plan call it what you want urgently needs to go before public scrutiny. Why does Dawlish need another 1000 houses are we experienceing some kind of sudden baby boom.
Having just been told I have to wait two weeks to speak with my GP, and then another four for a blood test appointment surely infrastructure needs to be the priority for any council.
Two things spring to mind here, it could be a diversity thing aimed at importing ethnic minorities from the midlands and London to avoid Devon being classed as a white only county. Or more likely they are just looking at more council tax money
(I'm sure I'm tempting fate here but...........) anyone have any thoughts on any of the sites mentioned in the first post of this thread?
For example: Take Lanherne. The site they have in mind is where the allotments used to be. It is bounded by a cycle/footpath on two sides and the Lanherne (sheltered?) scheme on the other. How will it be accessed? I can only imagine via going through the residents' car park. So issues I see straight away are noise, pollution, and danger for the residents of Lanherne caused by the site traffic going back and forth from the building site.
@Lynne: They don't seem to care, or even want to think about that sort of thing, judging by my experiences on Badlake Hill.
Will the selling agents of the Langdon site tell their clients the truth about Langdon Hospital actually being a prison for some of the worst convicted mentally ill psychopaths in the country.
See first post and proposal to build homes on land adjacent to the country park.
So if this were to happen I'd suggest that the park would need to be renamed as it would no longer be a park in the countryside but more a park surrounded by houses ( a bit like Sandy Lane Playing fields).
There is a planning application presently lodged with TDC from Cofton Holiday Park (see https://dawlish.com/thread/details/47240). There have been lots of objections to this planning application by those who use the countryside park for recreation on the basis that what Cofton wish to do would not only be visible from the park but would give the area an urban feel. More to the point, the Design and Heritage officer at TDC is also objecting to the planning application on more or less the same grounds.
Ergo, if the planning application from Cofton has a problem because of the perceived urban nature of what is being proposed and its consequential negative impact on the country park then what the hell does TDC think 100s of houses would do?!
Building on land presently used for agriculture (market gardens, farm land).
What with the farming industry being under threat from any future free trade deals with mega farming countries like Australia, N.Z, the US, Argentina and Brazil I can totally understand that farmers are looking for other ways to earn a living. Some might use their land to go into tourism of some kind, others might decide to sell up especially if they can get planning permission for their land to have housing built on it. Take a look at this:
Whereas agricultural land has a value of £8,000 – £12,000 per acre, the same land with a residential housing consent can achieve 30, 40 or even 50 times that value.
The Old Vicarage,Weech Road: My heart bleeds for those who live near this site. It could have been such an asset to the town and immediate area instead of which it is now, an eyesore of a derelict building. Trouble is, trouble is, it is a listed building and as such it is afforded protection from development. Previous planning applications to develop the site have been stalled by the mere fact of it being a listed building. As I am not aware that its listed status has changed or that planning legislation concerning listed buildings has changed I can only assume that despite its potential for development that is precisely what it will remain. Would love to be proven wrong. (as I suspect many others would wish as well).
More info here on this sorry saga https://dawlish.com/thread/details/47211
For more details and maps showing exact lay outs of proposed development land click on this link http://democracy.teignbridge.gov.uk/documents/s12465/Appendix%20A%20-%20TDC%20Draft%20Local%20Plan%20Part%202%20-%20Chapter%20Links.pdf
and then click on link for Chapter 5 - Housing options in the coastal towns
I have been sent the following information;
"The Government has told Teignbridge it must build 751 houses a year (they had planned to order 1,532 houses a year!). TDC therefore has to identify the sites where the houses can be built. If TDC does not do this the Government will take over planning at Teignbridge and increase the numbers by 20%.
It is important to stress that at this stage no decisions have been made about any of the sites, and it is really important that local residents send in their comments when the consultation starts on Monday 14th June.
As well as the above, the Government is proposing to bring in a new system under which land will be zoned. Anything designated for 'growth' will be deemed to have 'planning permission in principle'.
Conservative ministers claim their plan will eliminate 'red tape' but it is feared that it abolishes any meaningful involvement of residents and local councils in planning matters.
The consultation on the possible housing sites ends at 12 Noon on Monday 9th August 2021.
Do please have your say."
and what is the position of our local MP anne marie morris to above.?
Dunno. Perhaps someone could ask her and put her response on here.
Ever been had?
The owner of Warren Farm has certainly pulled the wool over the eyes (pun intended) of the great and good of Dawlish.
I well remember that he whipped up members of this parish into a frenzy over his land becoming a Country Park, due to his claims about his livelihood being threatened.
What's changed since? Oh of course, the £s per acre for building plots is waaaaaay more than the (still high) £s per acre he was being offered just a few short years ago.
Hook, line and sinker.
Teignmouth Road site: Just to flag up to dogs and their humans that for those of you who use this area as a pleasant, rural, exercise area, that if new homes are built on this site then you will no longer have an enjoyable walk around the fields but a much more restricted urban one alongside the new homes.
I'll have to break the news very gently to a certain dog I know who presently loves going there.
@1263 click on this link to find out what our MP has to say https://dawlish.nub.news/n/anne-marie-morris-weekly-column---opinion
and click here to see what local Dawlish cllrs Martin Wrigley and Gary Taylor say https://dawlish.nub.news/n/give-your-views-on-potential-housing-sites-in-dawlish
Correct me if my interpreatation was wrong, but after reading A. Morris article it never actually answered the question just more political bu**sh*t
The dawlish councillor link does not open for me.
@1263 - won't open for me either. Suggest you find Dawlish Nub News and then scroll down to find article.
I've fixed the link. There was a semicolon on the end of it that was causing it to fail.
In addition to the wholesale destruction of farm land most of it grade 1 there will be the unrelenting pressure to build a by pass around Starcross and Kenton taking away yet more farmland and in the process possibly releasing yet more land for housing development. I also think it is about time that the goverment put into law that councils can set by law the percentage of affordable for each and every site. This would stop the likes of the REDROW Viability trick being applied again. That document makes very interesting reading and contains many half truths.
The first thing that needs to happen is for local councils/local authorities to actually do a decent appreciation of the land that they designate for each purpose (and therefore accurately reflect in the 'Local Plan').
I know of several parcels of land that have been designated for wildlife, coastal protection (some nowhere near the coast) etc where buildings have been in place since the 1950s and further back. These parcels therefore have a precendent set and can be built on.
Due to this there are many areas which the public think are protected which clearly are not - I'm not usually a conspiracy theorist but it begs the question: 'Do they know or are they really that incompetent?'
More houses built means more rates, its always about the money nothing else.
@HuwMatthews2 -re your second paragraph
Can you give examples please.
I only ask as if any are in Teignbridge and Dawlish in particular, given that the Teignbridge Local Plan is presently being reviewed, now might be just the time to flag up and get amended any apparent oversights/anomolies.
It also might be that, for example, buildings may be in place on a piece of land but that they have been there for some time. For example take barns and barn conversions. It might be the case that planning consent could be given for a barn to be converted to a house provided that the house is sited on the exact site of the barn and does not in anyway have an adverse impact on its surroundings. But just because planning permission may have been given for that one off house it does not necessarily follow that planning permission would be given for any other development on the surrounding land.
Not a chance! :)
I don't think I would be looked on very kindly by landowners if I gave the game away by giving local authorities advance notice!
I hope that it's understood that all of the proposed sites are ones which the owners themselves (usually so-called farmers) have put forward. They haven't been randomly selected by "the council".
@Teignpot: Yes - for clarity. It was in 2018 thatTeignbridge District Council asked for land to be submitted to them for consideration for development. Totally agree that none of this land has been randomly selected by the council. It is what has been offered to them by the landowners themselves.
@HuwMatthews2 - I got the impression that you were bemoaning land being incorrectly believed as being safe from development when it fact it hasn't been categorised as such by the local authority. The only way that, as I see it, that can be corrected is if you alert the local authority NOW whilst there is a public consultation going on.
Unless of course you are on the side of the landowner(s).....
Nothing ever changes on this site. There is always one that has to bemoan everyone else. No wonder there is so little traffic on this site anymore.
What was once a great site has been relegated to a few who brave the waters and then comes along the nasty shark to have a chomp!
See below an extract from an article in the i newspaper a few days back.
“.......(housing) supply in the UK is in the hands of private developers who have very little incentive to build out at a rate commensurate with (housing) demand because this would lower market prices.
Developers hoard land and wait for it to increase in value before building on it. When they do build, it’s not in their interests for the supply of new homes to truly meet demand. There aren’t enough requirements for them to build truly affordable homes so when there is a new supply (of housing) it isn’t the kind we most need.
A huge programme of public house building is the most obvious solution. But the government won’t go down that route.
In a properly functioning housing market, people would be able to choose between genuinely affordable homes to buy, a safe and secure tenancy in the private rented sector, and a social home if that is what they need”.
in other words the vast majority of the new housing that the government says has to be built around here and elsewhere in the country won't meet the needs of the local population. And it isn't just me saying that. If you read the links I've given above ( see 2nd June posting at 08.50) it seems our Conservative MP and our local Lib Dem councillors agree with that analysis.