Planning ref ; 12/02281/MAJ
I don't usually write, I just read, but I feel the need to say, just at a time when we need more help to get the best from these developments, and a few of you are intent on questioning someones integrity, making them justify themselves to the point they go away, so when someone new moves to the area, they decide to help the community to show their commitment as a resident, we collectively say no to them and berate them.
I believe what was written, and that the man had nothing to gain from any alterations to the developments and reading between the lines I think they must be buying a house just outside of town (maybe old Teighnmouth Road).
Shame on you
You may well be right WakeyWakey that Andysport was/is indeed a genuine newcomer to this site and this town. On the other hand it is not in the least bit unknown for certain posters on this site to re-invent themselves with different posting names and different posting styles. After a while they start to give themselves away. Posting names change but whether those posting do is another matter again. Pesonally I hope that Andysport is genuinely a brand new poster and that we hear from him again.
Now, to return to the topic of this thread. Here are some more details of the SLP planning application.
|Address:||Land To The South Of Shutterton Lane And Finger Of Land To The North Of Shutterton Lane,|
|Proposal:||Development for housing, multi-purpose community building, car parking, hard and soft landscaping and open space, sustainable urban drainage system and new vehicular, cycle and pedestrian routes and accesses together with all associated works|
|Type of Application:||Major Application|
|Date Application Received:||19/07/2012|
|Date Application Validated:||19/07/2012|
|Publicity Expiry Date:|
|Date Decision Issued:|
|Applicant Name:||Shutterton Park Limited|
|Applicant Address:||PO Box 158 , Third Floor, Royal Bank Place, 1 Glategny Esplanade, St Peter Port, Guernsey, GY1 4EX|
|Agent Name:||Mr W Wright|
|Agent Address:||Arup, 13 Fitzroy Street, London, W1T 4BQ|
From the online documentation concerning this planning application it looks like SPL are hoping a decision on it will be made at the TDC planning committee meeting scheduled for the end of October this year.
And in an e-mail dated 25/7/12 to TDC planners this is what the local NHS thinks should happen re any extra health facilities that might be required because of the increase in the town's population.
"NHS Devon Plymouth and Torbay have reviewed capacity in the Dawlish area and are of the opinion that the best solution to meet the future needs for primary medical services in Dawlish is by making more use of the existing branch of the Barton Surgery and to expand the main Barton Surgery as appropriate.
There is existing capacity for more outpatient activity at the hospital.
We would like to work with the council to liaise with developers regarding any potential for S106 contributions that may assist with increasing capacity as outlined above."
Is there a local protest group acting against this development?
WHY!!!!!!! should there be?
If you click on this link it should take you to TDC's website and the Shutterton Park Ltd planning application. http://gis.teignbridge.gov.uk/TeignbridgePlanningOnline/Results.aspx?Type=Application&Refval=12/02281/MAJ
To follow the documents/correspondence concerning this application click on Associated Documents which you will find to the bottom left of the screen, under the map.
Suggest to those who are interested to check, say, every two days or so to see if anything new has been posted.
Thanks for the links Lynne.
And here is Starcross Parish Council's thoughts on this planning app.
"SUBMISION FROM STARCROSS PARISH COUNCIL TO PLANNING
APPLICATION REF: 12/02281/MAJ - SHUTTERTON LANE DEVELOPMENT
S10 of the latest Development Plan Document states that the A379 is an important part of the
Teignbridge road infrastructure. Further both the earlier Teignbridge Core Strategy (June
2010) and the more recent Dawlish Neighbourhood Plan (Sept 2011) recognised the traffic
problem on the A379 through Starcross. On each occasion Starcross Parish Council has put
forward representations but to date both bodies have failed to take into consideration the
impact of the proposed core development areas on the “wider” transport infrastructure and
The A379 has long been a sub-standard A road and with the proposed development of
housing, jobs and tourism within Dawlish and to a lesser extent, Teignmouth, traffic problems
in Starcross will only worsen. The importance of this road corridor, together with the
unfortunate restrictions within Starcross, means that it will have an impact upon, and possibly
an inhibiting factor to the successful delivery of these elements.
The B3381 has already become a “rat run” between A379 and A380, to avoid traffic
congestion both at Starcross and Matford Roundabout.
Starcross Parish Council is of the opinion that this major planning application should not be
considered on a “standalone” basis before the democratic process of the Core Strategy has
been exhausted and in particular the impact of the core development areas on the “wider”
transport infrastructure and communities has been addressed."
And then there is this. A response from TDC to a query in relation to the wording in the public advertisement concerning this planning application.
Location: Shutterton Lane
Applicant: Shutterton Park Ltd
Thank you for your email received on 27 July 2012. I will respond to each of your
questions individually below.
1. Which development plan is it to which this planning application does
not accord? - The Development Plan for Teignbridge is made up of the Devon
Structure Plan 2001-2016 and the Teignbridge Local Plan 1989-2001. This
proposal is contrary to the adopted Teignbridge Local Plan 1989-2001 which
designates this site as Open Countryside.
2. With which provisions within that Development Plan does it not accord? - The
aforementioned Local Plan designates Urban Residential Development
Boundaries (within which the principle of residential development is acceptable).
Outside of these areas the land is designated as Countryside (as this application
site is) and there are a number of Policies which seek to protect this land and
restrict development to that which is required for the purposes of agriculture,
horticulture or other rural business. The Devon Structure Plan provides more of
a spatial vision for the County and therefore does not make specific land
allocations. However, it does also contain Policies which seek to protect the
I hope that this answer is of use to you. I must advise that this is a very
simplified summary and the adopted Local Plan is now quite dated and it does
not make adequate provision for the housing requirement for the District. There
are also more up to date documents (such as the recently publish National
Planning Policy Framework) which also need to be considered alongside the
Teignbridge Local Plan and Devon Structure Plan."
This is TDC's requirement concerning this application and affordable housing.
"The above outline application is supported by Housing Services provided that the application includes the following affordable housing provision.
30% affordable housing with 70% being rented housing and 30% being intermediate housing.
Affordable housing meeting Code 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes
The affordable housing to be broadly in line with the following -
20% - 1 bed accommodation
60% - 2 bed accommodation
10% - 3 bed accommodation
10% - 4 bed accommodation
With an element suitable for wheelchair access."
and here is SouthWest Water's thoughts on the sewage issue.
"I refer to the above application and would advise that the public foul sewer network is
unlikely to have sufficient capacity to serve the proposals without causing the public
sewer network to surcharge, with resultant flooding.
This has been made known to the applicant/their consultants previously and
investigations to establish the level and cost of improvements necessary to
accommodate the foul flows generated by their particular development identified.
Such improvements as are required have been currently costed at £99,600 + VAT and
will not be funded by South West Water and will need to be at the
applicant/developer’s full cost.
Should your Council be minded to approve the planning application, I would
emphasise that suitable planning conditions/s106 planning obligation terms will need
to be imposed (eg requiring no development to proceed on site until such time as
funding has been provided for the improvements identified."
and this from Devon County Council concerning traffic and highways. Note the bit about Shutterton Lane (I've highlighted it in bold).
"PLANNING APPLICATION – HIGHWAY CONSULTATION REPLY
APPLICATION NO: TE/02281/2012
APPLICANT: Shutterton Park Limited
DETAILS OF APPLICATION: Development for housing, multi-purpose community building, car parking, hard and soft landscaping and open space, sustainable urban drainage system and new vehicular, cycle and pedestrian routes and accesses together with all associated works
LOCATION: Land To The South Of Shutterton Lane And Finger Of Land To The North Of Shutterton Lane
The Highway Authority notes the Planning Application is an Outline Application for 350 dwellings and a multi-purpose community building with a gross floor area of 1000m2. The vehicular access to the site will be via the existing roundabout at the northern end of the existing Sainsbury’s access road, which is currently Highway Maintainable at the Public Expense already.
The Highway Authority has scoped with the planning applicant prior to submission of the application to establish the level of information that needed to be submitted with an application of this size. In summary the applicant has provided a Transport Assessment (TA) and Travel Plan (TP). The TA provides junction analysis for several junctions in the area that may be affected by the additional traffic from the development. This information was based on Census Data for Dawlish Central and north East Ward information and is generally accepted by the Highway Authority. The Travel Plan needs more work and reflect the measures required below by the Highway Authority.
The Highway Authority notes that Figure 5.2 and Figure 5.3 in the Transport Assessment show the proposed access arrangements for the site. Figure 5.3 is lacking and needs to also show the visibility splay heights of no more than 600mm. Also the bollards shown on the emergency access points need to be shown as knock down bollards rather than lockable bollards.
In general a Combined Section 38/278 Agreement will be required to ensure the roads internally within the site become adopted highway and the S278 aspect of the agreement will allow any offsite highway works to be completed.
It has been specified previously by the Highway Authority in meetings with the developer that a street lit pedestrian/cycle link should be provided under a S38/278 Agreement at the south west corner of the site to enable pedestrians and cyclists from the development an easy route to Secmaton Lane, Sainsbury’s Petrol Station and Exeter Road. The Highway Authority has concerns that if a link is not constructed site users will try and climb down the existing bank. Therefore, the Highway Authority recommends that as first priority the applicant should approach Sainsbury’s to ask whether they would be supportive of such a link to be built on Sainsbury’s Land at the planning applicant’s expense. It is felt by the Highway Authority that a link would be beneficial to Sainsbury’s as residents of the development would have easy access to the petrol station area. Alternatively a S106 contribution will likely be sought by DCC so that the Highway Authority can purchase land from Sainsbury’s and deliver the link itself in the future.
The Highway Authority has investigated whether a vehicular link to Shutterton Lane is appropriate so that the junction of Exeter Road and Shutterton Lane could be stopped up. Shutterton Lane is a single track road with existing dwellings served off of it at either end. If a full vehicular link was formed into the new site it is considered by the Highway Authority that the additional traffic from the development and potentially cut through traffic that would use Shutterton Lane to get to and from amenities in Dawlish Warren and alternatively Dawlish Warren to Exeter Road would be inappropriate for the existing road conditions and would likely have the effect of creating additional danger to all road users. The Highway Authority has checked the accident statistics for the Junction of Exeter Road and Shutterton Lane reported to the Police for the last five years period. There have been no accidents related to the lack of visibility at the junction.
1. Potentially a contribution towards providing a cycle/pedestrian link to Secmaton Lane depending on whether a Section 278 can be used to complete the link.
Reason – To ensure the site is safely accessible for all site users.
2. £700,000 towards diverting either the Stagecoach 2 Service or the 186 bus into the site for seven years.
Reason – To ensure the site is accessible and convenient for all site users.
3. £190,500 – Towards the Countess Wear PUA Additional Outbound Lane Improvement Scheme.
Reason – To mitigate vehicular capacity issues into and out of Exeter.
90% of residents in Exminster work in Exeter (derived from Census Data)
19% of residents in Dawlish work in Exeter (derived from Census Data) 73% of the 19% drive = (14%)
Sentry’s Farm (65 dwellings) contributed £227,500 at 8 trips/dwelling per day
65 dwellings x 8 two way trips = 520 two way trips
350 dwellings x 8 two way trips = 2800 two way trips
90% of 520 two way trips = 468 two way trips
14% of 2800 two way trips = 392 two way trips
50 % of traffic turns left at Matford Farm Roundabout for both sites traffic.
50% of 468 = 234 two way trips.
£227,500 divided by 234 = 972
196 two way trips x 972 = £190,500
4. £3000 towards providing dropped crossings on the footways on Exeter Road.
Reason – To ensure the site is accessible for all site users.
5. £90,000 – To upgrade Street Lighting on Secmaton Lane.
Reason – To ensure the site is safely accessible for all site users.
6. £10,000 – To provide secure cycle parking at Dawlish Station.
Reason – To improve the sustainability of the site.
7. £50,000 – Towards providing a shared use footway on Dawlish Warren Road to link the site with the Exe Estuary Trail.
Reason – To ensure the site is safely accessible for all site users.
8. £300 per dwelling towards Sustainable Travel Vouchers. Sustainable Travel Voucher - shall mean a voucher to be provided by Owner which shall entitle the holder to redeem the voucher on application against the cost of using sustainable travel modes (such as the cost of bus travel in the vicinity of the Land or the cost of bicycles or cycling equipment) to a maximum value of £250 per household in respect of public transport and £50 per household in respect of cycle provision
9. A Travel Pack or Welcome pack will need to be provided by the developer. Travel Pack - shall mean a package of travel information produced and provided to be provided to the residents of the Development by the Owner aimed at encouraging residents of the Development to use sustainable modes of transport (including a location plan of bus stops near to the Land, a bus timetable and bus route plan, cycle route map and any other information which the County Council or Owner considers appropriate towards promoting sustainable transport objectives)
Should the Planning Authority be minded to approve the application the Highway Authority will require the following conditions
1. The proposed estate road, cycleways, footways, footpaths, verges, junctions, street lighting, sewers, drains, retaining walls, service routes, surface water outfall, road maintenance/vehicle overhang margins, embankments, visibility splays, accesses, car parking and street furniture shall be constructed and laid out in accordance with details to be approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before their construction begins, For this purpose, plans and sections indicating, as appropriate, the design, layout, levels, gradients, materials and method of construction shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority.
REASON: To ensure that adequate information is available for the proper consideration of the detailed proposals.
2. The development hereby approved shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with a phasing programme which shall previously have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing.
REASON: To ensure the proper development of the site.
3. No part of the development hereby approved shall be brought into its intended use until the access, parking facilities, visibility splays and off site highway works have been completed with details that shall have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.
REASON: To ensure that adequate facilities are available for the traffic attracted to the site.
4. No construction shall begin on site until a Construction Management Plan has been hereby approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON: To ensure that adequate facilities are available for the construction traffic attracted to the site.
5. The development hereby approved shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with a Parking Strategy which shall previously have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing.
REASON: To ensure the proper development of the site.
6. No development shall commence until a full engineering drainage strategy has been submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason – To ensure the highways serving the site can be properly drained.
7. Prior to the Commencement of Development the Owner is to submit to and obtain the written approval of the Planning Authority to the Travel Pack which shall include the provision of a Welcome Pack to the first occupant(s) of each Dwelling and the £300 Sustainable Travel Vouchers. Once written consent from the Planning Authority is received to produce the Travel Pack the Owner is to provide a Welcome Pack for each dwelling and shall distribute a Welcome Pack to each dwelling prior to the first occupation of each dwelling.
Reason – To maximise the sustainability of the site.
8. Prior to the submission of the detailed planning permission a phasing plan shall be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason – To ensure that the site is developed in the correct order
THE HEAD OF PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENT, ON BEHALF OF DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL, AS LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, IS LIKELY TO RECOMMEND REFUSAL OF PLANNING PERMISSION, IN THE ABSENCE OF FURTHER INFORMATION.:-
1. Adequate information has not been submitted to satisfy the Local Planning Authority that the proposal is acceptable in terms of access contrary to Policy TR10 of the Devon County Structure Plan.
Officer authorised to Date: 07 August 2012
sign on behalf of the County Council
and this is an objection from a resident who lives Shutterton Lane way.
"I strongly object to this proposal as I did with the Barratts development, and it probably won't be listened too. But as was predicted with the early plan shutterton lane has now become a rat run from Dawlish warren to Sainsbury's. We have noticed a large increase in traffic on a very narrow lane with belive it or not a 30mph when the main road is 20mph. The section 106 for retaining the hedge between Barratts and shutterton lane has been completely ignored by the new residents of which you are aware. If this does get the go ahead which it probably will then something seriously needs to be done about the access to shutterton lane. i.e. Residents only.
and Dawlish Town Council is recommending refusal because:
"given that there is a pipeline of approved developments adequate to meet the 5 year housing land supply needs of Dawlish plus 20% this Council sees no imperative to approve this application prior to the determination of the Core Strategy and consequently recommends refusal of this application on the grounds of this application being premature. Other reason which have caused this Council to recommend refusal are:
1. Loss of green space between communities within the Parish.
2. Loss of identified employment land.
3. Lack of a viable business plan for the proposed community building.
4. Increas in transport to access schools and the town centre.
5. Lack of information regarding the parking provision in relation to road safety.
Resolved by the majority of Members present and voting that this Council requests that Cllr R Vickery, Chairman of Dawlish Town Planning Committee is given the opportunity to speak at the Teignbridge District Council Meeting regarding this major application".
wow only 2 objections, unfortuneately the first one won't even be looked at as its in the incorrect format for a valid objection.
2nd one town council do they have much clout in Devon???
1. not a valid objection
2. Incorrect wording - could be thrown out
3. I missed this, is it a requirement ??
4. missing the point, there exists a valid objection by highways i would have thought this should have been stated.
5. This just means they need to provide a statement.
No wonder so many planning applications get past in and around Dawlish.
Does anyone know of any farm land for sale ????
No - suspect it's all been bought up/have options on it to be bought up, by developers. Forget growing food/raising livestock, let's build houses instead.
@Patrick75rogers re your posting of 30th july. you wanted to know if there was a group fighting off this planning proposal. it seems that there is - dawlish regeneration group.
Seems they've instructed solicitors and a private planning firm. You can see proof of this for yourself if you follow how to access the planning documents concerning this proposal online as I've explained how to do in one of my postings above.
Sainsbury's are supporting this application.
Sainsbury's need putting in their place hopefully the section 106 failing of Millwood developments will reflect on them and TDC will have the balls to close them down instead of accepting their claim that it has nothing to do with them.
If truth be known Sainsbury's are probably not only supporting the application, but are financing it as well. Wont be long before they submit plans for a second storey to the existing store.
Some questions for no-one in particular other than for someone who might know the answers:
1. Who is this "Dawlish Regeneration Group"? Can anyone join? How many members of this group are there? How are they funded? Are they related to the Dawlish Community Trust? Are they FOR regeneration or AGAINST regeneration?
2. is @FredBassett for real? or just a cartoon character?
For the first time (sorry Lynne) I'm reading through the associated documents on the TDC website (I'm bored), and had to laugh at the letter of objection by someone who was, shall we say (naming no names, lest I upset the sensitive amongst you), recently of this parish. I'm not an officer of the spelling police, but how can one be expected to be taken seriously, if one cannot be bothered to use a spellchecker on a formal document? And, as usual with this person (who must still remain un-named, loose lips sink ships etc), it started quite well, but unfortunately quickly descended into a scattergun rant! I'm not saying that this person's points are without merit, however they can't be expected to be taken seriously if they can't be constructed in a professional manner.
1. Don't know. Don't know. Don't know. Don't know. If you google Dawlish Regeneration Group you do get to a Dawlish Community Trust website but whether they are one and the same or made up of the same individuals or not I.............don't know. Guess they are for regeneration but, it would seem, they do not view this proposed development as one they think will be of benefit to Dawlish.
2. Hmmm...... suspect I might know who is lurking behind that posting name.
This is part of what TDC planners say about the Shutterton Park Ltd site in the document made available to the public this week concerning the future plans for Dawlish in particular and Teignbridge in general. (DA1 = the Shutterton Park Ltd site).
The area of land subject to policy DA1 has not previously been allocated for employment development contrary to public perception.
There is no evidence to indicate development of land at DA1 would cause demonstrable harm to tourism and the role of Dawlish/Dawlish Warren as a holiday resort.
There is no evidence to indicate the scale of proposed growth would cause demonstrable harm to the function of the A379 road.
There is no evidence to indicate the proposed development could not be supported through improvements to the sewerage infrastructure or that it would increase risk of pollution into watercourses and affect bathing water quality.
I think Dawlish S.O.U.L. would be against it
Does anyone know anything about them?
Oh yes, they're the sister organisation of that other tiny minority group - Dawlish N.I.M.B.Y.
@Patrick75rogers re your query about s.o.u.l.
All I know is that Martin Heath of Southdowns Road may be a person to contact. But that is all the info I have.
Yes, that would be the Southdowns Road that used to be fields.......
Teignbridge Core Strategy Development Plan is now available for viewing. As predicted, Teignmouth housing increase is based around the new link road into Morrisons (Higher Exeter Road - Shepherds Lane - Broadmeadow), The Dawlish element makes interesting reading seeing as works appear to have started in St James' Plantation/Elm Grove area. It can be interpreted in a number of ways - make of it what you will! Personally I think this is a development outside of the Core Strategy.
Haven't looked at the Teignmouth bit yet Huw but will do so in due course.
James Plantation/Elm Grove area development. This Cavanna/Bovis development of some 251 dwellings was given outline planning permission circa 2008 as was the 124 Strongvox dwelling development that backs onto it at Secmaton Rise. So you are correct to say that they are outside of the core strategy (or Plan Teignbridge as I believe it is now known) but they both do have planning permission.
The land identified for housing development in Dawlish in the core strategy/plan Teignbridge is in addition to those two developments and we are looking at at least another 900 dwellings between 2013-2033. The land identified for this development is mostly, but not exclusively, the other side of Secmaton Lane and going up towards Langdon Hospital.
So, 375 dwellings presently being built with another, at least 900, due to be built over the next 20 years or so.
Note that the Shutterton Park Ltd developement area behind Sainsbury's is no longer identified as being an area that should be developed for housing. However................
Totally agree with you Lynne.
I also don't think that the Housing element of the Strategy looks like a 20 year plan for either Dawlish or T'mouth. I'll give it 5-7 years to completion of all sites and then we'll see additional 'fill ins' and other land having applications placed on them.
This national move towards 'Home Choice' schemes does not work! Why would you live in an inner city area on benefits (or indeed pension) when you can come to the seaside and receive the same money and pay the same (subsidised) rent? We're going to need a hell of a lot more social housing if this continues!
Just to point out that the target % for affordable housing within the new developments in Dawlish and T,mouth, a la Plan Teignbridge, is now 25%. Though whether that 25% will be achieved is another matter entirely. Indeed whether affordable housing via Section 106 agreements remains a means of providing housing for those unable to buy on the open market may be an issue that the government may be wishing to alter.
But let's stay with where we are at the present.
Of that 25%, there are different forms of affordable housing that could be on offer - the two that come most readily to mind are affordable rent and shared ownership and I think you'll find that in both instances applicants have to have a local connection (and I don't know, despite asking goodness knows how many times, how 'local' is defined for the purposes of allocating affordable housing).
The other 75% of the new homes will be on the open market for anyone who wants to, and is able to, buy. That could mean an influx of people from other parts of the country looking to retire/relocate down here, second home owners, buy to let landlords, whatever. It's an open market -if you've got the dosh you can buy the property.
Officer recommendation re this Shutterton Park Ltd planning application to build some 300 or so houses to the side of, and behind, Sainsburys is that it should not be supported.
The application will be heard by TDC's planning committee Monday 26th November.
Correction: whilst the TDC Service Manager, Spatial Planning & Delivery has submitted a report saying that he cannot support this development proposal and gives umpteen planning policy reasons why not, it seems that other officers in the council disagree with him as the agenda has just come out and the recommendation is that the proposal should be agreed.
Confused? Me too.
I had a quick conversation with planning office yesterday regarding a planning application there response was "we are not looking to refuse any application, we will work with you to get your application approved" interesting !
Confused, sounds like the council officers are trying hard to keep there jobs, by way of bringing in money from applications and also the grants they then get for each home built.
I'll be very happy for this to go through as more residents will hopefully allow us to have a Lidl and Tesco, or at the very least a Lidl and expanded Sainsburys. Then we'll all save a fortune on petrol and produce less of this 'greenhouse gas' which I keep getting told is bad for the environment.
The downside could be that if the area becomes big enough for a Lidl/Aldi it may also be big enough for a McDonalds, I don't like McDonalds, but I do like Lidl.
This planning application by Shutterton Park Ltd was voted down at today's TDC Planning Committee meeting.
20 voting councillors of which:
15 voted for it to be refused
4 voted that it should be agreed
However, I bet SPL are preparing their Appeal even as I type this.
I'm sure they are Lynne. Their appeal will be in sharpish but Billson is on the back foot....