YOU say....!

I often come to Dawlish but I don't want to have a holiday right next to Tesco's! And we DO use Sandy Lane for golf. What's going to happen now? Do we need to go out of town?

Although this website's main aim is dedicated to protecting Sandy Lane playing fields from development, I'd like to add something to this Shutterton Bridge (Sainsbury's) vs Lady's Mile(Tesco's) debate which is..........that despite my having lodged an objection to the Lady's Mile planning application with TDC on 18th March they have still not published it despite having published many other objections they have received since receiving mine.

I do not know why this is for although I have e-mailed TDC asking why this should be I have not received any acknowledgement from them let alone explanation. Therefore, in the absence of TDC making public my objection, I will make my own arrangments.


Objection to Tesco Application to build at Lady’s Mile
Planning Application 09/00626/MAJ

"The lion and the unicorn were fighting for the crown
The lion beat the unicorn all around the town.
Some gave them white bread, and some gave them brown;
Some gave them plum cake and drummed them out of town."



The Local Economy

As the local economy is largely based on tourism I am at a loss to understand how building a supermarket on land that is presently used for camping will benefit Dawlish and Dawlish Warren. Whilst I am aware the landowner has been given planning permission to build holiday accommodation on other land he owns at Lady’s Mile, this will not compensate for the land lost to the tourism economy if Tesco is allowed to build. We need more holiday accommodation not less. By building at Lady’s Mile, Tesco will not only take away land presently used by campers but surely will put off other holiday makers from staying on the same site. Would you want to holiday next door to a supermarket with all the noise, pollution and safety issues associated with it and the traffic it would attract? I most certainly wouldn’t. I’d be off somewhere else (and not necessarily in Teignbridge!) pumping my money into another town’s economy.


The presence of a supermarket, at whichever site, will take money out of the local economy (it will!). However, as it has been deemed that Dawlish should have a new supermarket does it not make more economic sense for the Sainsbury store at Shutterton Bridge to be the one that is built? It will not take away land presently used as tourist accommodation and in addition, the application includes the building of small business units. A double plus then for the local economy in terms of the Sainsbury application compared to the double minus of Tesco’s (loss of holiday land and no business units).


Sequential Testing
Yes, agreed, the Tesco site is nearer the town than the Sainsbury one. That said, both sites are located out of the town and are within, I understand, 800 metres of each other. Given these two facts, that one site is nearer the town (by approx 800 metres) than the other should not be any reason why the sequential test should over-ride all other arguments. They are both out of town developments for goodness sake. However, should it be deemed that planning law in the guise of sequential testing be rigidly upheld with regard to these two planning applications then I feel sure the following quote will serve to sum up not only my own thoughts but those of many others as well. "If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "the law is a ass- a idiot.” (“Oliver Twist”).

As interesting as the debate is that the two of you are having, can I just point out that none of issues either of you have raised will determine the outcome of the planning applications submitted by Sainsbury's and Tesco's.

What will determine the outcome?

Well, in the first instance the decision making of the Teignbridge District Councillors who sit on its Development Control Committee. As I believe that whatever they decide could (again) be challenged in the courts whole thing will ultimately be decided by planning law and the legal profession. How, where etc the supermarkets source their products just ain't a factor any more than how much they charge their customers.

Here's some more from Tescopoly. You're right that Tesco doesn't have the monopoly here, others are just as bad. Here's what it says:
"Supermarkets such as Tesco, Asda, Aldi and Lidl are big players in not just the food industry but also garment retail. A quarter of all clothing in the UK is bought from supermarkets such as Tesco and Asda, which gives these global discount retailers immense power over global markets and garment economies.

Research by the Clean Clothes Campaign reveals that while supermarkets are seeing massive profits from their cheap fast fashion lines, workers in their supply chains face increasing poverty, appalling conditions, and serious workers rights violations.

The Clean Clothes Campaign's “Cashing In” report conducted research in Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka and Thailand, interviewing factory workers for Tesco, Walmart, Aldi and Lidl

The report showed that major supermarkets' price breaking approach to garment retail created major labour rights issues for garment workers in their supply chains:

- Working weeks for supermarket garment workers were found to be as long as 90 hours, with overtime unpaid. Workers in a Sri Lankan factory supplying Tesco said they worked n average of more than 64 hours pe week. Of ten factories surveyed in Bangladesh no factory had a regular working week of less than 60 hours and more than half exceed this.

"We do a lot of overtime. Almost ever day there is at least one hour extra. We are called on Sundays as well. However, our monthly wage slip will not show all the overtime that we do. It will quote only 1-2 hours as overtime in a month" - Woman at a Tesco Supplier, India.

- Poverty wages were paid to workers so low that families were often malnourished. Garment workers in Giant's supply chains should have the right to earn a living wage – one that meets their basic needs and those of their families. In Bangladesh, the lowest basic wage (before overtime) was 13.5 euros a month at a Lidl supplier, and in India, unskilled workers started on 45 euros per month. Nowhere did workers earn a living wage.

“We have to sleep in crowned rooms made out of wooden planks for walls so there is no escape from the mosquitoes. I use the meagre salary I receive very frugally as I have to pay for the boarding house and spend for food while sending some money home for sisters' studies” - Woman in a Sri Lankan factory supplying Tesco and Walmart.

- A strong resistance to any attempts at worker organising was found. The factories deprived all workers of any forum to voice concerns. At an Aldi supplier in Bangladesh, one male worker had been fired for association with a trade union while two female workers were not only sacked but forced to leave the neighbourhood for attempting to organise workers.

“If we try to form a union we will lose our job. So I do not want any union” - Worker at a Lidl and Walmart supplier in Bangladesh.

- Giants are increasingly using temporary contracts with their workers. This results in a lack of job security for employees, and means it is even harder to form trade unions. In a Tesco supplier in Sri Lanka, more than half the workforce were employed on casual contracts, compared to just a few in another Tesco supplier. Twice as many workers in this first factory said that they were afraid of losing their jobs.

“I worry about my security. I don't have job security because we are subcontracted. I am always afraid that I will have no money to pay in a month” – Tesco supplier, Thailand

The key cause of these issues was identified in the retailers’ own purchasing practices - prices and schedules imposed on suppliers created some of the biggest obstacles to implementing the very international labour standards the companies committed to. The CCC's report calls for:


1. Giant supermarket retailers to address the impact of their purchasing practices, following steps outlined by the CCC.

2. Stronger action to be taken by governments to protect garment workers rights in the face of company cost cutting and the increasing trend for fast fashion

3. A greater public awareness of issues, to be achieved through the international Better Bargain campaign, shining the spotlight on the real cost of cheap supermarket clothing.

The full “Cashing In” report can be downloaded here

The growing concern of labour standards along supermarket garment supply chains is supported by a number of other research projects.

War on Want's research in Bangladesh, "Fashion Victims," finds that workers are regularly working 80 hours a week for just 5p an hour, in potential death trap factories, to produce cheap clothes for British consumers for companies including Tesco and Asda.
Labour Behind the Label's report "Who pays for cheap clothes?" ,July 2006, asks what impact the trend for cheap clothes at companies such as Tesco, Asda, Primark and Matalan is having on workers' rights around the world.
Labour Behind the Label's Clean up Fashion website has company profiles of Tesco, Asda Walmart, Sainsbury's, Marks and Spencer.
The US International Labor Rights Fund produced a report, "Walmart in China: rolling back labour rights" on Wal-Mart's responsibility for poor working conditions amongst its suppliers in garments factories in China.
The Corporate Watch/Labour Behind the Label report "Off the Peg: Tesco and the Clothing Industry in Asia", pulls together information about Tesco's role in the UK market and the effect it has on Asian suppliers. The constant pressure on prices, led by Tesco and the other retailers, results in a downward spiral affecting working conditions in the garment trade in Asia. "

I do not work for tesco's although if I indeed needed work I would have no objection in doing so, I have over the years done various price comparisons, and after tesco asda comes a close second, therefore one has to go where ones budget fits, and not everyone can afford the luxury of looking at statistics, or where they get their chickens from, I think most supermarkets supply what the customer is asking for. I do not feel that because a company has been able to grow both in customer base and profit this makes them a bad company. Indeed it allows them the freedom to become more competetive.

I think a lot of people don't care about the brand of supermarket though I have to say that I don't think Tesco did themeselves any favours in terms of public relations with their high handed and extremely arrogant attitude to wanting to build a store at Sandy Lane! I think the main issue is where the supermarket ends up being located and I think the majority of people would prefer it to be sited at Shutterton Bridge.

Sue - you don't work for Tesco's do you? After all you seem mighty keen on them. Here's a bit of info on why we should all look a little deeper, and question the Tesco's ethos (?) instead of blindly following like a shed of the cheap chickens they sell.

The following is from the www.tescopoly.org website.
Tesco now controls over 30% of the grocery market in the UK. In 2008, the supermarket chain announced £2.8 billion in profits. Growing evidence indicates that Tesco's success is partly based on trading practices that are having serious consequences for suppliers, farmers and workers worldwide, local shops and the environment.

I am in favour of having tesco build a store in our locality, whether it be on shutterton site or ladys mile site, I have no objections what so ever, I live near both sites. It is prefereable to having to travel to newton abbot or exeter on a regular basis, which I will continue to do should a sainsburys be built, I feel that the oppositions voice is louder than those in favour.

Tesco's have resubmitted planning application for Lady's Mile site

And another little piece of info that some of you may not have been aware of. Have fun and go ahead and ask him questions.
http://cllr-alan-connett.blogspot.com/

Anyone interested in the Secmanton Rise planning application, can see how much the development will cost the developers before a brick is laid here:
http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/media/pdf/n/g/DC2008_Sept_29_Item_8_-_B6_-_08.pdf

For what it is worth and I know comments have already been made.
http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/media/pdf/n/3/DC2008_Sept_29_Item_8_-_A1_-_08.pdf

Re The Skate Park. I believe the following were the conditions when the Skate Park was given planning permission.

Resolved
That permission be granted subject to the following conditions:
1. Development in accordance with revised plans.
2. Acoustic barrier prior to first use in accordance with further details to be agreed.
3. Replacement trees to be planted.
4. Unless otherwise approved, no floodlighting to be installed.
5. Not used outside the hours of 8.00 am to 9.00 pm.

we used!should really have concerns over the impartiality of the Post/Gazette reporter Tom Scobie. In his account of the yoof centre planning approval not once was the word "disaffected". Have the yoof suddenly become "affected" ?

By 19 votes for and 0 votes against, the planning application for "A New Youth Centre Including Classrooms and Training Areas" at Sandy Lane was approved by TDC's Development Control Committee at its meeting on 29.09.08.

I've just received this from Teignbridge District Council re trees having to be planted as part of the planning consent for the skate park being built:


"As you correctly state, there was a planning condition requiring the
planting of 5 trees. In consultation with te Council's Tree Officer it has
been agreed that 5 Pyrus Calleryana (Chanticleer) should be planted. 3 of
these will be on the Sandy Lane frontage and 2 between the Pavilion and the
houses in Henty Avenue.

In order to comply with the condition they must be planted by 30th November
this year."

It's good that Anne has had an email from DTC. That must make her the first! But isn't that just the issue... NO COMMUNICATION. NO CONSULTATION. This council think they can keep us in the dark and feed us fertilizer. The obviously think they know better than we do... and they forget that they are only human too!

From Dawlish Live by someone called Ann:
I have had an email from the Town Council re the Youth Club.
There is not going to be any alcohol on the premises.
It is not going to be a drop in centre for drug/alcohol abuse.
Maybe now the rumours can stop.
If anyone wants full details suggest they email the council themselves.
DTC are obviously fudging the issue.

I reply to the questions Lynne and Sue raised when meeting with Mike somebody.

1. What was the Government target?
2. That doesn’t figure, any extension to open hours for happenings within the Parish, could be dealt with the same way as other extensions.
3. All staff working with children, (whatever classification you attach to the children) need a CRC. Who will police that?
4. Building the skate park under-ground was a non-starter in the first place. Children need to seen as to what they are doing, (I think they called it: showing off).
5. That appears to be a fudge of an answer.
6. Bit late now for that. I was under the impression that consultation was first in the queue, not last.
7. We employ CPSO’s to look after our needs. If they are not doing it, then why employ them?
8. As 7 above. If there is a problem, which there will be. What are they going to do about it? Shut it down!!!!!
9. The cricket pitch boundary was moved to accommodate the skateboard park, (I was there when they moved the boundary). This new planning application was I think to pinch a bit more to make a bank of soil with a fence on top.
10. The thinking was that a tall fence would appear unsightly, but a bank with a fence on the top would be more pleasing to the eye.

PS Dangerman - you talk about a new school. Please do tell more.

There are also at least two houses up for sale on Exeter Road where the houses back onto the playing fields.

I think by the time the new school is built and a new all weather pitch is put down there won't be a lot left of our beloved golf course area to worry about. I see there are two houses on the market already opposite where the proposed youth club/ bar/disco and 24 hour opening skate park will be.

Oh dear,! how could they do such a thing?
http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/news/Tesco-alleged-sold-food-past-use-date-Devon-stores/article-297635-detail/article.html

Spoke with Tom Scobie of the gazette/post yesterday re bar and disco for yoof centre. he didn't seem to believe me but I eventually guided him to the revised plans on the TDC website. He was going to check it out with TDC.

This may well be the first test of of the independence and attitude of our local reporter given the well publicised links to his lib-dem past and links with Wally P. If he fails then it will be a sad time for the only real paper covering our town.

I gave him a big story on a plate (worthy of being covered by a national paper (well the Daily Mail anyway); bar for yoof centre!) But he didn't seem all that enthusiastic.

And here is my official response as submitted to TDC to the revised plan:

1. Loss of meeting rooms - . Why have the meeting rooms and kitchen shown in the plans submitted back in July now been replaced by a disco and bar?

2. Noise pollution - I note the EHO is concerned with noise levels given that this building would be sited so close to residential units. I totally agree with that concern.

3. Original Planning Permission - there appears to be a constant tinkering with, and moving away from, the original plans which were granted planning permission in Feb. 06. These concerned a Youth Centre with integrated skate park. Now we have a separate skate park (presently being built) with a proposal that the still to be built Centre be used as a part Youth Training Centre and, seemingly, local disco and bar area. I am left to wonder just how many more "decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse"* there will be before this building finally gets off the ground!

4. Objections - The revised plan does not in any way address those issues raised in my previously submitted objection (indeed the revised plan raises more objections as per outlined above.)

(*) from "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" - T.S. Eliot

Revised plan has been submitted re Youth/Training Centre. It is now proposed that the upper floor should lose meeting rooms and a kitchen and that they be replaced by a disco and a bar.

Off topic I know, but thought some of you might like to know that the first Dawlish Local Produce Market is due to take place on Friday 17th October. 9.00am - 2.00pm.

If you, or anyone you know, wish to have a stall please contact Dawlish Town Council on 01626 863388.

Stalls will cost £20 to hire. Help will be provided in setting them up.

Re the Youth/Training Centre planning application. Environmental Health Department have lodged letter expressing concern about noise and light levels due to close proximity of residential dwellings. Letter can be seen on TDC's website.

Looks like the planning applications for the following may be heard at the 29.09.08 Development Control Meeting:

Planning reference: 08/02503/MAJ - Tesco at Lady's Mile
Planning reference: 08/02952/MAJ - Lady's Mile & land for holiday accommodation use.
Planning reference: 08/02603/MAJ - Classrooms and Training areas for Youth Centre - Sandy Lane
Planning reference:08/02514/MAJ - Outline planning permission sought for approx 147 residential dwellings at Secmaton Rise. Approval sought for means of access.
Planning reference: 08/03014/MAJ - Outline planning permission sought fro approx 270 residential dwellings at Secmaton Lane/Gatehouse area. Approval sought for means of access.

Could be an interesting meeting on Monday 29th September!

I am wondering if Tesco is a new name for cancer or weed!!!!!
They sure seem to be springing up everywhere and infecting everywhere they set up.
http://www.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/news/Tesco-nail-coffin-small-businesses/article-289298-detail/article.html

I notice whenever we receive emails from Teignbridge at the moment we are asked to comment on proposed unitary council for Devon. Has anyone commented so far? Looking at Dawlish TC website they are in favour but is this because they will have more power under this proposal eg planning and environmental health?
www.electoralcommission.org.uk/boundary-reviews/open-consultations/online-submissions

Thought some of you might be interested.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7572199.stm
I did give directions once before, but I will give them again.
Aldi, the East end of the Exeter by-pass, go straight through the traffic lights and take first on the left.
Lidl, which there are two, The roundabout at the Alphington end of Marsh Barton trading estate, first left. If you are coming into Alphington from the A30/38 third left and second left respectively.
Grab a bargain and save a few quid.
Sorry if I am offending organic and farmer's markets adicts!

Thought some might be interested!
http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/news/Tesco-confirms-open-store-city-later-year/article-278951-detail/article.html

nice to see the skateboard area is open at last, well at least after the workmen have gone home, funny how with all the dangerous items on the site how few of the skate boarders wear any safety equipment, how long before an accident happens. this park will be open 24-7 unless a good size fence is erected.

Will Dawlish Skateboard park be used when required as a nursery for beginners, before they move onto better facilities?

http://www.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/news/Building-starts-skate-park/article-271393-detail/article.html

I've looked at the transport assessments for both these proposed planning applications. Whilst on the face of it it makes sense to have both developments joined up in the middle I am concerned that this will create a rat run. As Secmaton Lane cannot be used by motorists as a backend of town cut through I feel this new road will be.

Pity those who live in Carhaix Way & Pidgely Road - they are the ones who will take the brunt of the traffic caused by this new rat run.

Is this I wonder why Dawlish were so eager for a jump start?

http://www.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/news/Building-starts-skate-park/article-271393-detail/article.html

For info. There are two planning applications in at the moment concerning the building of residential accommodation on land immediately adjacent to Sandy Lane Playing Fields.

1. Planning Reference: 08/02514/MAJ concerns the land by Secmaton Rise and which it is suggested should be accessed via Carhaix Way.

2. Planning Reference: 08/03014/MAJ concerns land to the back of Gatehouse Primary School and James' Plantation. It is proposed that this be accessed via a new road to be built leading to/from Secmaton Lane and running to the side of the Primary School.

Although two separate developments, it is being suggested that the two schemes will link up in the middle so that vehicles can travel through from one side to the other.

I've been following the 'sort of' debate about the proposed Facility for Vocational Training being based at the Youth Centre.

For what it is worth, my reason(s) for objecting to it is that I don't think it should be located in a Youth Centre that is to be built in what is a residential and leisure area.

Who the Facility for Vocational Training is aimed at is a connected but separate argument which raises two concerns for me. Firstly, from how far and wide and by what forms of transport would the teenagers be travelling in order to get to the centre and secondly if these teenagers are deemed to deemed to be 'disaffected' what exactly does that mean?

Whatever the answer(s) to the second part of my concerns, it still remains the case that the Youth Centre at Sandy Lane is not the site where the FVT should go. If it is offering training in light industry then it should be sited appropriately - like a light industrial business park.

The Youth Centre was originally given planning permission in Feb.06. It must be started to be built by Feb 09. If not,planning permission ceases and they have to submit again.

The planning application fee charged was £4,720.

But oh dear, almost 3 years later and still they haven't got money to build Youth Centre. Oops! What a waste of money!

But hang on - here comes the Cavalry! Devon County Council will stump up a huge amount if Youth Centre to become part Youth Training Centre.

New planning app. submitted with regard to Youth Training Centre (probably to be heard early September this year). If granted then:

1. Money available
2. New planning app. means the clock starts ticking again and the looming deadline of Feb. 09 gets removed.

Money and Time, Time and Money.

Tick Tock, Tickety Tock.

If I am not mistaken, was this not the same agency that backed the Sainsbury planning application.

The South West Regional Development Agency has defended itself against a campaign group's demands for the body to be scrapped.

The Taxpayers' Alliance called for the abolition of Regional Development Agencies yesterday Note: fri, claiming that £15bn has been wasted since their inception in 1999.

The alliance argues that RDAs have failed dismally on their three key aims.

I should have said, "involved with the yoof centre," after heavily.

I found the following on the Charity Commission web site. whilst Dawlish community Trust, are keeping a low profile, they may be heavily involved and there are councillors among the trustees.

THE PROMOTION FOR THE PUBLIC BENEFIT OF URBAN OR RURAL REGENERATION IN AREAS OF SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEPRIVATION (AND IN PARTICULAR THE TOWN OF DAWLISH, DEVON) BY ALL OR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING MEANS: A) THE RELIEF OF FINANCIAL HARDSHIP: B) THE RELIEF OF UNEMPLOYMENT: C) THE ADVANCEMENT OF EDUCATION, TRAINING OR RETRAINING, PARTICULARLY AMONG UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE, AND PROVIDING UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE WITH WORK EXPERIENCE; D) THE PROVISION OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, OR BUSINESS ADVICE OR CONSULTANCY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE IN CASES OF FINANCIAL OR OTHER CHARITABLE NEED THROUGH HELP: 1) IN SETTING UP THEIR OWN BUSINESS, OR 2) TO EXISTING BUSINESSES; E) THE CREATION OF TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES BY THE PROVISION OF WORKSPACE, BUILDINGS AND/OR LAND FOR USE ON FAVOURABLE TERMS; F) THE PROVISION OF HOUSING FOR THOSE WHO ARE IN CONDITIONS OF NEED AND THE IMPROVEMENT OF HOUSING IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR OR IN CHARITABLE OWNERSHIP PROVIDED THAT SUCH POWER SHALL NOT EXTEND TO RELIEVING ANY LOCAL AUTHORITIES OR OTHER BODIES OF A STATUTORY DUTY TO PROVIDE OR IMPROVE HOUSING; G) THE MAINTENANCE, IMPROVEMENT OR PROVISION OF PUBLIC AMENITIES; H) THE PRESERVATION OF BUILDINGS OR SITES OF HISTORIC OR ARCHITECTURAL IMPORTANCE; I) THE PROVISION OR ASSISTANCE IN THE PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES FOR THE PUBLIC AT LARGE OR THOSE WHO, BY REASONS OF THEIR YOUTH, AGE, INFIRMITY OR DISABLEMENT, FINANCIAL HARDSHIP OR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES, HAVE NEED OF SUCH FACILITIES; J) THE PROTECTION OR CONSERVATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT; K) THE PROVISION OF PUBLIC HEALTH FACILITIES AND CHILDCARE; L) THE PROMOTION OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND PREVENTION OF CRIME; AND M) SUCH OTHER MEANS AS MAY FROM TIME TO TIME BE DETERMINED SUBJECT TO THE PRIOR CONSENT OF THE CHARITY COMMISSIONERS FOR ENGLAND AND WALES. ANY OTHER CHARITABLE PURPOSE FOR THE GENERAL BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC AS THE TRUSTEES DECIDE.

Check out planning application 08/02952/MAJ - (every little 'elps!)

Ah Lynne! But you are not a councilor, had you been, you would still be mesmerized by the first page. I have been asking on a variety of subjects from councilors of Dawlish for years, and from upper tiers of the political chain and have never got an worthwhile answer from any of them. The only one that came near to giving me an answer was Humphrey Clemens, he has since crawled back into his shell, claiming that whatever he said, I would knock him down.
I was thrown out of a council meeting by the infamous W. Protheroe. Al l I attempted to do was to get an answer to a previously asked question. It is recorded in the minutes that I was a, “disruptive influence”, and they would not even tell me who I was trying to influence.
If I was in your shoes, I too would have grave concerns of what these Councilors are trying to foist upon us, and other friends in the same boat as yourself do not like it either. Being subjective is what more mothers should practice. They should look to the future for the benefit of their offspring, and not let others dictate what they think is best for them.

Disagree with you there Peter. It was precisely what was written on the first page that imade me look further into the planning application. See my formal objection below. I have held fire on making any subjective comments on whom the training centre is aimed at and from where, for the simple reason that it is proving very difficult to find out any further information. Questions get asked but no answers are given.

I believe my objections to the planning application stand firm irrespective of the proposed clientele.

When/if I have more information about the 'disaffected youth' I will make an opinion. However, as I have a 13 year old daughter she will bear heavily in my mind. So expect a more subjective, protective parental, response. Would you or anyone else expect less?

In the meantime can I ask all those who are concerned about this youth training centre proposal to lodge a formal objection with Teignbridge District Council.

Sue , my comments re; the planning application for the Yoof centre, is word for word as printed on the application, they are not mine. I guess it was written like that to please the readers when they have to deliberate on the "yes", "no", issue. If they could get past the first page, which many of them can't, then they may take a different slant on it.
But as you say, "it looks good", so they will read no further than that.

With the Fair on the lawns almost upon us, if you feel strongly as I do about the damage it causes to the Lawns and the trees, now is the time to email
THiggs@teignbridge.gov.uk
Their contract runs out this year.
Previous email received from Tracey Higgs as follows:
Quote
"Councillor Alan Connett has asked me to respond to your queries regarding the fair.
Query 1 - Fair parking too close to the trees.
Last year, Mr Rowlands DID ignore the terms and conditions with regards the parking of vehicles too close to the trees. He was warned and has been advised that prior to pulling the fair on this summer, he is to meet with the Council's Arboricultural Officer and the boundaries re-iterated.
Query 2 - Fair operating in bad weather
Clause 24 states:-
''Weather The fair shall not operate when weather conditions are such as to jeopardise public safety or cause damage to the Lawn''.
There is nothing in the contract that states he should not operate in bad weather and I have never known Mr Rowlands to be nothing other than cautious. "

Surely if it is bad weather then it stands to reason it will cause damage to the lawn !!
If Teignbridge knew the Fair was too close to the trees causing damage why not insist they move rather than let them continue damaging the trees for two weeks.

Tree lovers out there please send email supporting removal of the Fair from the Lawns. When I spoke some time ago to one of the Arboricultural Officers he was telling me how much damage the Fair does. He is unable to do anything about it - it needs people power!

Delighted to see common sense prevailed tonight as Dawlish Town Council gave Tesco an almost unanimous thumbs down. Great speeches from David Bailey , Chris Marsh and another resident from Little Week Lane (sorry didn't get your name). Strange comment made by Bob Vickery. Not sure I understand what he was getting at.... did he want Tesco's?

When you put it like that, Peter, it sounds rather lovely!
I almost feel bad for objecting against it.... except when I realise that there has been NO consultation on its change of use. And it's effectively become a light industrial training centre - in the middle of a residential and leisure area. And it will be open to TEN PM every weekday... for training. And there is NO consideration to waste and recycling even though they are using numerous materials - some hazardous! And the facility is targeted at the WHOLE of Teignmouth (so far as disaffected youth are concerned) ... etc, etc.
It needs more consideration from so many angles.

From the original planning application:
This prosal is a modification to the approval already given under, NDD/05/04251/MAJ, to redevelope the lower floor into a ground floor level series of classrooms and training areas, for dissaffected, unemployed and poorly educated young people in teignbridge. helping them begin a new life.

"Integrated within the centre a Facility for Vocational Learning (FVL) that will be used to improve the lives of disaffected young people of the whole of Teignbridge"
This refers to the building, metalworking, plastering and building training facilities that will take up about 50% or more of the youth centre!!!!

For information - here is a press release issued by Devon County Council on 20.05.08.

"Dawlish Integrated Youth Centre £700,000

There is currently very limited youth provision in Dawlish which has over 2,000 young people aged 11 to 19 living in the area.

The Centre will be used to deliver a range of youth support services including positive activities to promote personal and social development, as well as services provided by Devon County Council's Youth Offending Team; Connexions services; Drug and Alcohol services and other voluntary sector services.

The project has been driven by Dawlish Action for Youth and is widely supported throughout the community. Young people are fully engaged in the needs analysis, design and lobbying stages and they will remain actively involved and play a leading role in its delivery.

Dawlish County Councillor John Clatworthy said: ""Having been a member of the group which dealt with the sale of Exeter International Airport, it is good to see a large sum being allocated to Dawlish."

"The long-standing requirement for a youth centre will now become a reality with this fundin, the site being made available by Teignbridge District Council and a grant from Dawlish Town Council".

Hi Peter, thank you for your kind comments. Just to clarify I have objected to TWO planning applications recently. One is Tesco's at Lady's Mile and the other is the massive *change* to the Youth Centre.
I want to emphasise I am not against the Youth Centre, but I am deeply concerned about the changes that they are proposing to it - namely for it to be a "Facility for Vocational Learning, for the disaffected youth from the WHOLE of Teignbridge". The centre now plans to deliver drug, alcohol, employment and youth offender services. It is a major departure from the original - and much needed - plan for a youth centre for Dawlish young people. And, insultingly, there has been NO consultation with residents about this. The application reference for this is 08/02603, on www.teignbridge.gov.uk in the planning section.

Well done Lynne and Sue, as you are the only two that I know of that have hit them with fruitful objections.
I will follow with mine shortly.

To return to Sandy Lane issues. For information - below is my objection to the planning application for a Vocational Learning Facility to be sited with the Youth Centre. This has objection has been submitted to Teignbridge District Council.


OBJECTION TO PLANNING APPLICATION – 08/02603/MAJ

Introduction
Planning approval was originally given for a Youth Centre. This new application not only seeks to change the use of the building from that of a 100% Youth & Community Centre into a 50% Youth Training Centre/50% Youth & Community Centre, but also seeks to change the geographic area from which its clientele will be drawn. Whilst any public building should be open for all to use, it would seem from this planning application that a facility which I understand was originally aimed 100% for the local community (by which I mean Dawlish and its immediate environs) is now 50% aimed to serve the whole of Teignbridge (see section 3 of the Planning Application Form and section 5 of the Design & Access Statement ). Whilst such changes in themselves need not prevent planning permission being granted, I would respectfully suggest that at the very least planning permission be deferred thus enabling various assessments to be undertaken such as traffic impact. Give also that the type of activity to take place has also changed from that originally envisaged I feel that Health & Safety, Waste Disposal and Risk Assessments also need to be made. I see no evidence of any of this from the online planning documents. A deferment would also enable consultation with local residents to take place.

Consultation
I refer you to section 4. of the Design and Access Statement in which it is stated:” Extensive consultation over recent months has been carried out with local organisations and residents...”. I beg to disagree. As a local resident I can guarantee you that the first I and many other residents knew of this Facility for Vocational Learning was when we read the planning application. Indeed, I suspect many others are presently in blissful ignorance of this whole issue. That I am someone who keeps themselves very aware of what is going on in Dawlish, that I live fairly near to the Sandy Lane site and that I am the mother of a 13 year old would indicate I think that had any public consultation been undertaken I would have engaged with it. The reason I don’t know of any consultation is because none has happened. Consultation with residents may have taken place some couple of years back concerning the original proposal for a 100% Youth/Community Centre but none, absolutely none, has taken place with residents concerning the proposed Facility for Vocational Learning. Indeed, this is implicitly admitted by the applicant’s agent when in section 8 of the planning application where it is asked if neighbour and community consultation has taken place the response is “Yes – At Time of Original Application”.


Risk Assessment, Health & Safety
The vocational unit will contain “general purpose metal and woodworking machinery” (see section 23 of the planning application). From the floor plans submitted it seems that vices, lathes, drills, soldering equipment and electric circuiting equipment will be present. Have any Risk and/or Health & Safety assessments been made concerning this? Training in Hair and Beauty is also to be offered. Again, given the chemicals that may be used in such training have any Risk/Health& Safety assessments been made?

Immediately next door is a children’s playground and a pre-school day nursery. Has any risk/health & safety assessment taken place with regard to them? I ask this not only on the grounds of the type of activities now proposed to take place in this Youth come Training Centre but also from the point of view of increased traffic. I will return to the traffic issue separately.



Waste Disposal
It is claimed there will be no hazardous substances on site (see section 24 of the planning application). However, as the waste materials will include wood, metal and chemicals - all potentially hazardous - surely a waste disposal assessment/provision is required. Has this happened? I have to say I think not, as in section 7 of the planning application where it asks if “the plans incorporate areas to store and aid the collection of waste?” the applicant’s agent has ticked the ‘No’ box. He has also responded in the negative to the question “Have arrangements been made for the separate storage and collection of recyclable waste”. Does that mean there will be no recyclable waste? I find that difficult to believe.
It would appear that no provision has been made for the storage and removal of waste whether hazardous, recyclable, or landfill.


Parking for Motor Vehicles
The applicant’s agent states that there will be no on-site parking spaces (see section 11 Vehicle Parking in planning application) and claims in the Design and Access Statement “Impact to car parking is minimal due to the age of the majority of users not being driving licence holders”. Yet a few paragraphs later he writes “The facility is intended to be used primarily by young people but it is intended for all members of the community to have availability”.

I disagree that the age of the young people using the vocational training facility would be 16 and under. I believe it would be more like 16-19. And given that this facility is to be made available to all within Teignbridge how do you think the vast majority the users will travel? By public or by private transport? I suspect private. Presumably the cars and motor bikes will be parked in the nearby Leisure Centre and Sandy Lane car parks. Has any assessment taken place regarding the impact on these parking areas?

I note that section 20 of the Planning Application has been left blank. This is the section that asks for details of employees. I would imagine at least two centre managers would be required (if only one s/he would surely be working hours way beyond the European working time directive!). And, of course, trainers will be required to train the trainees. How many trainers? Why no car parking provision for those working at the centre such as the trainers, the officer manager(s) and the youth workers? Whilst I am all for more sustainable forms of transport I am at the same time a realist. Do I think users and staff will walk, cycle or use public transport to get to the centre or do I think they will use private transport? Well, what do you think?

Traffic Impact Assessment
Whether driven by parents/carers or driving themselves, the users of the centre will inevitably increase the amount of traffic using Sandy Lane. The materials needed for use in the training centre will necessitate delivery vehicles. Has any traffic impact assessment been made? What about the safety of pedestrians? Secondary school students cross this area on their way to Dawlish Community College. Mums and small children are in the area due to the close proximity of the children’s play area and pre-school nursery. What about them, their safety, their needs?

I am also concerned for the safety of pedestrians as outlined in the paragraph above with regard to construction vehicles should this planning application be approved. What safety measures would be put in place to protect pedestrians and those caring for small children?

I note that when planning permission was originally granted for the 100% Youth Centre (NDD/05/04521/MAJ refers) a condition was that “No development shall commence until a scheme for the calming of traffic in Sandy Lane has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The building shall not be occupied until the scheme has been completed in accordance with the approved details”. Reason: In the interest of Highway Safety. If those measures were deemed necessary for a Youth Centre only, then surely even more highway safety measures may be needed given the greater number of cars, motor bikes and delivery vehicles in the area now travelling to and from the Facility for Vocational Training.

Opening Times
It is stated that the facility will be open from 9.00hours – 22.00 hours Mon- Friday and from 9.00 to 12.00 hours Saturday. Does this mean the whole building? If so, does this mean that training sessions could be taking place up to 10 o’clock at night? A little excessive don’t you think?

No information is given for how long the training sessions will last. Will they be for half days or full days? This may be important for if for half days then traffic on Sandy Lane will again be increased at the change over time. If for full days, where is it expected that the students will go at break and lunch times?

Location
This planning application seeks to change the use of the building from that of 100% Youth/Community Centre to that of 50% Youth Training Centre. It is my belief that it should be rejected, or at the very least deferred, not only for all the reasons stated above but also because I believe its proposed location is not the right one. For a Youth/Community Centre to be built in a residential and leisure area is one thing, for an industrial vocational training centre to be built is quite another. It should be located in a more appropriate site such as an industrial estate.

End.

Just like they did at their Kingsteignton store!

Remember they would not comment on the potential of a future mezzanine floor... that would effectively DOUBLE the size of the store.

It may only be slightly smaller now Peter, but you can bet your bottom dollar that give it a few years and they will be putting in for planning permission to make it bigger.

That's what Tesco do. WAKE UP DAWLISH!

Tesco!!!!
I see that the Tesco new development, will be slighly smaller (notice "slightly") than Newton Abbot and Exeter Superstores.
It will cover 6.19 acres, (half of the whole of the Sandy Lane playing fields).
It will have parking for 213 vehicles incl 14 disabled and 20 cycle.
The store size will be huge 24,458 ft2.
It will reduce the much needed holiday parks.
The huge roundabout that will be built at the junction of Carhaix, will bound to have a detrimental impact on the properties along the A379 adjacent to the site.
Noise levels are bound to increase by increased traffic movents.
In order to protect the property for an airbourne terrorist attack, the whole of the roof area will be camoflage with sedum (Low growing plant).Perhaps they will also lay green tarmac.
It is time to protest against this utter madness.

Those 40+ on the waiting list for an allotment are as you rightly say more than enough to trigger something.
But nothing will be triggered unless the council are made aware of their responsibilities.
This council we have do not offer anything, they tell you what they want. It is high time others told them what we want.

Peter,

As I understand that there are over 40 persons waiting for an allotment in Dawlish, I would have thought that figure more than enough to trigger any bureaucratic/statutory mechanism.

So..... why hasn't that happened?

Hi Lynne, Daniel.
My understanding is, they are not statutory allotments.
The piece of ground is leased by the council from the Luscombe estate.
If the estate management decline to renew the lease, (which is only for stretches of five years) then bang would go the allotments.

The used to be many statutory allotments in and around Dawlish (before I came here) but when they wanted to build on the land, everyone was given notice to quit and they accepted it out of hand, as in those days they did not know how to stand up for their rights. Different story now, put pressure on the authority, it is your right. Remember though, they will probably make you jump through many hoops before you will get it. You only need six members of the electorate to set the whells in motion, but many many more would certainly make them sit up and think.

Hi Lynne,

Re your comments on allotments, if they are statutory allotments and thus defined as such in the law, if a change of use for the land is required, consent will have to be gained from the Department of Communities and Local Government. They cannot change the use automatically and especially if a waiting list is known to exist.

The Section 106 Agreement monies (called a commuted Sum) could be used for any community provision as required by the Local Authority and could cover the cost of providing and/or upgrading allotment sites. It is up to them what they ask for in negotiations. Maybe you need to speak to TDC's Allotments Officer or Leisure Services Team.

Hope that helps

Daniel

If you wish to complain about the lack of information, consultation, risk assessment, traffic impact assessment, noise assessment, refuse disposal arrangements (lack of), etc etc concerning the DAY proposal to change the 100% Youth Centre into a 50% Youth Training Centre then as well as telling the councillors & local press DO TELL THE PLANNERS.

You can do so either by going onto the planning page on the Teignbridge District Council website or by e-mailing the planning department direct: planning@teignbridge.gov.uk

or by writing to:
The Planning Department
Teignbridge District Council
Planning Department
Forde House
Newton Abbot
TQ12 4XX

You must quote the planning reference: 08/02603/MAJ

Youtha - don't joke about these things.... that's probably how the youth club got turned into an industrial training centre. One bright spark, with one sherry too many decided to say "what-oh gentlemen, why don't we get all the cash we can by turning the youth centre, into a government training centre? Bound to be some grants in that for us"

To return to Sandy Lane issues........ (unless of course there are plans to turn them into allotments.....well at this rate you never know do you?!)......... should you wish to express your concern/disquiet regarding the proposed Youth/Training Centre to our local councillors here is how to do it:

NAMES AND DETAILS OF DAWLISH COUNCILLORS

Devon County Council
John Clatworthy, 23 West Cliff Road, EX7 9EB. Tel: 01626 864091
johnclatworthy@devon.gov.uk

Teignbridge District Council
Humphrey Clemens, Manor Farm, Holcombe, Dawlish. Tel 01626 863020
Humphrey.clemens@aol.com or Cllr.Clemens@Dawlishtowncouncil.uk.net

Graham Price, Mewstone, The Mews, Dawlish. Tel: 01626 867088
Graham@the-mews.eclipse.co.uk

Rosalind Prowse, 4 Nash Gardens, Dawlish. Tel: 01626 866621
rosedens@hotmail.com

Ted Hockin, Aalsmeer, 14a Exeter Road, Dawlish. Tel: 01626 862088
e.hockin@tiscali.co.uk

Mary Mugford, Seaforth, 7 Mount Pleasant Road, Dawlish. Tel: 01626 863516
mmugford@teignbridge.gov.uk


Dawlish Town Council
See above for details of:
- Humphrey Clemens
- Graham Price
- Rosalind Prowse
- Ted Hockin
- Mary Mugford


Geoff Wills, 13 Kingsdown Crescent, Dawlish. 01626 888074. geoffwills@ccz.eclipse.co.uk

Helen Humphries, Flat, 6 Marine Parade, Dawlish, 01626 862233. helenhumphries@aol.com

Pauline Bloomfield, 50 Cofton Hill, Cockwood, ex6 8RB. 01626 890200. paulinebloomfield@btinternet.com

Wally Protheroe, Mount Pleasant Inn, Mount Pleasant Road, Dawlish Warren. 01626 863151. wallyprotheroe@tiscali.co.uk

Francine Tullis, Branscombe Cottage, Branscombe Lane, Dawlish. EX7 0QU. 01626 864424
francinetullis@tesco.net

Jackie Bush, 2 Elm Grove, Dawlish. 01626 865704. jaivic@aol.com

Helen Wills, 13 Kingsdown Crescent, Dawlish, EX7 0HP. 01626 888074. helenwills@ccz.eclipse.co.uk

Janet Garland, Cranworthy, 10 Luscombe Terrace, Dawlish. 01626 888312

Derek Collins, 5 Little Week gardens, Dawlish. EX7 0RB

Apply a little pressure to your lovable councillors and see if they can worm their way out of it.

Allotments: I understand the lease on the land presently used as allotments in the town is due to run out in 2011. All the allotments are used and there are presently over 40 persons waiting for allotments in the town. So how come no allotments are forthcoming via Section 106 agreements from the proposed supermarket(s) and residential developements? There is obviously a need for them.

Do not wish to hijack this site with another problem, but as it affects so many, I thought why not, it could be of benefit.

With the cost of living going through the roof, I thought I would dig out old documents that I acquired many years ago to do with allotments, (another fight of mine).

I thought I would let readers into a secret....Under the allotments Act 1908 which have never been anulled to my knowledge:

Duty of certain councils to provide allotments.
— (1) If the council of any borough, urban district, or parish are of opinion that there is a demand for allotments in the borough, urban district, or parish, the council shall provide a sufficient number of allotments, and shall let such allotments to persons resident in the borough, district, or parish, and desiring to take the same.
(2) On a representation in writing to the council of any borough, urban district, or parish, by any six registered parliamentary electors or [persons who are liable to pay an amount in respect of council tax] resident in the borough, urban district, or parish, that the circumstances of the borough, urban district, or parish are such that it is the duty of the council to take proceedings under this Part of this Act therein, the council shall take such representation into consideration.

All the shenanigins that went on to provide allotments for the people of Dawlish and eventually provided at an enormous cost, (leased land at Brown's Brook from the Luscombe Estate). One would have thought it would have provided it for a pepicorn rent as it is not much use for any other purpose and it is for leisure purposes after all.

This is why I prefer Sainsburys rather than Tesco coming to Dawlish. I have experienced Tesco doing this in several towns I have lived in.

"Squeezed out by the big boys
Since it first opened its doors in 1946, residents of Withernsea, in East Riding of Yorkshire, bought most of their groceries from Proudfoot, the family-owned supermarket in the centre of town. As the "big four" supermarkets expanded their grip upon Britain's towns more and more independent shops went under but trade at Proudfoot remained brisk.

Then in 2004 Tesco came to Withernsea. Its first move was to send more than 6,000 residents vouchers offering an £8 discount for every £20 spent in the local Tesco store. Proudfoot responded with its own discounts but could not match Tesco. Sales at Proudfoot in the year following Tesco's arrival in town fell by 35 per cent.

The Proudfoot family were so outraged by what they believed was Tesco's "predatory pricing" policies that they tried to take the company to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT). Ian Proudfoot, who, with his brother Mark, runs the family stores, said at the time: "It is... an attempt to squash competition and dominate the catchment area." The OFT decided that Tesco's actions were not deemed "anti-competitive".

The store struggled on for another two years before finally folding when Aldi offered to buy them out. Mark Proudfoot thought it best to concentrate on the four other Proudfoot stores they still owned across the region. Since April, their stores have been reduced to three after Tesco took over the store in Barton-Upon-Humber."

taken from "The Independant" today.

Certainly if Tesco come here rather than Sainsburys, I will be shopping online for my "non-fresh" groceries.

Despite the comments from the young mother I find it cheaper to shop locally for fresh items as you don't overbuy, the butchers will give a discount if you shop regularly and they are always so cheerful and helpful, and if anyone saw the programme regarding the meat factory supplying meat to Tesco some years ago, you would never eat Tesco meat again (and I haven't!)

Hi V6. Check this out.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jul/08/food.ethicalliving

Now here's one to watch out for. Suddenly it's gone from being a Youth Club for Dawlish, to being a centre for disaffected youth, for the WHOLE of Teignbridge. Evidently the rest of Teignbridge don't want their troubles on their own doorstep so they are dumping them on Dawlish instead. Meaning our kids and grand-kids who just want a nice time in a youth club, will be subjected to who-knows-what in terms of language, habits, manners, abuse, aggression, drugs, alcohol..... perhaps not IN the youth club, but who's going to shoo them away afterwards!

The other DAD was right - we aren't against supermarkets as such. Granted, there does seem to be a little ill-will against Tesco's - but that's because they were so determined to build on Sandy Lane, and came marching in here with their high-handed bullying tactics. You're right, no-one can blame Alfie Jeffries from taking the money. Most people would, so good luck to him. But in the scheme of things, we are only about protecting sandy lane against development....

Er.....DADS is about not building on Sandy Lane Playing Fields, not about there not being a new supermarket in Dawlish. Didn't you see our home page?

But hope you feel better for having got all of that out of your system.

lets all face facts here,as a modern mother of 3young children struggling to make ends meet (especially in our countries current financial climate with a recession looming) a supermarket is THE ONLY PLACE i can afford to shop, we now are living in the 21st century and anyone who thinks they can preserve this ideal of a scene from yesteryear of a mother with her wicker basket shopping in her local shops needs to wake up and face reality. Dawlish shops charge extortionate prices for their goods and produce, it is no wonder that most locals including myself now shop out of town, most families cannot afford to shop locally due to the prices shops charge for the most basic of items. I havent been able to afford to shop here since the birth of my second child 8 years ago. The shops have slowly closed down due to people shopping at cheaper out of town locations, Dawlish has been taken over by Charity shops (even those are not cheap nowadays)and invaded by bookies At least if a proper supermarket is built in Dawlish i will be able to shop there rather than drive my car to either Newton Abbot or Exeter thus saving on petrol and pollution.Who knows if they do build it - with the new road tax bands and price increases coming into force next April perhaps we will all be able to use our cars less.As for Mr Jeffreys- fair play to him i say,if it was anyone of us who owned that land what with the current economic state of this country
WE WOULD ALL BE TEMPTED to sell up to the big corporates to try to make some cash to balance our books, afterall Mr Jeffreys has a business to run and a family to support the same as the rest of us, so give the guy a break. Face facts Dawlish will get a supermarket one way or the other - be it a Sainsburys or a Tesco or whoever. It is called MODERNISATION AND REGENERATION !!!!! Welcome to the real world !!

What the fuss is about.

Can someone please tell me how we have moved with an apparent sleight of planning application hand from

1. A youth/community centre being built for the use of the Dawlish young people and commuity

to

2. This proposal whereby the lower floor will be "developed into a series of classrooms and training for disaffected, unemployed and poorly educated young people in Teignbridge".

It is claimed that neighbours and the local community have been consulted about the proposal. I would disagree. The community may have been consulted about (1) but they most definitely have not been consulted about (2).

Whilst Sandy Lane may be an appropriate place for a Youth Centre given that it is a leisure area, that does not make it an appropriate area for a youth training area.

What do you think?

Whilst I support the youth in Dawlish, I do not support the location that has been earmarked for the proposed youth centre and never have. And by all accounts, there could be an even bigger backlash, than there was for the proposed Tesco store to be built there. People in Elmgrove drive, already have problems with the football club members.

Sandy lane playing fields are just that and the definition of a playing field is, "An open space for pitch games".

For years various bodies have placed other recreational facilities on these playing fields, thus removing the facilities for pitch games. There have been no other pitch facilities made available to my knowledge in the past 75yrs, which on balance is a disgrace considering the growth in population over those years. Instead of having more open space provided which is a recommendation from various government sources, we have been systematically denied what we once had.

It has been so easy over the years to meet a demand for other sporting activities, without any consideration of those that play pitch sports, their voice being lost in the wilderness. It has now reached crisis point, so much so, that the alterations to the previous planning application is causing much concern. It has always been a concern, but many decided to tolerate it. I think things will be a little different now.

It is my understanding that those that have leased the cricket pitch, at a cost, (so I am told) of £2100 for the season. Will now no longer seek to renew their lease because of the encroachment of the skateboard park onto the cricket pitch, which has made it smaller. They will be looking elsewhere, so there will be a loss of revenue for someone.

Nothing is ever easy!

I'm furious about the proposed use of the youth center. The problem isn't that there will be "disaffected young people" (DYPs), it's that they will be herded here from all over the district. So, whereas it's fine to have DYP's from Dawlish here, because they'll balance out person-to-person the decent kids, now we could end up with 20 DYP's to every normal adjusted kid - and that's NOT right!
The youth centre was billed for our young people, and designed for them, and now they are saying it's got to be changed to accomodate every snotty-nosed, knife-wielding ASBO-proud yoof in the whole of Teignbridge. And give them the kit to sharpen their crow-bars, saw off their shotguns, and the venue to buy/sell drugs.
Sandy Lane may get a new unofficial off-licence, but Dawlish will become a no-go zone.

Why oh why oh why are they trying to stiff us with this? We aren't even in a central location to bus all these troublemakers into. Can't they set up some service for them in Forde House? Or are they worried they will be the subject of too many bad influences there?

http://www.dawlishaction4youth.org.uk/guestbook/home.ikml

We've known about the youth centre for some time, and to be honest, it's needed. Whether or not it's in the right site, well time will tell, and after the investment of time and money, we certainly hope it is in the right place!
However, whether or not the youth centre, that was *supposed to be for our young people* should be undermined, and have facilities reduced by a plague of disaffected young people from all over the district, well that's just plain wrong. The youth centre, the residents, the young people themselves have been done a MASSIVE DIS-SERVICE by whoever agreed to this white elephant of an intrusion.
Do we really want our young people meeting and socialising with "disaffected youth" - FROM ALL OVER TEIGNBRIDGE? "Disaffected" - meaning they could be doing anything from drug/alcohol use, dealing or violent/criminal behaviour. Do we want this in our midst? Do we want our children and grand-children to be influenced by it?

Yes, I do feel very aggrieved about this, especially as we have Tesco and now this, which I stumbled on yesterday! Why cannot TDC leave alone Sandy Lane for the good people and visitors (like myself of several years standing) of Dawlish to enjoy and cherish! Surely this site is no good for a youth centre, being so close to an established residential area. Wouldnt this sort of development be better in Teignmouth or Newton Abbot which are bigger settlements?

Come on DADS, fight this ludicrous proposal and the war which seems to be happening on this land.

Daniel

From the youth club plans you'll see that they are including a unit for the "disaffected youth of the WHOLE of Teignbridge"

I can only assume, that these "disaffected individuals" are the young people who have been excluded from school. Why? Because they are disruptive, have problems (drugs, alcohol, violence, mental health, etc), and are not a good influence on young people who want to work hard. SO so so... now they are going to scoop them from all over the district and DUMP them on Dawlish with our children here, and teach them their sordid tricks, where to get alcohol from, share fags, drugs, etc.... It's a shame about the disaffected ones, but I do not think that this is a solution to help them - it's only going to help the powers that be, who have tick-boxes and targets to meet. For Dawlish this is a BAD MOVE! Does anyone else feel aggrieved about this?

08/02603/MAJ
Former Play Area
Sandy Lane
Dawlish
Devon
New youth centre including classrooms and training areas

I see Tesco are still operating in Zimbabwi.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7481496.stm
Must be a friend of Mugabe

I was so upset this morning I had to go out whilst they were cutting and chopping up the trees. The sound even inside the house was very distressing. A very very sad day - such a waste of beautiful HEALTHY trees. Why the park couldn't be moved a few feet to accomodate them - we'll never know...

RIP trees.

With the murdering of the trees at Sandy Lane playing fields, for once I am speechless.

This was in my local paper today!

Tesco’s fighting talk on store plan

Tesco today came out fighting and insisted it is still determined to build Wombourne’s first supermarket despite having its multi-million pound plans thrown out by South Staffordshire planning chiefs.

The supermarket giant followed in the footsteps of rivals Sainsbury’s when its proposals to branch out into the picturesque village were rejected by planners.

But bosses are insisting they will continue with their battle and are studying the reasons why the application was rejected on Tuesday.

Spokesman Tony Fletcher said today: “We are obviously very disappointed that the plans were refused.

“We are looking at all of the reasons why the plans were turned down so we can decide on our next step.

“From all of the feedback we have had, residents have said that a supermarket is something they need in Wombourne,” he said.

“We are still very much committed to building a supermarket in Wombourne and so now we are deciding which route to take.”

Sainsbury’s was the first store giant to announce multi-million pounds to set up a supermarket in the village, after snapping up a vacant factory unit on Heath Mill Road industrial estate, off the Bridgnorth Road.

And Tesco followed just days later after it emerged bosses were in negotiations to buy the Static Systems site just yards from the site owned by its rivals.

Both had hoped to win over planning chiefs with promises of bringing hundreds of jobs to the village and dozens of residents signed petitions supporting the supermarket plans.

I wonder if ultimately we will need a fighting fund to be set up.

This was in Regeneration and Renewal magazine today!

Public inquiry into Tesco's plans

A public inquiry will be held into plans to build a supermarket in a Norfolk seaside resort.

Last year, North Norfolk District councillors rejected plans for a 16,000 sq ft (1,500 sq m) supermarket on Cromer Road, Sheringham.

Planning officers had recommended approval of the project but councillors voted for rejection by 17 votes to nil.

The inquiry, to be held in the council chamber, will begin on 1 July and is expected to last three weeks.

The district council has pledged £200,000 in a fighting fund to block the supermarket application.

The inquiry will be chaired by a planning inspector appointed by the Secretary of State.

Lynne,
I am sorry then, it was TDC not updating their website page! I was under the impression from that they were looking into additional consultation as it was badged as pending decision!! It sometimes happens though and I know too well working at the Local Authority!!!

Whats the latest with Tesco?

KEEP GOING DADS!

Planning Permission HAS been given by TDC to Sainsbury to build a store at Shutterton Bridge. I was at the Dev. Control Committee meeting and heard it all.

Interestingly in relation to Peter Harry's comments, I seem to recall that Ted Hockin was equally HORRIFIED when there was a plan several years ago to demolish outmoded beach hut shops at the Warren in favour of a bright modern seafront walk which we now have! Apparently, in this case he was upset as he had popularised these huts at the Warren after seeing them in WW2 in (I think) North Africa!
It didnt have anything to do with the fact that Mr Hockin owned the majority of them after buying them up over several years!!

Seems like history repeating itself to me!

Sue

I have looked on the TDC website and it would appear that PP has not been granted for Sainsburys at Shutterton Brook, it was listed as "Pending Decision" which means some issues need to be resolved before PP issued or the decision has not been posted yet and the site updated.
I was cross to read Mr Jeffrey's comments in the Express and Echo as it would appear the only person who will benefit on the Tesco being on Ladies Mile is him and alsotwo supermarkets in Dawlish would case retail oversaturation and a drift from town centre.

Keep going DADS!

I understand that the planning application for the phone mast at Sandy Lane was approved today (Cllr Mary Mugford spoke IN SUPPORT of it).
Maybe she didn't see the front cover of a Sunday newspaper claiming that all these suicides in Wales have been attributed to mobile phone masts!!!!
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/49330/Suicides-linked-to-phone-masts.
I know, I know, don't believe everything you read in the papers, but sometimes there's a germ of truth in them.. The health implications of phone masts have been long known though, so I'm surprised anyone would speak in support of such a risk in the heart of our community, so close to schools and nursery schools!
I'm intrigued. Did Cllr Mugford really speak on behalf of her constituents? Did she really represent the local residents who are concerned about their health and that of children in the local schools?
(from email also sent to M Mugford, and several others)

Personally, with fuel prices it is better to have a small supermarket nearby rather than spend time and money going to Newton Abbot. Although I do a lot of local shopping for the heavier items I do use a supermarket. Without a large organisation then Shutterton will never be developed particularly with the economy at the moment. We have to ask why aren't there more young families in Dawlish and one of the reasons has to be lack of a supermarket.

Sainsbury have been given the planning go ahead to build at Shutterton Bridge.

Round one to Sainsbury.
Round two to ?

And did Ted Hockin give his reason why he is so HORRIFIED?
Sainsbury is to far out of town, it is asking for planning approval on land that has been earmarked for light industrial development and, in spite of road improvements in the immediate vicinty of the store, how will improvement be made to the rest of the road network to get there. A store of the projected size, needs people for it to survive, Dawlish alone could not give it that support.
I do wish people would think of the wider implications and not focus on the fact that there may be a supermarket, which may benefit some.
A supermarket what ever name it runs under, will I fear do untold damage to Dawlish.

Yes think that supporting Sainsburys application is the way forward. Plus of course Dawlish gets the benefit of a business park hopefully attracting full time employment to the town

The problem is it seems a supermarket is inevitable. So, given that, do we want one that is pleasant to us, listens and takes note of our views (Sainsbury's)? Or do we want one that's operates with bully-boy tactics, being set to build on the leisure land initially, upsetting everyone at the consultation, and with an appalling record of treatment of communities and suppliers - putting profits before people (Tesco's)? So if we DON'T want Tesco's - does that mean our best weapon against them is to have Sainsbury's?

Received email from Ted Hockin as follows re planning officer recommending refusal on Monday re Sainsburys.
"I agree with you, this is an officer recommendation which has horrified Dawlish councillors, I have written to everyone on the Development Control Committee (apart from one who would do the opposite of anything I suggest) for their support in getting the application approved.

Ted Hockin"

Express & Echo
1PM UPDATE: TRAFFIC HOLD-UPS CAUSED AFTER ACCIDENT

12:41 - 20 June 2008



An accident involving a car and a motorcycle has partially blocked the Exeter Road at Dawlish.

The accident on the A379 outside Marine Garage is causing disruption to traffic in both directions.

An accident which caused disruption on the A379 in Dawlish are few and far between.
A supermarket in Dawlish will cause disruption every day.

And it's not unknown for Tesco to go in small and non 24 hour and then some years later - guess what they want to do? Yep! get bigger and stay open longer.

On the subject of mezzanine floors (a favourite Tesco way to increase size, and add non-food ranges): was told that the height of the store will be 6m at front, dropping away at the back. Also told it needs to be 7m high for a mezzanine. But when I asked about a mezzanine, was informed that this was not the purpose of THIS consultation exercise...

Another question - another answer:
I asked - how many juggernauts? - answer: "6 per day"
A friend asked, 24 hour deliveries? - answer: "No, just starting very early, and finishing very late"

When I went to the Tesco's consultation, I asked a few questions. Here's one of the answers:

Store size: 25,000 sq ft

Tesco's claim not to know how many people will be shopping at their store, but they say that their average takings at an average Tesco store are £12,500 per square metre, per annum. (In other words - Tesco's will be taking about £29million a year from Dawlish residents!!!)

Allegedly it's cost them a cool £18million! But at this rate, they'll be in profit VERY quickly!

Has anyone clocked Brixham 21 ltd (google it) It would appear that Tesco are hell bent on ruining the quality of life where ever they touch down.
Anyone going to Brixham will know of the traffic problems now. Imagine what it will be like with a Tesco in the Town?

And if anyone wants to write a letter to our local papers here are the e-mail addresses.

For the Gazette - Dawlish@internet-today.co.uk
For the Post - mda.edit@internet-today.co.uk

You will need to provide your full name and full address and phone number but the number of your house and your phone number aren't published.

For the Gazette deadline is noon Monday for following Wednesday's paper and for the Post I'd guess Weds. noon for following Friday's edition.

tesco's are putting their planning application into teignbridge next friday 20th june not giving us a chance to send back their forms to take our comments into account!! so that they can have their planning in before sainsburys. tesco's are so sneaky with what they are doing.also we are sending comments back to the lady that was very rude to me last time coz i asked a couple of questions she didn't want to answer!! so will my questions mean anything to her now? i don't think so.come on dawlish wake up again and say no to the bullies from tesco's once they are in they will just keep getting bigger.what about the shops at the marina they will not be able to stand up to tesco's being so close!! also the shops in the town come on make a stand dont just let them bulldoze us!!!!! who want's to go camping on a tesco car park not me!!

* Having adverse effect on traffic, road access, visibility or parking.
* Resulting in noise and disturbance affecting local people.

Two things that Tesco's will definitely be causing at Lady's Mile!

So, erm, "me", are you possibly thinking that people may have grounds to object against a forthcoming planning proposal.... like Tesco's?

And here's some advice re objecting to planning applications:

Can be considered:
* Being contrary to local or structure plan policies or government advice.
* Allowing overlooking windows, thereby resulting in lack of privacy.
* Having a poor design and appearance or being out of keeping with the character of an old building or having an overbearing impact on an adjoining property.
* Result in the loss of important trees.
* Having adverse effect on traffic, road access, visibility or parking.
* Resulting in noise and disturbance affecting local people.

Cannot be considered:
* Loss of personal view from the particular property.
* Loss of property value
* That the development differs from what the developer told you personally they were intending.
* Disputes over land ownership
* Doubt over the integrity of the appliant
* Objections to the principle of development where an outline permission exists.

Just in case any of you have any need to contact our local councillors about any recent events or proposals that you may be none to happy about here's a reminder of who they are and how to contact them.

Teignbridge District Council

Humphrey Clemens, Manor Farm, Holcombe, Dawlish. Tel 01626 863020
Humphrey.clemens@aol.com or Cllr.Clemens@Dawlishtowncouncil.uk.net

Graham Price, Mewstone, The Mews, Dawlish. Tel: 01626 867088
Graham@the-mews.eclipse.co.uk

Rosalind Prowse, 4 Nash Gardens, Dawlish. Tel: 01626 866621
rosedens@hotmail.com

Ted Hockin, Aalsmeer, 14a Exeter Road, Dawlish. Tel: 01626 862088
e.hockin@tiscali.co.uk

Mary Mugford, Seaforth, 7 Mount Pleasant Road, Dawlish. Tel: 01626 863516
Mmugford@teignbridge.gov.uk

Dawlish Town Council
See above for details of:
Humphrey Clemens
Graham Price
Rosalind Prowse
Ted Hockin
Mary Mugford

Geoff Wills, 13 Kingsdown Crescent, Dawlish. 01626 888074. geoffwills@ccz.eclipse.co.uk

Helen Humphries, Flat, 6 Marine Parade, Dawlish, 01626 862233. helenhumphries@aol.com

Pauline Bloomfield, 50 Cofton Hill, Cockwood, ex6 8RB. 01626 890200. paulinebloomfield@btinternet.com

Wally Protheroe, Mount Pleasant Inn, Mount Pleasant Road, Dawlish Warren. 01626 863151. wallyprotheroe@tiscali.co.uk

Francine Tullis, Branscombe Cottage, Branscombe Lane, Dawlish. EX7 0QU. 01626 864424

Jackie Bush, 2 Elm Grove, Dawlish. 01626 865704. jaivic@aol.com

Helen Wills, 13 Kingsdown Crescent, Dawlish, EX7 0HP. 01626 888074. helenwills@ccz.eclipse.co.uk

Janet Garland, Cranworthy, 10 Luscombe Terrace, Dawlish. 01626 888312

Derek Collins, 5 Little Week gardens, Dawlish. EX7 0RB

Some further information - wards
The Teignbridge and Town Councillors represent parts of Dawlish, or wards, on their respective councils. Which ward you are in depends on where you live.


Teignbridge District Councillors
For the purpose of the District Council, Dawlish is divided into two wards.

Ted Hockin, Graham Price and Mary Mugford represent Dawlish Central and North East ward on Teignbridge District Council. Lady's Mile Caravan Site is situated in this ward. This ward covers roughly the town centre out to Cockwood.

Humphrey Clemens and Rosalind Prowse represent Dawlish South West on Teignbridge District Council. This ward covers, roughly, an area from the western side of the town, including Holcombe, to the boundary with Teignmouth.

Dawlish Town Councillors
For the purpose of the Town Council, Dawlish is divided into three wards.

1) North East – from the eastern side of the town to Cockwood

2) Central – covering the town centre

3) South West – from the western side of the town, including Holcombe, to the boundary with Teignmouth.

Pauline Bloomfield & Francine Tullis represent North East Ward

Graham Price, Geoff Wills, Wally Protheroe, Ted Hockin, Mary Mugford, Janet Garland, Derek Collins represent Central Ward

Humphrey Clemens, Helen Humphries, Rosalind Prowse, Jackie Bush, Helen Wills, represent South West Ward

TESCO CONSULTATION - Yes Tesco are back in town with their latest plan. Thursday 12th until 8.30pm and Friday 13th 10.00am - 5.00pm at the The Manor House, Dawlish.

Now they want to built a store right next door to Warren Copse (very environmentally friendly - I don't think) and right opposite the backs of the bungalows, mostly occupied by the elderly, in Lambert Close. Bad enough with the traffic already on the Exeter Road but can you imagine the extra fumes created by all the traffic coming and going, not to mention the juggernauts with their deliveries.

And Tesco say they are doing this to help the people of Dawlish. Oh Yeah?

Don't forget to tell them what you think about this latest effort.


PS No, I don't live in Lambert Close.

I see Tesco and the like are comeing to the westcountry to exploit the tourist (which they always have done, but other folk did not realize it).
We will come here for your benefit and then tell us if every little hurts.
http://www.thisiswesternmorningnews.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=248235&command=displayContent&sourceNode=248201&contentPK=20823356&folderPk=115131&pNodeId=249131

Hey Zeds, yes it WILL make a difference! All the comments that Tesco's receive - they MUST show them to the council. SO get along there and tell them what you think! Put your comments in writing if possible, and remember that their questions will be worded to give them the answers they want! Don't mince your words.

Oh, erm, what's going on? Tesco's? In Dawlish? That'll be nice!

What's that you say? It'll destroy the character of the town? It will wipe out local businesses? It will cause greater traffic? It will have heaving great HGV's delivering all hours day and night? It will remove one of our local campsites? It will make Dawlish look like every other "Tesco-town"?

hmmm, perhaps I'd better get down to the consultation at the Manor House this Thursday/Friday and tell them what I think....

... but whatever I say it won't make a difference ill it - not really?

£86,000! That's chicken feed to Tesco. Shame on them.
DAWLISH WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hugh Fearnley-Eatsitall is trying to get Tesco's to listen to his campaign for free range chicken. True to their bully-boy form Tesco's are appearing to turn a deaf ear to him too - and asking him for £86,000 to communicate with shareholders. See:
www. chickenout .tv

David, a supermarket may shake up the Co-op, but it will also DESTROY the rest of the town. Eliminate the independent bakers, and see off the butchers, greengrocers and other local shops. We ARE real when we say Tesco's - in particular Tesco's - are aggressive bullies who do not care about the local community they only care about profits! If you want to "get real", then go have a look at www.tescopoly . org That might make you realise a few facts

well at least that awful co-op store will get the shake up it needs ! tesco would be an asset to the town ,
get real people!

T- ake-over
E- very
S- ite.
C- aravans
O- ut!

Re Peter Harry's comment, is that buy one acre of land and get 40% off another that Tesco are thinking!!!

Whether you believe in solidarity with Seaton, or just fighting our own corner YOU'VE GOT TO READ THESE:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tesco-invades-seaton-ndash-closing-the-nursery-and-holiday-village-800210.html
http://www.tescopoly.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=596&Itemid=110
http://www.geminiexeter.co.uk/Article.asp?id=621136&spid=13014
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/03/393927.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1582876/Resort-staff-'being-made-homeless-by-Tesco'.html

I see Tesco have extended their "But one, get one free." range. At first glance I genuinely thought Tesco was going barmy.
http://www.tesco.com/themepark/

Which is the better bargain, "Buy one, get one free," or 40% off?
That was the question asked on BBC today.
I still say Lidl and Aldi have better bargains and in most cases, better quality.

Tesco Public Exhibition of their new proposals will take place: Thursday 12th June 2.30pm-8.30-pm & Friday 13th June 10am - 5pm in The Mayor's Parlour, The Manor House, Dawlish.

As per my earlier comment, to check out the land price, it may be of interest to contact the District Valuer for Exeter and South East Devon, who is contactable as follows

The Valuation Officer
Broadwalk House
Southernhay West
EXETER
EX1 1TS

Tel: 01392 606900

In my experience, £18 million sounds a lot for the site in terms of land values. To illustrate, agricultural land or undeveloped land such as Ladies Mile would be far less than prime residential land. In my area, residential land is going for over £1 million per acre, but greenfield about £750,000. Is PART of Ladies Mile 18 acres, I think not, I would say all of that site is about that much.

I would say that Tescos are, in planning terms "Land Banking" and they are probably looking to buy the whole site and sit on it till they can develop, whilst Mr Jeffrey can sit back and enjoy his fortune and not have to worry if his caravan park is full or not.

I agree with other comments made here that who would wish to holiday right behind a Tesco, especially in Tents and caravans with thin walls and also HGV's going by peoples houses on the Exeter Road all days and night and the associated pollution. Surely this location would fail the Councils sustainable development test and surely Cllr Ted Hockin would not appreciate HGVs coming past his house all day and what about the tight bend into Dawlish which has been notorious for years, can you imagine a big HGV coming around there!

The Ladies Mile proposal has not been thought through in my opinion and is worse in lots of ways than Sandy Lane. Use the info I gave Sue to help fight this awful proposal. Backing you all the way and keep going DADS!

Best wishes

Daniel

Take a look at www.ownonline.co.uk for an alternative to supermarket shopping.

Just to get the record straight - when I was quoted in the Express & Echo, yesterday re Tesco, I did point out that it was a "personal" quote and not indicative of the feeling of DADS as a whole. This seems to have been missed out, and as a result I have been misquoted.
Please also note that whilst I wholeheartedly believe that a supermarket will be detrimental for Dawlish traders and have a knock-on effect on the Dawlish community, those are my personal sentiments only. The aims of DADS are to protect Sandy Lane playing fields against development, and as a group DADS is not anti-supermarket... unless anyone wants to tell me otherwise???

Official - Tesco wanting to build on part of Lady's Mile Caravan Site. Details still to be released.

So why did the chamber of trade act like an ostrich when it came to their members and only ask about "section 106"s? and why did the town council just sit there like nodding monkeys saying they had no objections? In the meantime, the people that the two groups are supposed to represent are simply fodder destined for the big-cat supermarkets

So that ought to be a good enough reason to get backing from the TC and the Chamber of Trade to oppose planning applications from any supermarkets.
But I bet they will not raise their heads above the parapet?

Not bored, Harry, it's borne out everywhere IF we choose to look! I went on a course recently where the tutor showed:

If £1 is spent in a supermarket just 26p of it ends up in the local economy.

If £1 is spent in a local store owned by someone in the community it generates £2.57 into the local community.

On this basis supermarkets are DRAINING our local economy.

Many of you may know that I am dead against any supermarket taking up residence any where in Dawlish. We already have many that are not that far from here anyway and my reasons are too numerous to mention.
I would however like to draw readers attention to the following snippet that I have obtained from a rather large document, (500+ pages) and ties in nicely with the invitation mentioned in the thread below.

Standard political assumptioms hold that ecomomic growth, measured by GDP, will bring about commensurate increases in wellbeing. That, after all, is the promise that lis behind most modern advertising. Acquisition equals happiness. Yet, if this were true, people in the UK should be reporting sharp increases in their life satisfaction - given the rapid increases in income. The sobering reality is that British people have not reported a significant or sustained increase in their personal wellbeing for well over three decades.

Instead, there is convincing evidence that consumption growth is not delivering the wellbeing assumed by conventional theory. Indeed, it mat actually be causing harms, particularly when the pursuit of material wealth takes away from the quality of personal relationships or a proper balance between work and life.

Although the average individual in Britain has never had so much disposable income, some commentators believe we are a country in a 'social recession'. More than two million Britons are on antidepressants and a million regularly take Class A drugs. Binge drinking, violence, self-harm and vandalism have all reached record levels. Unicef research suggests that British children are the unhappiest in Europe, the most likely to feel lonely and the least likely to sit down for a family meal. Barely 40% of over 11s find their peers "kind and helpful" - the lowest score in the developed world.

And now the bit that I like involving supermarkets and also fits in nicely with farming today.
Research by the New Economics Foundation demonstrates that for every £10 spent on a local food initiative, £25 is generated for the local economy, whereas £10 spent in a supermarket only generates £14 locally. The congestion associated with food transport costs us £5 billion, 95 billion annually; removing diffuse water pollution from water systems caused by intensive agriculture adds £250 million a year to our water bills.

Apologies if I have bored anyone.

Farm to Home Service Meeting

Would you like to buy meat; poultry; eggs; vegetables & fruit locally?
Do you want to buy fresh, quality produce and see how it is grown/reared?
Do you pay unfair higher prices for food during the holiday season?
Are you paying to travel to supermarkets or for them to deliver?
Do you think Farmers get unfair prices from Supermarkets?
Is the hard-working farming community struggling?
If the farming community dies, will we lose our beautiful countryside?
Would you prefer your hard-earned money went directly to your local farmer rather than the supermarket chain?

“YES”!!

Then You are Invited to a
Farm to Home Service Meeting
“Linking Local Farmers direct with Customers
And Changing the Way People Buy Produce”

On Friday 23 May 2008
In the Council Chamber, The Manor, Dawlish
8.00pm start

Everyone Welcome - Especially Farmers!

Unable to attend or for more information:- Call Tracy on 01626 891187

Date 23 May 08
Time 20:00 - 22:00
Location Council Chamber, The Manor, Dawlish
Contact Tracy 01626 891187

I once heard that if everyone stopped buying MacDonalds for ONE WEEK the company would collapse. I don't know whether that's true or not. I wonder how long it would take to affect Tesco's?

Does anyone know what deals were struck with the football club should Tesco have got their wicked way?
And would those deals if any, still apply?

If everyone but everyone everywhere boycotted Tescos do you think they would collapse? A fantasy I know but one has to have one's dreams.

‘A new supermarket will kill the town!’ provoked the reply: ‘There is no town! Dawlish is not a town.’

What is it then?

1. A daytrip destination. Dawlish businesses serving visitors (including we visitors who happen to live here) will thrive despite / because of the new supermarket.

2. An expanding suburb of Exeter, part of the great suburb / garden city of England (Note: what was MAFF is now DEFRA, and farmers are part-time park keepers.), supplied via supermarkets of all shapes and sizes, supplied by trucks, boats and planes, supplied by agribusiness mining the planet. NB Dawlish has a Tescos already, in the Strand. This supply chain machine is probably unstoppable short of a complete collapse.

And I wonder that if the Tesco deal should go through in Dawlish on the site they are allegedly interested in for the amount of money they are allegedly willing to pay for it if the present owner of that land will become one of the richest people in Devon?

And where has Tesco got all this money to give to this one person? From their profits. And how do they make their profits? From the people who buy in their stores. And who buys in their stores? People who very likely have not got a lot of money to spare and therefore are looking for cheap(er) food.

Redistribution of wealth from the poor(er) to the already rich(er)? Surely not!

Scottish billionaire Sir Tom Hunter today took another shot at Tesco after beginning legal action to block a £150 million rights issue planned by Dobbies Garden Centre, which is majority owned by the supermarket giant.

A spokesman for Sir Tom , who also owns Dobbies’ chief rival Wyevale Garden Centres, said: “We do not believe this offer to be in the interests of all shareholders.”

A spokesman for Tesco said: “We are surprised that West Coast Capital [Sir Tom's investment vehicle], which says it is committed to long-term growth at Dobbies, should seek to prevent it raising fresh funds. The capital raising was “vital” for Dobbies’ future, Tesco added.

The £150 million rights issue, earmarked to expand Dobbies existing network of 23 stores, is worth more than the company itself. Dobbies, which announced the rights issue last month, said this morning that Mr Hunter’s West Coast Capital investment vehicle has filed court papers asking for an interim order to block the rights issue. Dobbies said that it would make a “robust defence” of its plans at a court hearing.
Related Links

* Dobbies to raise £150m after profits slump

* Tesco unfazed by warning from Dobbies on profits

* Stakes raised as fight for Dobbies intensifies

West Coast Capital, which owns a 29.9 per cent stake in Dobbies, faces paying out £44 million to maintain the level of its investment and buy up extra shares made available through the rights issue.

If West Coast Capital, or any other shareholders, do not take up the 12.45 million shares that are being offered at £12 each, Tesco's 65 per cent stake could rise to 83 per cent, thereby effectively ending a battle that began last year when Sir Tom claimed that the retailer's £15 a share offer for the gardening group undervalued the company.

Dobbies said today: "The board of Dobbies hopes for an early resolution in order to allow it to concentrate its energies on running the business to deliver returns to the benefit of all shareholders."

Sir Tom is Scotland's richest person with a £1.05 billion fortune according to The Sunday TImes Rich List

John Lord’s (of yellow book Ltd) presentation on Tuesday was very professional, and Lord seemed genuinely concerned for– even fond of – the town. On ‘the vexed issue of the new supermarket’ he had a graph showing a steady descent in the Dawlish economy (starting evidently after the major descent caused by the existing supermarkets at Newton Abbott etc.), predicting a future big dip caused by the new supermarket – which he expects to come here – with a big hopeful regeneration sweep upwards to counteract both these declines. At one point he said that a good regeneration programme for a tourist area is one which the residents themselves welcome, not one designed to appeal to visitors. But then when he came to the recommendations, he spoke only of ‘attracting visitors’, and the specifics were largely cosmetic: smartening up the Lawn and the Strand – plus a Costa Coffee branch at the bowling green end of the Lawn; someone pointed out we have several coffee/tea shops already, and lots of concrete at the other end, and new mature trees to replace the chestnuts – shame! – and how long does he think they would survive vandals and neglect?

And now that Tesco has decided to throw in the towel --------re Sandy Lane, how many have noticed the conspicuousness of the councillors that would not comment on the Sandy Lane proposal because they had a prejudicial interest in it? Well they haven't now and there is still no word, so just who do they represent I wonder?

I'd like to return to the supermarket issue.

Even though Tesco have said they are no longer interested in building on Sandy Lane playing fields they have not gone away from Dawlish. Indeed they have issued a press release saying they are still looking at sites around the town.

Until they go public concerning the site they are particularly interested in, we can only surmise on the likely outcome of any planning application that they will submit.

However, if it is the site that the grapevine says it is then in sequential planning terms that is their trump card as this site is nearer the town centre than the Shutterton Bridge one that Sainsbury are interested in. Further, given that the site at Shutterton is designated as employment land (not retail) Tesco would probably have plannning legislation on their side should they go to appeal if TDC turned down their planning application.

Tesco would not be back unless they thought they had a damn good chance of getting this 'prize' of Dawlish.

Despite the above, all I seem to hear from the shakers and movers in Dawlish is how Sainsbury will be of benefit to the town etc etc. Now whether or not they will is a matter for debate but the point I am trying to make here is that it is only Sainsbury's that I hear being talked about. Tesco is not mentioned at all. It's almost as though there is some collective belief that if Tesco are ignored they will go away. They won't.

I think we'd all like to see the town centre regenerated, but the real issue is that's all they are looking at! There is more to Dawlish than the Lawn, the brook and The Strand. I understand that this is what Yellow Book were asked to focus on, so it's what they've done. But WHO gave them that brief in the first place?

I think the line is, that the public have already been consulted over the past few years so that what happened on Tuesday was a presentation of what is planned to happen as opposed to a consultation on what would we, the public, like to happen.

So, unless enough people create enough of a stink about any or all of the proposals they will happen - money and political will allowing.

What did anyone think of the Dawlish Tomorrow meeting yesterday? Are we ordinary residents going to get a say or are the Groups such as DARE, DT and DTC going to tell us what we want?

Understand Sainsbury's Planning Application will be heard by Teignbridge District Council's Development Control Committee on Monday 23rd June 2008.

Have heard that they have offered £18 million for site PROVIDED they get planning permission to build there.

They have yet to go public on their plans.

I think you should check out whether Tesco has bought or is about to buy Lady's Mile holiday village.

Bella, the VAST MAJORITY of shops in the town are independent. Flower shops, cafes, bakeries, toy shops, newsagents, giftshops, general merchandise, healthfoods, jewellery, mobile phones.... it's a lot of livelihoods that are being threatened!

Dawlish Town Council have given their approval to Sainsbury's application. Now it must go to Teignbridge District Council for final decision.

Bella - how often have you gone to town to buy a loaf of bread and then ended up popping in to a shop for other stuff? Or gone into the butchers, the deli or the greengrocers etc, for essentials, and then nipped into another shop and bought stuff there too - just because it was close by? Well once the butchers, deli, greengrocers and bakers are gone - there will be no cause for people to "pop into town for esssentials", and the other shops will also start to suffer. That's when the town becomes full of charity shops and card shops, interspersed with shops selling plastic buckets and spades. Hardly a town - more a ghost town!

A new supermarket will not cause local shops to go bust as they do not provide the majority of people's weekly grocery shopping.
It is only the baker's delhi's who are independant

£18 MILLION?????? To build on Lady's Mile!!!!! Tesco's????? Wow, I wonder what they were offering for Sandy Lane.

and local traders to the bankruptcy courts!

If Tesco build on a caravan park (Lady's Mile?) then not only will they be stealing local customers from the town traders, they will also be reducing the numbers of high-season shoppers in general... fewer campers. Ho de ho! Sir Terry's laughing all the way to the bank!

Tescos have given up on Sandy Lane - official. Now have their eye on a local caravan site - allegedly. For a great deal of money subject to planning permission - allegedly.
Like £18m - allegedly.

No news is good news!!!

Hi All,
Have you tried approaching Sport England, who are the Government body who cover sports provision and opportunities for sport and healthy living in England. They may have some comments for you and almost certainly would have to be contacted by TDC before they sell their land for their views. It may be worth you looking on the web for contact details and also possibly do a FOI request for all dealings on Sandy Lane.
Re the planning application for Sainsburys, you will have a statutory consultation period of approx 21 days to comment on the application. All of the neighbouring properties should have been written to for comments under the Town and Country Planning Act. Also, as a major application, TDC may also have to consult neighbouring authorites and a range of local statutory agencies (including DCC, Highways Agency, Sport England and several others) The application now submitted will have to be determined, but you can seek to influence the debate by writing to your local councillor, MP, MEP, Parish Council or Planning dept.
Why not also seek to get a FOI request to have a look at the Council's Economic Land requirement study (or whatever they call it) and also the Open Space Needs Assessment, as they will use this to evidence the required provision of open space or employment land and will also support policies made.
I too am greatly concerned at the impact of new development of the mahgnitude proposed on the Shutterton area of Dawlish, a more peripheral area of the town, which has not been greatly urbanised. All I say is say farewell to the beautiful environment which exists at the moment and hello to traffic and urban sprawl! As to traffic generation, you raise a valid point, when looking at the Planning Application,. TDC and DCC will have asked the applicant to do a traffic generation assessment and an traffic impact study. Their percieved numbers of traffic generation will be in this study and also their proposed or required improvements to the local road network.... Would make interesting reading to see!!!!! I bet the numbers will be far greater than on the roads at high season!!!

You are correct that development needs to be well planned and sustainable and this is the ethos of the Government Planning Policy - Planning Policy Statements 1 to 7 freely available on www.communities.gov.uk! Have a look, they are really interesting and are the basis for all planning policy decisions and objetcives in the UK!

As I have stated before, the familiy shopping provision is dire (as my family and I can testify to as very regular visitors to the area, over the last 40 odd years) but the growth needs to be properly planned and in the right location (Shutterton and Sandy Lane are not that in my opinion but as I said I am possibly biased against out of town development as I live near to the giant Merry Hill Centre which has killed our local towns)

The advantages that the respondent identifies are correct and very important, and incomes have been an issue in Dawlish for many years especially with a high level of low or seasonal employment. Shopping choice and town centre decline need to be addressed (TDC should have a Town Centre Strategy incidentally which may be worth a look at) and if correctly planned, a new supermarket could bring economic and social benefits to Dawlish but these should also be sustainable to the community, and not bring about the loss of such valuable and well used open space.

KEEP GOING DADS!!!!

Daniel

There is hope!!! This was on the website of my local paper, the Express and Star today!

Keep Going DADS!!

Daniel
Sainsbury’s shop plan sent packing

Sainsbury’s plans to build a supermarket in Wombourne have been thrown out after councillors were told the store would “bleed dry” village traders and shopkeepers in nearby towns.

Planners on South Staffordshire District Council had recommended approval of the proposals for a former industrial site in Heath Mill Road. But last night councillors voted 30 to five against the application, arguing that it was too big for Wombourne and would affect the livelihood of local traders and the vitality of the village.

Tesco is also vying to build a store in Heath Mill Road, yards from the site where Sainsbury’s, which is now likely to appeal, had hoped to start construction.

Councillor Roger Lees said a Sainsbury’s store would attract traffic from Dudley, Stourbridge and Kingswinford as well as Wombourne and surrounding villages, exacerbating an already chaotic situation.

A supermarket in the village would spark “a malaise” in Wombourne which would spread to other parts of South Staffordshire and also bleed dry Wall Heath, Kingswinford and Gornal, he warned.

He also accused Sainsbury’s of not making any car parking provision for its estimated 250 staff.

Supporting the refusal, Councillor Mary Bond said: “While I recognise that some residents like the convenience of a superstore on their doorstep, this is off-set by the longer-term impact such a development would create for Wombourne as a whole.”

Councillor Reg Williams said a supermarket would have a “monstrous” effect on shopkeepers’ trade.

Several councillors, including planning chairman Brian Cox, voiced safety concerns over the road junction at the site.

At a site visit yesterday, lorries were seen mounting the pavement in order to make a turn.

Councillor Mike Hampson accused Sainsbury’s of “courting disaster” over its traffic management plans.

In Sainsbury’s defence, Councillor Alan Hinton said most villagers did not use the local shops for their weekly groceries and the store would provide much-needed jobs.

He also argued that only five or six per cent of the local shops were food outlets. “I don’t think the local traders would lose out that much,” he said.

Hi Peter,

I believe we are talking about two different things. The postings on this site are concerned with:

How to force parish referendum on Sainsbury's Planning App.

What I believe you are referring to is:

How to call for a by- election to take place in south-west ward following resignation of Cllr.

Very similar procedures though and understandable confusion.

I have drafted a letter with space for 10 sigs.
If you would like to sign this form you are quite welcome.
Give Sue or Lynne a ring and they will arrange for me to call on you I am sure.

So.....that's how. And who will organise?

Here's how to force a parish referendum or poll.
http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rodmell/local.htm

Okay then, let's organise a poll via the 10 signature system. Who knows about this? Who will organise?

To expect DARE to hold yet another poll may be unrealistic, especially with the scant regard the first poll seemed to be given by the council. HOWEVER, a "proper" poll (ie: one that the Council MUST listen to) can be forced through with just 10 signatures from the community. How about that, DevonDel?

The key issues about these developments are
a) there is no organised, specific opposition to them. Such opposition would go out of their way to inform and enlighten the community as to the problems that the developments will cause, and
b) even with fierce opposition, campaigning, complaining, etc takes time and money. The ones with the time and money are the developers - not the community. Activists and the community (including traders) need to start speaking up. If they don't then they can hardly whinge about it all afterwards!!! Perhaps people really don't care...?

Totally agree that another 'referendum' should be taken about Sainsbury's at Shutterton. Alas, I fear it may be too late to stop or delay this as a planning application has already been submitted. Thus now in the hands of the Cllrs. They now need to be persuaded of the degree of unease there may be about the Shutterton application.

I am greatly concerned about the apparent free for all in planning applications that is taking place around the Shutterton area - 2 x housing schemes and now the Supermarket. How many cars will these schemes generate if they are given the go ahead?

One other point. Whilst Chamber of Trade may be supporting a supermarket I understand there are members of it who are equally against such a scheme. There are also other traders in the town who are against the idea of a supermarket but who are not members of the Chamber of Trade.

Suggest those with misgivings contact Cllrs urgently and writer letters to local press. Even if ultimately Dawlish gets a new supermarket the whole thing needs to be thought through and planned long term.

when all this started off it was to protect Sandy Lane and it may well be that this was in the mind of the 90%+ of respondants to the DARE survey who did not wish a supermarket for Dawlish. Other proposals are now on the table.
However, family shopping in Dawlish is dire! Poor choice and generally poor service and prices. Dawlish residents are generally on fixed or low incomes who see government inflation figures of 2.5% but in reality are experiencing hitting the pocket inflation of some 3 times this.
Add to this the Chamber of Trade support for a supermarket and th case is, i feel, not as clear cut. We may pontificate from the moral high ground over 75% of shopping spend going to supermarkets but there is a reason for this. They provide free parking (compare this with the current TDC actions), huge choice, sharp prices and efficient staff.
I feel the debate has moved on from Sandy Lane and that with a Shutterton proposal on the table DARE should quickly repeat their poll.

7.00pm- THURSDAY 1ST MAY, special PLANNING COMMITTEE being held by DAWLISH TOWN COUNCIL to DISCUSS SAINSBURY'S PLANNING APP.

Meeting OPEN TO PUBLIC.

Plans will be on display then and/or can be viewed beforehand at TDC's offices in Newton Abbot or at The Manor House, Dawlish.

Peter, I agree with your concerns about traffic - but it's only part of the picture. A supermarket in Dawlish will KILL off the town centre trade, a fact that many town traders seem to live in blissful(?) ignorance of. The town needs to wake up and smell the diesel! Town traders - you have been warned!

My concerns for any supermarket coming to Dawlish is based on traffic generated.
In the Western Morning News the following has just appeared.
http://www.thisiswesternmorningnews.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=248235&command=displayContent&sourceNode=248201&contentPK=20389582&folderPk=115131&pNodeId=249131
Sat in a vehicle with the engine running and going nowhere is bound to add to something of which I could not possibly comment.

I have downloaded the documents. Will take some going through. One thing that jumped out was the fact that they still say there is a need.
At the meeting arranged by DARE, I thought there was a resounding NO!
The increased amount of traffic that will be attracted by it, along with the increased traffic from the proposed two new developments at Secmanton Rise and James plantation, Will I am sure bring chaos. But then from experience, people love it in traffic queues for hours on end.

2 x Planning Apps have been submitted for the Shutterton Area.

08/01471/MAJ for industrial & employment development on land adjacent to Shutterton Industrrial Estate and

08/01472/MAJ for a foodstore, petrol station, access road and car park on land at Shutterton Bridge.

This was in my local paper, the Wolverhampton Express and Star tonight!!!

Supermarket giants battle it out

Around 250 jobs could soon be coming to Wombourne if supermarket giant Tesco get its way for a store and petrol station in the village.

The company wants to build a shop and garage in Heath Mill Road.

That is just yards from where rival Sainsbury’s has snapped up a piece of land.

Five Tesco representatives met with members of the parish council last night. Members of the public were not allowed into the meeting but will get to see the plans on Thursday from noon at Wombourne Council Offices.

Parish council chairman Mike Heighway said the retail giant was interested in a medium-sized supermarket with petrol station.

Tesco has already put in a bid for the Static Systems building in Heath Mill Road, which could result in the relocation of 300 workers.

Static boss Adrian Turner said today: “If the opportunity came up for us to relocate locally into a more modern building we would be happy. But we will not be moving for moving’s sake.”

Sainsbury’s wants to build a 25,000 sq ft store, also creating 250 jobs, opposite Tesco’s desired plot. The battle comes just weeks after Tesco won an eight-year wrangle between the two for a prime city centre plot.

This article posted on April 8, 2008 at 11:13 am. Bookmark this page permalink.

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT ACCORD WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN FORCE IN THE AREA IN WHICH THE LAND TO WHICH THE APPLICATION RELATED IS SITUATED.

This is the key statement here... I thought that Secamation Lane was in the green belt (Am I correct in thinking it is near Langdon Hospital?) Surely that land, if green belt, would be subject to provisions in the Local Plan to maintain the level of urban sprawl, also the rural development of Dawlish. Planning Policy Statements 1 to 7 make reference to rural development, what TDC should be adhering to and these can be obtained from a search at www.communities.gov.uk. This development of 150 plus homes in this area of outstanding beauty will have an irrepairable impact, possibly over and above that of Tesco and the two together (and Sainsburys) would have a dreadful impact on the area.

It is not only out of the scope of the Local Development Plan, but also the County Structure Plan and Regional Planning Guidance (Now Regional Spatial Strategy). Development in this area would have to demonstrate sustainability to the community and given that it is far from local shops and services (and existing schools are quite small) there would doubtless be infrastructure building/upgrading issues!

Have tried to see the plans but I cant get into the file!

KEEP GOING DADS!!

Best wishes Daniel

PS Thanks for that e-mail! I am happy to help, as are my family whom I said have been regular visitors to Dawlish for over 40 years!

Re: Planning Application; It seems that DARE and approx 45 residences either backing onto or very near to proposed site/Carhaix Way were consulted about this. Not sure why not all of Dawlish consulted, after all all of us will be affected one way or the other if it gets built.

Proposed access at the moment only via Carhaix Way. Approximately 140 residences. How many cars and car journeys per day would that equate to?

Needs another route? Sandy Lane? Believe TDC own land that Carhaix Way route will need to cross. Is that land for sale/lease?

Residential development in that place would, may I suggest come under the banner of, "Sporadic Development" and should not be encouraged, in fact it should be banned.

HOUSING APPLICATION submitted. See page 27 Dawlish Post 4.4.08.

Application Ref; 08/01236/MAJ

LAND AT SECMATON LANE

Note: THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT ACCORD WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN FORCE IN THE AREA IN WHICH THE LAND TO WHICH THE APPLICATION RELATED IS SITUATED.

Planning documentation can be seen on-line by logging on to www.teignbridge.gov.uk follow the planning links to public access.

Comments about the proposal must be received by 25TH APRIL 2008.

Peter, that would be the thing I would most wish for in the world, I so so so love Dawlish to bits and I am coming home when I come down as I virtually grew up there! Incidentally I did try for a job at TDC and wasnt successful! A nice home on Plantation Terrace would do me fine, or one overlooking the sea in Exeter Road!!!

Lottery win notwithstanding but would so love to come and help you full time and live in my favourite place!!!

Bogof
03 April 2008 21:00:15

Er....Daniel....you don't fancy relocating and coming down here to live do you?

What an excellent idea!

Er....Daniel....you don't fancy relocating and coming down here to live do you?

Hi Peter, you are most welcome, as I said, I am totally behind what you are doing and keeping Sandy Lane for the people!
Forward Planning is difficult to get right and there are many instances of where this hasn't worked (I work in a New Town) and where it has successfully! it is the hardest job of a Planning Policy Officer to work out and balance the needs of communities against space and nationally, the wishes of the multinational corporation, in this case Tesco!
I totally agree Peter re the loss of open space and indeed my Local Authority where I live has sold off countless areas of open space, which in my view has contributed to the rise in antisocial behaviour! I think that the skate park idea and BMX track in that area would have been great and I am sure the children around there would have loved it!
In all of this plan, are the young people being asked what they want by TDC? I would assume not, and also all of those people who wish to save this precious open space, It is amazing that the Council havent acted upon the guidance (you don't quote a source so I assume the County or then Urban District Council) produced this guidance) and ensured that the growth of the town was controlled and measured and sustainable. As I said, I work in a New Town, where the town trebled in size at the same period, with open space provision to match that growth, but not subsequently. I would be interested to see if TDC have an Open Space Needs Assessment (which are commissioned from consultants) and measure provision by ward across a range of activities, I would be very interested to see the results, because most of Dawlish now is very built up and I would say, towards the limit of its growth, without the release of green sites, which would doubtless be hotly contested.

The majority of modern sites over a certain size (Government guidance Planning Policy Statement 3 and previous guidance PPG 3) states over 15 (25 in PPG 3) units in urban areas (or lower in rural areas) can be developed to yeild benefits for the local community, including affordable housing, and also payment of commuted sums (a large cash payment) towards the development of infrastructure, community facilities and sports and leisure facilities. It would be interesting to do a FOI request to see how TDC have spent the planning contributions on sites in the Dawlish area.

Surely, and this is my professional opinion, commuted sums could be used to enhance Sandy Lane and secure its future!

KEEP GOING DADS, BACKING YOU ALL THE WAY!

Daniel

I have just recieved this email at work re the Government's new initiatives - Does this help?


FAIR PLAY
03 April 2008

MINISTERS CALL FOR:
• CHILDREN IN DISADVANTAGED AREAS TO GET ADVENTURE PLAYGROUNDS
• CITIES AND TOWNS TO MAKE PUBLIC SPACES MORE CHILD FRIENDLY
• AN EXTRA £10M ON TOP OF £225M ALREADY PLEDGED FOR PLAY


Children across the country are to get an extra 3,500 play areas and 30 local authorities will get £2 million each to build new adventure playgrounds, as part of £235m Government investment on children’s play.

Ed Balls and Andy Burnham also vowed to help tackle bullying and crime in play areas and other public spaces, improve road safety and work with town planners and developers to create more child friendly public spaces, ending the ‘no ball games’ culture.

The Ministers promised to investigate whether local authorities were being over cautious with play equipment and to support parents in balancing risk against opportunity.

For the first time ever the Government will have a new play indicator, meaning that every year children and young people will be asked how satisfied they are with their local play areas and parks.

To help them improve their play facilities, all councils will get funding for play (3,500 play areas), with 30 play pathfinder authorities getting extra £2 million for adventure playgrounds, and 43 playbuilder authorities receiving an additional £1 million for play areas.

Funding of £225 million was announced for play in the Children’s Plan, but an additional £10 million has been added to this fund, as Ministers underlined the importance of play and how it should be taken seriously by every council in the country.

Children’s Play Consultation

In order to create more high quality places to play, the Government proposes to:

1. Invest £235m over the next three years to develop up to 3,500 public play areas

2. Support 30 local authorities to develop adventure playgrounds or play parks aimed at 8-13 year olds in disadvantaged areas (20 will be announced today and a further 10 in the autumn)

3. Work with councils to ensure play areas are stimulating, exciting and attractive to children – working closely to involve children, families and communities

4. Drive local performance with a new national play indicator from 2009

5. Develop and test volunteering opportunities to support play

6. Work with planners, developers and transport officers to create neighbourhoods that meet the needs of children and families

7. Boost the qualifications and skills of the workforce

The Fair Play consultation was announced in a written ministerial statement, by the Departments of Children, Schools and Families and Culture, Media and Sport, which also included further information on how the Government intends to take forward the Children’s Plan, Children’s Trusts, the Youth Facilities Fund and the children’s workforce action plan.

Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families Ed Balls, said:

“The ability to play safely and independently is one of the defining characteristics of a good childhood. Play is first and foremost to help children have fun – but it can also keep them happy and healthy and allow them to develop and achieve their full potential. I want every child in this country to be able to benefit which is why I’m announcing today the biggest investment in play ever so that we can see 3,500 more playgrounds and 30 adventure playgrounds around the country.

“We need exciting and stimulating places for children to play which are close to where they live and easy for them to get to. But this is not just about designated spaces – public play spaces are an essential part of any community. I want local communities and children themselves to play a key role in making public spaces more child friendly. Let’s see an end to the no ball games culture and a start of a new era where children’s needs and children’s play areas are at the heart of the planning process from start to finish.

“As parents we all want to keep our children safe and that means making sure they can play safely. But we also know that as our children get older they need to be able to learn to take risks so that they can thrive. Play is a vital way of helping them do that and if we can provide safe environments for our children and young people then as parents we can step back and let them learn from experience.”

Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport Andy Burnham said:

"Good play areas are well used by children and parents alike and provide an excellent social focus for the community, but they don't exist everywhere. That's why we're launching this strategy, to give children a stimulating and safe environment where they can let off steam, mix with others and get active. The enjoyment children get from play can give them a life long love of being active and also build up a passion for sport.

"Of course it is important that children are kept safe but this does not mean we have to wrap them up in cotton wool. I want to get children outside where they can enjoy the many possibilities that play offers rather than spending all day in front of the computer. Play can help children explore their creative side while at the same time improve their fitness. New and improved play areas will give children fantastic opportunities to do just that."

Adrian Voce, Director of Play England, said:

“The challenge of opening up public space for play is huge. It needs a bold vision and the play strategy rises to this challenge. The proposed steps should put children at the heart of their communities – not rhetorically, but physically, out playing where they belong.

“In so doing, the government has finally come good on the full scope of Every Child Matters, recognising that children’s enjoyment of play and their freedom and safety as stakeholders in public space is as important as any outcome.

“The proposed strategy is a massive step towards England again becoming a more child-friendly country. For it and the funding to have the impact they need, local authorities must now make play the priority that it has always been for children.”

The Children’s Plan set out a new agenda on how Departments will work together to support children to play. In this, the Government announced the biggest ever investment in play of £225 million. We have now added an extra £10 million to this, meaning that over the next three years we’ll be spending £235 million on helping children to play.

Hi Daniel Russell again. I thank you for your comments. Planning is the name of your game, but forward planning by those that have been running our shop have not figured too well. There needs to be more open space, not less. It is amazing that space is always found for development whether for residential or commercial purposes. But when space is required for those that are already here to use and enjoy, it is non existent. 40 years ago it was said that Dawlish is lacking in open space leisure facilities, many developments have sprung up without providing for more open space. Recently there has been a consultation for the development of housing on James plantation. That area could have been used for BMX activities and even a skateboard park which would be far enough away from existing properties so as to cause them little if any disturbance. The proposed development should it go ahead would cause horrendous problems to those that already reside in the area and beyond.
I could go on!

To clarify my earlier comment, the speedway track plan we defeated was 10 METRES from our back door!

Keep going DADS!!

In reply to Peter Harry,

I know how valued the Sandy Lane site has always been as a local resource and that is why I completely support what you are doing. I have followed the campaign very closely when I have been in the area, which is on a regular basis.
I also understand the pressures of development from my everyday occupation as a council planning officer and the challenges which they face and also the importance of local grassroots action! Let me illustrate, Where I live in Halesowen, resident power have thwarted an important remaining greenbelt countryside site less than 10m away from our house be replaced by a speedway track, which would cause horrendous disruption and also inconvenience for local people and i worked to arrange a public meeting, work with members and do all what you are doing in this case.
I am appalled that another case of developing valuable green (and cheaper to develop than brownfield) land is being perpetuated (as I said, where I live has been full of this over the years, some of it less than beneficial to the area)

Incidentally, Peter, have you got hold of the TDC Local Plan (Local Development Framework) and a copy of their Open Space Needs Assesment to see what the level of provision in the ward is required?

Also, TDC need to set town centre economic viability targets for retail and commercial activity etc, may be worth investigating.

I have watched over the years, the increasingly busy nature of the A379, especially in high season with caravans on narrow roads and the tourist traffic (which I contribute to). I don't want Dawlish to become a clown town as it is perfect the way it is. Dawlish has always been somewhere I have been proud to call my second home and always love to come and see it and always will. It has so many happy memories and having travelled all over the world, nowhere else holds the same appeal.

The small shops in Dawlish do appear to have prevailed and I understand your concerns re their long term sustainability. I have got to know several of the shopkeepers personally over the years and I do understand their concern. The major factor of the decline possibly was the new Tesco at Exeter and the upgrading of Kingsteignton to a Tesco Extra, then also the Sainsburys at Newton Abbot and Exeter.
When I stay at the Warren, I used to use Gateway at Dawlish (till it closed and turned into a CoOp which isnt as good) then Liptons (Co Op) at Teignmouth and then latterly Tesco at Kingsteignton as the prices were lower, but how I missed talking to Dave at the Jolly Pedlar and Mr Marshall and Mr Steventon at the Post Office, both in the Warren (Geralds never seemed to be as good and the staff as polite)
I understand re the hospital but the situation was that bad when there wasnt one, that they had to react, all of my sympathies go out to the older people and how they are treated.
The One Stop is not really a substitute for a supermarket and here I agree with comments made elsewhere on the site that the retail choice for residents locally is poor but across the Country and in Dawlish I don't agree with the closure of Crown Post Offices and the Dawlish Facility was well used and still houses the sorting office beyond. Is there any scope for redeveloping this site as a small local shop?
I understand comments made re the Manor House being expensive to run and do concur that the post office is a better site for the Town Council - Could the Manor House be developed for local good, such as a Museum of the town or a sort of community centre of some kind?

I understand also re the DCC report re infrastructure and the town hinterlands are now larger than the centre, with new estates such as Carhaix Way and a major failing is that the road network wasn't enhanced, something which could now be achived via Planning Contributions

In suggesting that Dawlish would need a smaller supermarket, like a Tesco Express, Budgens Express etc, I was merely suggesting that this may help to boost retail choice in the town over Co-Op and Costcutter and would not require such a large site to be developed and indeed, could be provided in a presently existing vacant building. I echo some people on the site who were saying the choice of shops etc were poor and would boost local trade by keeping more people local.

I understand what you mean about soulless town centres and monotonous shops. This is what has happened in the Midlands and elsewhere as been demonstrated. Maybe by thinking smaller, this would enable retail provision to be extended in the town centre (and not out of town, with over 20 years growing up near to the massive and monolithic Merry Hill Centre I hate and detest) and would help to give the choice which some on the site had commented and would also, as has been mentioned on the site

Like everyone here, Sandy Lane needs to stay and I will back you all the way.

Like I said, anything I can help with (as a LA Planning Officer) I am prepared to do, that is how strongly I feel about this.

KEEP GOING DADS!!!!

In reply to Daniel Russel.

The Sandy Lane site has always been a valued local resource and one of the jewels of the town. Without tight controls to prevent increasing development on that now over-crowded site, it will no longer be a beautiful open space, it will become another concrete jungle. They need to provide more open space, and stop the insatiable appetite of building more on it.

You mention how busy the A379 is, but all roads will be made that much busier, IF a supermarket appears. The fact is we do not need a supermarket, full stop. Small is beautiful. We do not want to become a clone town.

You said that at least the small shops of Dawlish appear to have prevailed. That is because we have kept the big supermarkets away - so far, but I can assure you, some are hanging by the skin of their teeth.

You mentioned the hospital - the one we have now has a job to cope. I know many older folk that have had to be dumped elsewhere because they have no room here.

Your comments about the post office closure - well the site of the One-Stop (small Tesco shop) in combination with the post office is owned by a councillor, perhaps you had better ask him how that swap was engineered.

In the 70’s a report from Devon County Council stated, without new road infrastructure, Dawlish would reach a manageable capacity of 10,000 to 12,000. We now have over 13,000 and some want to cram in more.

You said that you think Dawlish Town needs something like a Tesco Express or smaller supermarket, and then maybe these could be extended in the locality, such as Exeter Road, Oakland Park etc. I ask why? Within 14 miles of Dawlish we have two large Tesco stores, three large Sainsbury’s, Asda, Somerfields and many more like Aldi, Lidl etc, So why is more needed? To have a large supermarket in Dawlish WILL destroy the town and instead of you coming away on holiday to a charming seaside town, you'll be visiting another town like every other. Heartless, soul-less and with identical shops. Hardly a holiday - it sounds more like a home away from home.

I'm only 5 so I can't type, but my mum is typing it for me. I came to Dawlish last year and we played football on the playing fields. Please let me play there again. I really like it as it's a big open space and I can run and kick my ball. My dad likes it there too. He pretends to watch us but he's having a kip really.

We come to Dawlish a lot and we would be so upset if we were to lose that beauful leisure space. We use it often for picnics and a break from the beach. It's what brings us to Dawlish. I do hope you manage to save it. We love it, it's always busy and the local people must use it lots.

Have you seen or heard about the Independent today which reports the dreaded Tesco’s buy-up of Seaton’s leisure and holiday facilities? The site of the holiday village has been closed, along with the swimming pool, gym and nursery school. There are no proposals for the 15 hectare or a timetable for its redevelopment and no housing for the 80 holiday village staff who live on the site. This village hosts 40,000 visitors a year. Lizzie Bewsher, head of a community group opposed to the plans, Stand Up 4 Seaton, said if Tesco (who refuse to meet the local residents) build a store in Seaton it will be its tenth outlet within 22 miles. A Waitrose is 7 miles away. 19 miles for a Sainsbury, Asda or Morrisons. The 152 staff at the Lyme Bay Holiday Village have received redundancy letters saying they will be closed down in January.

Forgot to say that the Co Op has replaced Gateway but doesnt appear to be as good a shop! but to the lady who suggested farmers Markets, this is a brilliant idea and Dawlish needs more events to get people into the town! Might I suggest you try a company called LSD Promotions who run such events by me in the Midlands and I believe across the country! I dont have a number though.

Keep Going DADS!!!

PS To Cllr Allan Connett and other Dawlish Councillors (including Wally Protheroe who I know well from the Mount and Ted Hockin) dont sell this land off, keep it for the people who want it.

As a very regular visitor to Dawlish over the last 29 years (and my family over the last 40) I see a growing, not a declining town, especially with the increasingly residential nature of the Warren but one where there needs a supermarket more locally situated, to the benefit of the local community.

Of utmost importance also is the important recreational resource that is the Sandy Lane site, it has always been a valued local resource and one of the jewels of the town.
I think both the Sainsburys and Tesco proposals are not in suitable sites, one meaning the loss of playing fields and one meaning over stretching an already busy road.

I remember when there was both AXE and Gateway supermarkets in Dawlish and both have closed, but I dont really think the decline of the town has been severe. If you want to see severe, you look at where i live in the Midlands, where Merry Hill has decimated all local towns nearby and the only thing there is is charity shops and pubs, at least the small shops of Dawlish appear to have prevailed. Also, the closure of the cottage hospital in Hospital Hill was replaced with a new hospital, as it was needed and present situation couldnt cope!

I agree with the suggestion to move the Town Council to the old Post Office (why this closed in the first place one will never know) as this would be more central location,

Teignbridge Council have invested in Dawlish, but for many years this investment has not been enough and with land prices (I am a planning officer by the way and will assist where I can) the carrot of always selling the land is there. Unfortunately unlike Teignmouth, there is not the option of redeveloping a car park for the new Co Op store anywhere.

I think personally that Dawlish Town needs something like a Tesco Express or smaller supermarket, and then maybe these could be extended in the locality, such as Exeter Road, Oakland Park etc. Is there a brownfield site on the edge of town which could be used? or alternatively a redundant site or empty properties which could be regenerated? Also in Guisborough, North Yorkshire, they built a new Morrisons behind an existing Georgian shop frontage, is this an idea?

Well done for all your campaigning and hard work to thwart the efforts of Tesco, I hope you do succeed in saving Sandy Lane. Dont do what we did here and sell out to Tesco, if you want to see Tescoville, look at Cradley Heath, Kidderminster, Stourbridge, Dudley!!!!

I wouldn't say that the Sainsbury proposal at Shutterton Bridge had received 'overwhelming support' necessarily. I think the consultation Sainsbury's held was a bit of a damp squib. (But then compared to the Tesco fiasco I'm sure anything would!). I think the Sainsbury proposal has attracted less opposition, rather than "overwhelming support" and there is a big difference between the two.

Sorry, this is going off at a bit of a tangent but the word Totnes made me think 'alternative' which made me think this website

www.yarnertrust.org

Chris does have a valid point about supermarkets lowering the local cost of living and it is interesting that Totnes is held up as a good example of a town retaining its uniqueness. Most of us wish to maintain and improve Dawlish as a unique town. Totnes has managed well and accepted Morrisons within walking distance of the town centre. The town centre shops seem to have evolved and adapted to this and seem better because of it. However, Morrisons did not build on a widely used recreational area as Tesco propose in Dawlish. I am not anti-supermarket, just wish to retain Sandy Lane for future generations as other generations have maintained it for me. We owe it to them as their legacy to us. Tesco's proposals lacked imagination and understanding and their arrogance, demonstrated in their campaign has made me change my shopping habits. The Shutterton proposals do show flair and imagination and seem to have enjoyed overwhelming support.

Yes, we must save Sandy Lane, that’s a priority. At the same time we should, in my view, be resisting plans for a new supermarket. The days of supermarkets is ending, with the days of cheap oil. What Dawlish needs is a core group of people interested in exploring Dawlish becoming a ‘Transition Town’ – anyone who doesn’t know what that is, look it up in google. More and more towns are joining the movement. Towns with ‘something special’ – those which are not yet dead towns or clone towns – have a head start, and Dawlish is special, but it won’t be if we let that supermarket in; we’d be at the back of the Transition queue then, sadly. I think Dawlish is still special, and if you do too, let’s get together – this could be fun! If Totnes and Ambridge can do it, so can we! Chris

This site and group is NOT about supermarkets. It IS about saving our leisure fields and recreation ground in the face of potential development - whether they be supermarkets, housing developers or even the football club wanting to fence the whole area off for their own personal use! Some of our members do want a supermarket but NOT ON SANDY LANE.

If it is a small group as you claim Chris why are you so worried? And please note - DADS is not against a supermarket as such (although some of its members may be) but against a supermarket, houses, or anything other then leisure facilities being built on Sandy Lane playing fields.

I'm really sick of these people moaning about tesco in dawlish , it would be brilliant. Not having a supermarket in the area increases the cost of living and isn't good for the environment. People travelling to supermarkets outside the town produces more pollution than large lorries driving into the town and people walking to the store. Dawlish seriously needs this to still be an attractive place to live and a small group of moaning nimbys are trying to ruin this opportunity for the town.

Chris

On this mornings local Radio - there was a discussion about Tesco wanting to build a Supermarket at Seaton, Devon.
I came in right at the end of the discussion - obviously Tesco are hell bent on building on an area where there is some sort of Holiday Accommodation existing now - which, of course, they would demolish - but, it was said, that Tesco had made a statement saying that Shopping was a REACREATIONAL ACTIVITY ! How long before Tesco say that to back their intentions at Sandy Lane, Dawlish ?

Are you fed up with relying on shops and supermarkets for your needs? Ever dreamed of growing your own food and rearing your own animals but never thought it possible?

KEO films, the makers of River Cottage are looking for families who have had no experience of gardening, smallholding or farming but who are ready to commit to an experiment in self sufficiency for a new CHANNEL 4 SERIES.

To find out more about this, e-mail rivercottage@keofilms.com or phone 0845 867 2694 and leave a message or call 07811 443 961 and ask to speak to Vanessa or Charlotte

Thats what we need to do here. Keep Dawlish as is, and get tourists to come to see it's uniqueness, not come to see something they already have or bring what they are trying to escape from.

We often visit Dawlish for weekends and holidays and it would be an attrocity if the town were to lose this lovely green space. It's great for the kids and old'uns too. We like to stroll around with the dogs (you can't take them on the beach in summer) and sitting there to watch the red arrows is an annual event. DON'T destroy the Dawlish Playing fields. Obviously residents value them - we holidaymakers value them too.

Take a look at this website;

www.cittaslow.org.uk

Tesco's say: "Where strong feelings are displayed it is easy for emotions to come to the surface and it seems to me that this may have been the case on this occasion and on both sides"

Now, I can understand the "strong feelings" of the community - as they watch Tesco's trying to build a supermarket on our leisure facilities. But... strong feelings from the Tesco's T-shirt brigade? Now why would that happen? To them it's just another store, a money-making, community-destroying, soul-less box. Perhaps they are on some massively juicy bonus if they got this one through?

At the end of the page on, "What TESCO will not tell us".

"Nice that they are blaming the community!!!!! And even though they acknowledge that their "side" was to blame, and they want to pass the blame to the community to share. They have certainly not apologised for their team's
actions - instead only that the community's approach had affected the Tesco's team's approach. Obviously they expected a welcome response from the people from whom they are attempting to steal leisure and recreation facilities!!!!!"

It has been my experience, that when those in so called authority are cornered, they wriggle like a worm on a hook. So there is nothing new in their comments either.





"You'd think that with Tesco's £billions they'd have managed to give their poor team a little training"

To return to the issue of Sandy Lane and in particular the proposed housing development on land south of Secmaton Lane.

It looks like the unmade part of the lane that runs up between the Scout Hut and the back gardens of houses in Kingsdown Crescent will be made into a proper road and will lead to the new development up through the James Plantation/The Old Pig Farm area. However, I am told that the width of this will not widen and that it will therefore stay single lane. It needs to be made into a proper road etc so that emergency vehicles can gain access to the proposed housing development. Unless emergency vehicles need access, bollards will prevent any other vehicular traffic. So I am told.

Did anyone else visit the presentation yesterday?

voice of reason - some of us will recall the days before Supermarkets and experienced how the quality of life in our Country has declined with their growth. You have my vote.

Concreting over the Lawn/Manor Gardens may fit with what the supermarkets want better (and the govt sequential testing) but is as criminal as building on Sandy Lane.

But here's a concept - NO SUPERMARKET AT ALL. What do you think? Stuff the "where's it going argument" how about "nowhere"?

I wasn't talking about the Lawn. I was talking about The Manor Gardens. They are two entirely different places, although quite near to each other.

Mammon, get a grip! There are other more important things than money! For example, social standing, pride and reputation. Imagine how building on either Sandy Lane, OR the Lawn would destroy all these things for OUR COUNCILLORS? Apart from getting voted out of office, they'd be publicly condemned and wouldn't be able to walk down the road without a few boos and jeers! Think about it - lovely lolly or public disgrace? (although we all know what toots your flute!)

Don't forget - today - Thursday 21st Feb, Cavanna and Bovis Homes are doing a pre-planning consultation exercise at Gatehouse Primary School 2.30pm-8.00pm concerning their plans to develop land south of Secmaton Lane for residential purposes.

Wot? Concrete over the Manor gardens, that lovely oasis of calm in such a built up area? Never! I was up there only the other day and thinking what a lovely place it is. The sun was shining the sky was blue. The brook was busily babbling it's way to the sea. The ducks and swans were busily bobbing up and down. The elderly were sitting on the benches taking in some winter sun and the children were playing. And we should lose this to a supermarket and its car park!!!

On the other hand though....it is centrally located and sequential planning does say that town centre sites must be considered first........and a supermarket sited there would draw people into the town so it could be of benefit to the town centre traders........and a lot of people could walk to it from their homes (lots of houses around that area) and after all the point, or so we are told of Dawlish 'needing' a supermarket is to reduce car trips and thus carbon emissions, (although how one carries home a weekly supermarket shop without a car is beyond me). And it might well draw a lot more people into the town to do their supermarket shopping - along with a lot more cars!

Still......money talks. That's why so many people worship me.

Bag lady - no problem with parking. We just fill in the stream and pour concrete over the town green, zapping any duck, tree, flower and blade of grass left - with a new housing estate on Sandy Lane to complete the job. Sorry kids, money comes first.

Trolley person - is it just me, or does your town-central suggestion have a touch or brilliance? It'll keep shoppers in the town, AND reduce our carbon emissions from driving too. The most damaging car journeys are those short in-town hops, with their stops and starts.

This way people could even take the train to get their shopping!

Word to the wise though, we need a GOOD central supermarket (M&S/waitrose) to pull this one off.

Hey not-off-your-Trolley-Dude, this sounds good - but no car-parking....! Oh, hey, that doesn't matter though - because everyone was saying they WANT to walk to the supermarket, didn't they! Even the supermarkets were saying that we'll all walk there!
That'll be alright then.

I agree that if we MUST have a supermarket (and that IS debatable) it needs really and truly to be in the town centre. So........I suggest the site of The Manor House and gardens. I mock not. Think about it.

1. I understand the Town Council wishes to vacate The Manor House.

2. Manor House, although a lovely building, I understand costs a small fortune to maintain.

3. Relocate the Town Council to The Old Post Office?

4. Or, from proceeds of sale of Manor House and part of the gardens, redevelop the site of the Shaftesbury Theatre and Old Post Office into purpose built theatre/cinema/museum/library/art gallery/municipal offices complex.

5. Supermarket and its carpark can then be sited in Manor Gardens area. This would make it central to the town centre, lots of people could walk to it (lots of houses nearby!) and would draw people up through the town from the sea front area thus potentially helping out the small traders.

Well, what d'ya think?

MacDonalds? Why not? And a Pizza Hut perhaps? Located on Shutterton site along side Sainsburys?

Peter Harry - based on the same logic that as 70% of people shop outside Dawlish, then we need a supermarket. I can also guarantee that 100% of Big Macs eaten by Dawlish people are bought outside Dawlish. Does that mean we're going to get a MacDonalds too?

The ONLY reason that TDC and Dawlish Town Council don't want Sandy Lane to be a village green is because they want the flexibility to develop it at some time in the future.
As they both KNOW village green status allows recreational/leisure developments, that can only mean they must want commercial, residential, retail development flexibility.

'Confused' is so because he or she is being logical and caring. Perhaps all would make sense if we could clear up Peter Harry's last posting poser and the 'Why?' of the current TDC stance. Could it be that Village Green status will not allow for the recreational use of Sandy Lane to be commercialised? Supermarkets come in many forms.

Adding to Confused's comments - has anyone done th sums to work out the "carbon cost" of actually building a new supermarket? Steel, concrete, new roads required, deliveries, and... as Mr/Mrs C' said - the additional journeys TO the Dawlish supermarket...

And......whilst I hear the argument that car journeys (for which read carbon emissions) to Exeter and Newton Abbot in order to do a weekly supermarket shop would be cut back if there were to be a supermarket in Dawlish, couldn't it be the case that the cutback in car journeys from Dawlish could be balanced out by an increase in the number of car journeys to Dawlish from other areas? Or am I missing something again in the argument?

Can someone please explain to me why it is claimed that one of the reasons that Dawlish needs a supermarket is because so much financial leakage from Dawlish goes to supermarkets in Exeter and Newton Abbot.

Surely if Dawlish has a supermarket there would still be a huge amount of leakage - straight into the tills of the Dawlish supermarket! Is that abject nonsense or am I missing something?

In response to Peter, the only things my wife and I shop for outside of Dawlish are essential items which cannot be found in the town and Supermarkets. As for yet more Supermarkets in Dawlish or anywhere else, pennies before people will cost us the Earth

Since the meeting at the DCC arranged by Younger-Ross with several notorieties in attendance, I am still trying to work out how Alan Connett can deduce that – as 70% of the people from Dawlish shop out of town there is a need for a supermarket. Surely there are many other reasons why, and I am wondering why he has latched on to a supermarket as being his main reason.
Are there any other thoughts?

Who will benefit from a new supermarket in Dawlish? Don’t let us fall for supermarket PR!

70% of shopping goes outside Dawlish already, to the supermarkets in Newton Abbott and Exeter, and 63 businesses in Dawlish have closed down in the last 20 years – so the town is declining fast.

The supermarket will be after the rest. Most business for a new Dawlish supermarket would be at the expense of local traders. This has happened time and again throughout Britain, where in-town or edge-of-town supermarkets suck the lifeblood from traditional town centres.

Don’t let’s us allow that to happen here! Let’s break the supermarket habit
See: www.habitude.org.uk/dawlish.htm for more info

If you've ever wanted a 2 minute guide to the supermarket argument in plain English, then check out this site.
http://www.habitude.org.uk/dawlish.htm

Just to let you know that our campaign to protect Sandy Lane with Village Green status is to be featured on the Politics Show, this Sunday, BBC1, at mid-day.

Fortunately we managed to deal with a number of "myths" bandied about by certain people, the main one being that if the Village Green status goes ahead, then the land cannot be built on for leisure or recreation purposes.

This is absolute tosh, and if you wish to check with the Open Spaces Society you'll find out that "the land may be developed so long as the development is for the recreation and leisure purposes, and for the further enjoyment of the land."

Another myth was that Village Green status would prevent the building of the skate park. Three points here: 1) The skate-park IS going ahead, seemingly before the status is approved. 2) The skatepark could have gone ahead even if the Village Green status is granted (see above) And 3 ) You're all aware that we AMENDED the application so that the skate park CAN go ahead in any case . So why would anyone trot that old chestnut out? That's an old smoke screen - surely you could do better than that!!!!

We are, as you probably know, still waiting to hear from Devon County Council on the application, and with the interest of Tesco's and potentially other developers, it's vital that this land is protected, so it's fantastic that we're getting such good exposure, long may it continue!

The great thing is that the land is so beautiful and so well used, that as soon as the media view it, they are immediately onside with our campaign! They are also shocked that not only are the local council(lor)s objecting to the Village Green application, these same council(lor)s are also saying that they refuse to give the land any other formal legal protection!

Like us, the media seems to think it can only mean one thing - that in the future the councils want to have the flexibility for (commercial/retail/residential) developments on the land.

We have pointed out that they (Councillors) could consider a different form of protection, eg: deed of dedication, but they simply won't. We explained to the media that these politicians are saying their "word" is enough. Even if we trust the "word" of politicians (and I have to say, that there's no reason not to) - the problem is, they only hold their respective positions for a short length of time - until the next election! So, change of face OR change of mind, either way - without FORMAL LEGAL protection the land is wide open again to developers all over again...

Check out The Politics Show at mid-day on BBC 1 this coming Sunday (17th). Has a 20 minute regional slot which this time should feature Dawlish.

Open letter to Alan Connett, Leader of Teignbridge District Council, following MP's meeting at Dawlish Community College, Tuesday 12th February.

Dear Alan

It was a shame that you had to leave the MP's meeting early. Fortunately I did get the opportunity to publicly address your comments about village greens, when you said they could not be developed for leisure use in the future. Your comments were: "Who can see into the future, 5, 10, 50 years time, when the community may want additional leisure or recreation facilities on Sandy lane? If it is protected by a Village Green application, that will not be possible."

However, the facts are:

Village Greens CAN be built on in future - so long as it is for leisure purposes and for the further enjoyment of the land.

Now you and I know we're never going to see eye-to-eye on Village Greens, and we are still awaiting the outcome from DCC, so let's park that argument completely. Covenants are worthless, and can be overturned - we both know that.

What is vital though is that many, many people would like to see *some* formal legal protection on the land. If not a village green status, then perhaps some other formal protection. A Deed of Dedication perhaps?

I understand that this is something that a land-owner can put on the land, it can last for say 25 years, and the land is still "available" after that time. It could even have stipulations such as use for "sport, leisure, recreation and youth/community centre", so it can evolve over the 25 years.

I ask you again, on behalf of the residents of Dawlish and further affield, if you would consider what formal legal protection can be given to this land? And, please, before you tell me that your "state of mind" is the legal protection I seek, as we all know, and as your own officer put in writing to me: "councillors are not in a position to bind a council to a course of action in perpetuity in the way you are seeking. Over time the views of councillors may change and new councillors are elected. For this reason you cannot expect Cllr Connett to give you the guarantee you require of behalf of the Council."

Because the bottom line is - your successor, all the successors to all the current councils , may not be as honourable or dependable as you. In which case, your current "stance" is nothing more than a stay of execution. Is that a gamble you're willing to take?

All the best
Sue Haswell

PS: I've cc'd this to councillors. It would be interesting to receive their comments too. Do you want to see this land legally and formally protected - or are you willing to gamble with Dawlish's assets?
-------------------------

Don't forget:

PUBLIC MEETING TUESDAY 12TH FEBRUARY. DAWLISH COMMUNITY COLLEGE. 7.00PM - 8.45PM

"DOES DAWLISH NEED A NEW SUPERMARKET AND, IF SO,WHERE?"

All welcome

Very sadly .....

1.The ITV programme about Tescos............ should sink a few ships!!

2. Local residents should be "Waving the Banner".....

3. After viewing the programmre on ITV3 - JUST who on earth would EVER trust TESCOS??????????

So, the skatepark goes ahead and we loose the trees! So much for Devon being a green-focused and environmentally friendly county! Trees go, concrete arrives. Anyone want to open a book on how long it will take for the kids to get bored with the skatepark? My money is on 6 months. We'll have lost trees and green space for nothing.

Apparently both Tesco and Sainsbury have declined to send representatives to next Tuesday's meeting called by MP to discuss whether or not Dawlish needs a supermarket.

(Source: Express & Echo 6.2.08)

Lynne, I think you will find that it is the field directly behind the Gatehouse primary school, That field along with James plantation, are owned or part owned by the same people.

Seems those houses that have been a long time in the planning for those unused fields just to the north of Sandy Lane Playing Fields may now be up for development.

I understand that both Bovis and Cavanna Homes are holding a pre-planning application consultation on their plans for residential development on a site south of Secmaton Lane. This 'consultation' will be held at Gatehouse Primary School on Thursday 21st Feb (that's half term week) 2.30pm-8.00pm.

Someone asked how long Dave Fenner's been a director at the club. Well according to a news article dated 5 August 04 he was a director then. Does that answer the question? Or do we need to know when he was made chair?
Here's where the articles are:
http://www.dawlish.com/News/Other-1629.aspx and

http://www.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?command=newPage&nodeId=134821&contentPK=10718883

You're right! A nice downhill/uphill slope that's naturally occuring would be perfect for them. Nothing else can be done with that land either! Of course they could just make the skatepark smaller. Who said it's got to be a certain size? Knock a few foot of it and we can keep the trees.

Teresa Green. They have moved the boundary of the cricket pitch as far as is possible, the top side is right up against the leisure center.
Isn't there room up near the scout hut to place it, down hill as well. Isn't that what they require to make it more exciting?

Anyone know who was the Chairman of Dawlish Town AFC on10.06.2005? We'd be interested in knowing cos that's the date the football club agreed that Chelverton Deeley Freed Ltd (on behalf of Tesco?) could have an option on their (the football club) lease. And how do we know that? Simple. Land Registry documents.

Shocking that they should take down those trees. They only have to move the skate park a bit and they could keep the trees. We are supposed to be supporting the environment and ecology, not destroying it!

It is my understanding, (rightly or wrongly) that any land owned by a local authority or any sub-division of that authority, has to be offered the land to all other authorities before it is put up for open tender.
If there is anyone that can add to that, it would be most helpful.

I've got a copy of the land registry for the area and it shows - clear as a bell, that DAWLISH ASSOCIATION FOOTBALL CLUB set up an "option to purchase" in June 2005, so that Chelverton Deeley Freed (one would assume, Tesco's developers) can purchase the land/lease. hmmmmm.

Will we have to come to this?
http://www.thisiswesternmorningnews.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=248235&command=displayContent&sourceNode=248201&contentPK=19687693&folderPk=115131&pNodeId=249131

Unfortunately, I am the only one to object to both the planning application and the disposal of land to house the skatebord/bmx park.
I am not against improving any facility for our youth - why should I be? but I am against the location proposed for it. I have done much research on this subject, and I conclude that those who have been responsible for it have let the people of Dawlish down badly. In fact, it is appalling. We have now seen access to the Astroturf barred to all unless they pay a fee, (which I understand has been the case but not always applied) our money provided for that facility, so why should councillors vote for a charge to be levied to use it, (especially where our youth is concerned. One faction saying, “keep the youth of the street’s”, another saying, “if we do, we will charge them”.
The site of the playing fields (which most of you must now realise) is the only site in Dawlish. As long ago as 1948, a document has this to say, "The Town Map Area is not well provided with playing fields, and the total area available falls far below the national standard." It continues with, "Playing fields and children’s play spaces should be provided to serve any new development in the Town Map area." Now there have been a few play spaces provided but no new playing fields. Instead, the playing fields that were kindly donated by the Pidgley Estate, has never been added too. We can see over the years it has been continually used (destroying space) for other leisure projects, and now they want to lay a concrete slab on this valued open space.
That is the crime!
There is a Development Control Committee meeting at Forde House on Feb 4 2008 where I shall not be available to attend, should anyone else wish to go along, it starts at 9.45 a.m.
This project should not go ahead on the proposed site no more than Tesco should be allowed to gain a strangle-hold on other parts of it.

Anyone else picking up that Sainsbury are bottling out of the MP's public meeting on 12th Feb. Wonder if Tesco will do the same?

Talking of trees being cut down...........

Have you seen that on the plans for the new Youth/Community Centre, Skate Park/BMX complex that ALL the trees on one side of that lovely avenue in front of the sports pavilion are to be felled. What ever is the world coming to? (Global warming that's what!). And I suppose that if, heaven forbid, Tesco got the go ahead to build at Sandy Lane then the trees on the other side of the avenue would get the chop 'n all!

Appalling, absolutely appalling.

Quote: "Looks to me that the road from Starcross up to Mamhead coming out at Telegraph Hill is going to be the solution for the traffic problem...." .....Isn't the Mamhead Rd in a conservation area???

Looks to me that the road from starcross up to mamhead coming out at telegraph hill is going to be the solution for the traffic problem, yes it will have to be widened but haven't there been a lot of trees cut down lately !!

The Sainsbury public consultation on it plans to build a supermarket near Shutterton Bridge will take place on Friday 1st Feb 10.00am-6.00pm and Saturday 2nd Feb. 10.00am - 4.00pm. in The Mayor's Parlour, The Manor House (Town Council Offices), Old Town Street, Dawlish

"Does Dawlish need a new supermarket, and, if so, where?". This will be debated at the now rescheduled public meeting organised by our MP, Richard Younger-Ross on TUESDAY 12TH FEBRUARY 2008. At DAWLISH COMMUNITY COLLEGE 7.00PM -8.45PM. Speakers have been invited from Tesco, Sainsbury, Friends of the Earth, Council for the Protection of Rural England and other local interested parties.

What you say David could hold true whatever brand of supermarket comes to Dawlish and wherever in Dawlish it ends up being sited.

One thing that appears to be overlooked in general is the likelihood that huge delivery lorries will have extreme difficulty getting around the road system in Starcross. So it is likely we will be seeing a relief road just for the benefit of wretched Tesco! The result being not just Dawlish being damaged with loss of local trade and traffic growth, but Starcross and Kenton also, not to mention the surrounding countryside!

Take a look at this for the type of thing Tesco get up to once they gain a foothold. It is an article entitled:" Tesco Expansion Would Threaten Littlehampton Traders". Log onto: www.theargus.co.uk/display.var.1959303.0.0.php?utag=30823

Yes, DL, couldn't agree more. We absolutely MUST keep this land open for recreation. If Tesco's (or others) think they can build on Sandy Lane but then substitute the space they take with other space - then why don't they go build on the "other" space in the first place!?

Hi Peter, I just wonder if there is a good reason for locking up the Astroturf? It does seem crazy to prevent people having access to something that is well used and beneficial all round, but perhaps there's a very good reason...? Anyone? And is this the sort of lock-out treatment we're going to be getting on the Sandy Lane playing fields ... unless they are protected as a Town Green? I'd like to know why the Devon County Council solicitor is taking so long in reaching a decision too.

Howzabout this.
There are a number of children that use the Atroturf, there are others that use it at night --It keeps them fit, and keeps them off the streets causing mayhem as some are accused of doing.
Recently the gates have been locked at night and to gain access, there is a £15 charge, non-refundable which will then allow entry to it.
This is something that needs to be rectified quickly. Are there any other views on this subject?

The Sandy Lane playing fields should be preserved not only for us but for kids who will use it in the future. This present generation of children gets less exercise than we did - and consumes far more calories. For the first time in human history it's easier for our kids to get hold of vast amounts of food and stuff it down than to go out and kick a ball around. It's a health disaster waiting to happen. We should prioritise our open spaces not cover them in concrete. We don't need more cheap food, we need healthy kids. And to have healthy kids we need safe open spaces within walking distance of their homes. Not more supermarkets and car parks.

According to MP's column in Dawlish Post the meeting that had been due to take place yesterday (Friday 11th Jan) will now take place on TUESDAY 12TH FEB AT DAWLISH COMMUNITY COLLEGE

Just a reminder that the public meeting concerning the 'Supermarket in Dawlish' issue scheduled for this evening (11th Jan) at Dawlish Community College has been CANCELLED. It is hoped that it will now happen next month sometime.

Anyone any idea why Devon County Council solicitor is taking soooooooo long to decide whether or not to recommend Town Green status for Sandy Lane Playing Fields?

What I've heard is that Sainsbury's didn't want to do public meeting until after they had done public presentation in early Feb. So....in order not to give Sainsbury's an excuse not to turn up MP decided to postpone meeting until after early Feb.

Will be interesting to see if either Tesco or Sainsbury's find further excuses for not attending rescheduled public meeting because, if so, then they really will be birds of a feather and at that point I shall decide that they can BOTH get stuffed!

I understand it was Sainsburys who decided not to turn up to the MP's meeting. Surely they can't be that small an organisation that they couldn't find ONE person to turn up!!!!! Shocked at you Sainsburys! Hope you're not going to treat us to the same level of arrogance and bullying that we got from Tesco's.

Ahem!
You may think like that, but you have to look at the picture in the round.
Humphrey Clemens is the Chairman of the Finance and General Purposes committee of Dawlish Town Council. He is also I believe to be the Chairman of the Newton Abbot Conservative group. The conservatives hold the balance of power on Dawlish Town Council. Yet it is that council that has still got an objection against the application for the Village Green status on the table.
Does that bring it back on track?

Interesting as some of these postings are, are we not getting a tad off topic?

I said watch this space, so here it is.
Sauce for the self-immolating gander.

Humphrey -- better known to his fast-diminishing number of friends as Hrrumph! – Clemens is really becoming a sad bad-tempered old man.

At the end of the council meeting on Wednesday, he turned on a number of voters who had been watching proceedings at the Manor House, describing them as ignorant.
This would have normally have been treated with the contempt it deserved but for one small matter concerning the rules of conduct.
In a recently- published leaflet, voters are warned that offensive behaviour ‘will not be tolerated’ and could lead to legal action being taken.
When one of the ‘ignorant’ voters protested and demanded an apology, he was told the meeting was over and the rules didn’t apply.
So, that’s all right, then. One rule for councillors, another for the people that put them there – or, in the case of Dawlish, didn’t put them there – 75% of councillors, including the mayor, can’t muster a vote between them.
Hrrumph! Describes himself in the register of ‘members interests’ as a farmer. In fact, he provides bed and breakfast in his Devon County council owned farmhouse at Holcombe.
Not so much a grumpy sad old man in welly boots, more like a ninny in a pinny.

Did you see Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall last night being thrown out of Tesco's? The manager accused Hugh of calling him an "arsehole", though it was on camera that he did nothing of the sort! Tesco's manager chucked him out anyway.... Does that sort of bullying behaviour ring any bells? Recent consultations, perhaps? Perhaps employees have to go through a similar scheme: Totally Warped Attitude Training??? before they are allowed to become...well you work it out!

Why should Tesco's care about free-range chickens? Heck they don't even give a pluck about free-range children! Trying to take away the community's recreation and leisure facilities. They are only eggcited about their own profits, not the damage they do to communities!

I wonder how many other Sainsbury Nectar card holders got Sainsbury's mail shot about these chicken programmes? Whilst it's good to see the programmes have had an effect on some of the supermarkets I note that Tesco appear unaffected. "Every little helps" doesn't seem to register with them when it comes to improving chicken production methods does it?

Perhaps Mel C should work for Iceland?

In answer to 'supermarket body parts' question.
(a) Mrs Tesco
(b)Mel C. On another point, it would appear that I have upset Humphrey Clemens (councillor). At the recent Town Council meeting, he asked for an apology from me over the reply I gave to Christmas Cracker , when he/she enquired about a piece of land adjacent to Hall Lane, Holcombe. He did not get it and neither will he. Watch this space!

Q: In that obscure advertising game of "supermarket body parts", if Jamie Oliver is the face of Sainsburys, who is the body part of Tesco's? It's a two-part question. a) body part, and b) name? There's a £2.50 chicken for the best answer.

Mmmm...... let me think now.....Jamie Oliver......Jamie Oliver......would that be the same Jamie Oliver who gets paid huge amounts by Sainsbury's to promote their food?

I wasn't shocked that it was Tesco's he focused on, though. As the British public spend £1 in every £8 at Tesco's, this company is too big for "our" good! It's a scary amount of control. When will this company finally get noticed for being a monopoly and anti-competitive? Tesco's business model is damaging to the health and wealth of producers and consumers everywhere.

Hey there Red Rooster, Pukka Chuck here. Don't know about you but don't it make you MAD MAD MAD when them supermarkets didn't answer Hugh F-W's questions and refused to meet him? They just don't want to hear from real people. Does it remind you of anything? Like the consultation in Dawlish.... They want to ram a supermarket on the people here for no reason other than their own profits.

On the subject of supermarkets - have you been watching Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall's tv programme this week called "Chicken Run". 3 part programme - last one is on this evening (Wednesday) at 9.00pm on Channel 4.

Also, Jamie Oliver has programme about same subject (chicken rearing) called "Jamie's Fowl Dinners". This will be aired this Friday on Channel 4.

It would have been a very one-sided debate without the supermarkets. Who would have been there to fight their corner? Also it will be good to have the opportunity to ask a few questions of our 'friends' at Tesco's - after all the questions that they REFUSED to answer before... will they still refuse? Will they still claim they aren't building on the recreation land? Will they still threaten anyone with legal action just for asking questions??? What an interesting meeting it may prove to be...

I must say I'm singularly unimpressed that the MP cancelled the public meeting at such short notice - just because he wanted both supermarkets there! If the supermarkets can't make it then it just shows what scant regard they have for their customers anyway. Surely the meeting should have gone ahead! It was for the benefit of the town - not the supermarkets.

SUPERMARKET MEETING CANCELLED.

We have just been informed by Richard Younger-Ross's office that the meeting scheduled for this Friday (11th) and to be held at Dawlish Community College has had to be postponed. R. Y-R hoping to get meeting rescheduled next month so that representatives from both supermarkets (Tesco and Sainsbury) can attend.

That's all we know folks.

Article I refer to in my posting below is in today's (Tuesday 8th Jan) copy of the W-M-N. See page 26.

Keep an eye on the Western Morning News this week. It should be carrying an article on Sandy Lane Playing Fields/Town Green application/Tesco's plans. Will probably carry photo of us with MP, Richard Younger-Ross.

The set aside in Holcombe refered to by Christmas Cracker that he/she suggest would make an ideal site for a Supermarket is in the ownership of DCC and is part of my agricultural tenency.I have unsuccessfully promoted it as a playing field for the children of Holcombe in the past as the Environment Agency condemed it as a flood plain. That is why it is unused as it is partially under water for a lot of the time. It would not have taken Mr Harry long to find out that I am Tenent of the land as it is recorded in the members interest records in the Town Council Office.

Highly recommend paperback called Tescopoly. Author Andrew Simms. £7.99. ISBN 978-1-84529-511-0

See postings below from Wakey Wakey and Sue Haswell. I wonder if anyone from Dawlish Community Trust will be at Friday's meeting. It would be very interesting to know DCT's stance on this whole issue. Perhaps Richard Younger-Ross should invite them to speak?

Question: Where does Father Christmas go to do his shopping? Answer: Iceland.

I wonder if Tesco's will announce the result of their poll at Friday's meeting?

Put FRIDAY 11TH JANUARY in your diaries. 6 - 8.30PM AT DAWLISH COMMUNITY COLLEGE. Our MP, Richard Younger-Ross, will be chairing a meeting concerned with whether or not Dawlish needs or wants a supermarket. Speakers from (hopefully): Campaign for the Protection of Rural England; DARE; Dawlish Chamber of Commerce; Teignbridge District Council; Friends of the Earth; Sainsbury's; Tesco's.

Oh....and I expect there will be contributions from the audience.........!

Hi Wakey Wakey. Here's an extract from my last email to DCT.
"... if you can absolutely guarantee me, and put it in writing, that you, and Dawlish Community Trust do NOT support the development of a supermarket on the sport and leisure grounds at Sandy Lane, and have not entered into any discussions with supermarkets or developers regarding developing this land, then I will happily and willingly withdraw paragraphs 2 and 3... "
I've still heard nothing. The above email was sent on 28th November last year.

Is it just me or is Dawlish Community Trust rather quiet? I seem to recall that they were asked to confirm that they did not want the playing fields built on - and I don't remember seeing any response .... has anyone heard from them? Did they EVER answer the question?

Thanks for that info Peter - very interesting. I've got a blinding headache now cos those bells are ringing so loudly.

I have heard that TDC are looking for land on which to (possibly) build houses/flats. Do you think we should tell them about this bit of land? Ripe for development I should think? What d'ya reckon?

In reply to Christmas Cracker. My research has shown me that the field in question is owned by Devon County Council and the whole of the farm of which Manor Farm is the hub, has the tenant farmer by the name of Humphrey Clemens.
Does that ring any bells?

How did this 'Dawlish needs/wants a new and larger supermarket' issue start in the first place?

Beg pardon for raising an issue not directly related to Sandy Lane but I'd like to raise a general point related to a new supermarket being based in Dawlish which is this: I have heard more than one town centre trader say that if Dawlish were to have a new, larger, supermarket then one of its benefits is that it would increase trade for those with shops in the town. For the life of me I cannot see the logic of that. Perhaps someone who is of that belief could explain why they think the way that they do.

As I was travelling on the bus towards Dawlish I happened to notice what appears to be a set aside field just to the Teignmouth side of Hall Lane, Holcombe. "Well I never!" I thought to myself, " Here's the ideal site for that supermarket, why hasn't any one mentioned it? It's located between Dawlish and Teignmouth town centres and is in walking distance of all those houses sited in Hall Lane, (I believe being able to walk to the supermarket was one of Tesco's selling points for its being located at Sandy Lane...). The bus stop is very handy too. Odd that the supermarkets are ignoring it." Any thoughts why that should be anyone?

Just had a look at that article, whoo - what a wiff! Rats, bovine-excrement, who knows what else? "We're community-led not money-led".... Oh yeah? so why do a deal with Tesco's in the first place? Come on Dawlish Town FC. Who you kidding?

FAO DAWLISH UNITED (but others may be just as interested.) Take a look at FOOTBALL CLUB WORKS WITH ALL COMMUNITY. Letter from Dawlish Town AFC in Express & Echo 19.12.07 Here's the link - copy and past it into your browser: http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=137329&command=displayContent&sourceNode=137080&contentPK=19300350&folderPk=79957&pNodeId=153652

So a "yes" outcome (according to Tesco's) from the Tesco's consultation looks just as inevitable as a visit from the grim reaper or a tax bill. According to TRUE public opinion, this fictional proposed store will be just as popular as death and taxes too!

The Tesco's consultation is flawed on a number of levels;
1) They openly admitted that the leaflet was wrong - but did not correct it or withdraw it.
2) They are collecting the votes and "processing" them in-house
3) They delivered the leaflets to selected roads only (no-one backing onto the fields got one delivered!)
4) The consultation prohibited certain sectors of the population from attending by virtue of location and timing.
The ONLY point I can see for their "consultation" was so they can tick a box on their "corporate social responsibility" guidelines. I wonder if all their consultations are so flawed and unprofessional?

Problems with Tesco survey # 2. Notwithstanding the lack of control mechanisms (see my earlier posting below) can someone please tell me what is fair about Tesco's survey when a) they have set the questions; b) responses are being sent to them and c) Tescos will announce the result.

This is like two political parties fighting out an election with one of the two in total control of counting the votes and deciding the winner.

A fair poll? I think not!

Consultations, consultations. What are they for and what do they do.
Well to answer that, I would first like to remind readers of the comment made by Richard Younger-Ross MP (In case you did not know who he is, he is the MP for Teignbridge) in the Dawlish Post 5 Oct 2007.
"Public consultation generally has a bad name, as public bodies supposedly consult on what they have already decided. So bad is the name that even when local authorities genuinely consult, residents don't believe them."
First answer-- To show people that they have been given a chance to air their views whether those views are taken on board or not.
Second answer-- They show the community that the results they have collected are in the consultees favour.
Truth is hard to come by these days and consultations are an easy way to avoid telling the truth, unless of course replies to consutations are placed in a sealed box and opened in front of a packed audience of no particular preference for or against.
Did you notice the address on the form that you filled in? How many "NO to Tesco" will end up in the shredder before a count is taken?

Very pertinent questions on the "What Tesco's won't tell us" page. Shame Tesco's won't give the answers... Why not though? What are they hiding?

Is it really true about the Exeter Road home owners with options? Mr Tesco told me that there cannot be a roundabout there (as previously rumoured), as it's not on the drawn picture that they produced..... Mind you, the traffic lights on the corner of Sandy Lane and Exeter Road mentioned in the leaflet was not on the 'drawing' either.

Here's a message for Mel - Scary Spice - C.
Listen....can you hear it? Yes, that's right. That's our collective raspberry being sent to your blackberry.

Why have Tesco set up such an expensive - who pays for it? - non-valid poll at all? Every comment we make can be used to further empower them. Think I need to get my IT department, Lawyer and Blackberry on to this.

And for all of you who have answered the Tesco 'survey' with valid names, addresses, tel nos and e-mail addresses can I just point out that no doubt Tesco will be using all that information for their own ends.

But how many people (football club, Exeter Road home-owners with options) voted "yes" a number of times? A number of people witnessed a football club person taking a massive pile of leaflets saying "we'll get the football club members to vote yes".

I voted more than once! I voted SIX times at least! And I've lost count of my votes on the website - which were done from different computers/different email addresses so are untraceable. I'm a one-woman vote-flawing system. Tesco - chuck it out now! Look at the DARE poll. It clearly said you're not wanted. 96% said NO!

Problems with Tesco's survey # 1. How on earth can this survey be valid when no control mechanisms are in place to stop people 'voting' more than once?

On a not unrelated issue to the Tesco saga - it looks very likely that Dawlish will have new houses being built in the reasonably near future. Rumour has it that they could be sited to the back of the golf course in the James Plantation, Old Pig Farm, Gatehouse Cottages area. Should that rumour prove correct then of course those houses will need access roads. Perhaps those who live in Kingsdown Crescent and whose houses back onto what is still the lane in Sandy Lane might like to think about that scenario.............

Can I just reiterate that the Tesco proposal is exactly that - THERE IS NO DONE DEAL.

And even if planning permission were to be given as long as Teignbridge District Council don't sell the land or lease to Tesco - TESCO CAN'T BUILD.

TDC also have to give permission, as landowners, for change of use from football pitch to whatever else the new owners of the lease might want to use the land for. If the landowners don't agree to change of use - TESCO CAN'T BUILD.

Christopher, you're right - Tesco's will kill the town and it's not about what the shops stock - it's because regardless of what the shops sell, nobody will visit them because they'll get everything they (think they) need from Tesco's. We've got some fantastic shops in town - tiny delicatessens, great butchers, greengrocers, health-food shops. We need to support these shops! Use them or lose them!

Yes, Tesco's WILL kill off trade. For some strange reason a couple of town traders think it will do them a favour, but it won't! All research shows that within 2 years the shops will close because they can't BORROW any more money to keep going. Keep Tesco's Out

Tesco will kill off local trade , that is because all the local shops in dawlish are useless. They stock almost nothing and are over priced.

Chris

As it seems that the Teignmouth/Dawlish area needs/wants a supermarket can I suggest that Tesco locate themselves on the Broadmeadow site in Teignmouth? Whilst I understand Waitrose were originally interested in the site I also understand that they have pulled out because of the cost of decontaminating the land. Well now, as Mr Tesco has so, so, much money and wishes to locate in the area and wishes to do something for the community (that's the joint Teignmouth/Dawlish community) why doesn't he go and locate his store at Broadmeadow? That way, Mr Tesco has his store, the community has its large(r) supermarket, the car trips to supermarkets in Exeter and N.Abbot are cut back, and Sandy Lane doesn't get built on. Everyone a winner. And I'm sure the football club (Dawlish Town AFC that is) can source money from other places for the upgrading of their stadium, can't you Dawlish Town?

From a pair of new locals

We also attended the Tesco roadshow at the Langstone Hotel on Friday 9th Nov.

We raised several points and were astounded by some of the answers we received.

The first point we raised was that the representation of their proposed store covered both the fenced off Football ground and the smaller football ground at the rear, contrary to what had previously been stated by a Tesco representative, and were informed that Tesco had been told “by someone on the council” that this was once a hockey field but was now “waste ground” and only used occasionally by dog walkers.

When we pointed out that the area known as the hockey field, was now marked out and used for junior training and football, the representative did go on to say that there was a strong depth of feeling being expressed about the use of this area, but to have a store large enough to make economic sense they would need all of the area shown and may in the future have to do the same as the Newton Abbot store and build even higher.

When it was pointed out that the little grey boxes and green space around the proposed Tesco site was actually peoples houses and gardens she did agree that the representation could be accused of “disingenuousness“.

We asked why Tesco did not want to build on or near the Shutterton estate, and were told that, while Tesco would dearly love to build the new store there, Government guidelines dictate that they build within 300 metres of a town centre, in order not decimate the local shops.

We have read and heard a lot about the number of people in cars leaving Dawlish to do their weekly shopping at Newton Abbot, Exeter etc. We are sure that everyone has heard of the Devonwide Travel Pass. Most buses are travelling with empty seats, and I think us old ‘uns should make more use of this wonderful facility and cut emissions and complaints about us travelling to the out of town supermarkets at a stroke.

Anyway, to cut a long story short we both voted NO!

For anyone who's thinking that Tesco's might win - STOP! I was part of a group just a couple of years ago and we fought Tesco's off - and WE WON! So, don't let them bully you in to submission. It IS possible. Very possible. And for anyone who wants a supermarket - there are other sites, and there are other supermarkets.

As a former Trader in Dawlish, I would suggest local businesses could do far more to attract loyalty and value for money custom. Meanwhile, get on the phone to your local TV Companies because they require as many residents as possible to contact them in order to justify covering the Tesco story to the extent we require.

So, "devondel" thinks that the Football Club fence was justified by the amount of work the staff had to do in removing "dog excrement" from the pitch before playing. This pales into insignificance when it is realised just how large a pile of manure the Football Club has shovelled onto the Sandy Lane Area by objecting to the application to have Town Green Status protection on the area. Whereever the Football Club ends up - it may well find its "gate money" vastly reduced - who, in their right mind, would consider supporting them after they have allowed themselves to be bribed - selling the good folk of Dawlish down the river.

We went to the consultation Friday night and after viewing the plan we asked if the roundabout in Sandy Lane would impinge on the bowling the Tesco representative informed us that he didn't know and when asked if he had seen the site he told us he arrived in Dawlish Thursday night and there was little point of a site visit in the dark.

XXX (the Tesco representative) was brilliantly arrogant and repugnant at the Tesco Consultation, it must had taken years to get that good at it or has she found a site which provides the pills because they really work?

Fenner's address? I looked on the downloads on this website and his address is in Torquay. Look at the football objections. Football Furious I am. They are a sell-out!

I'd like to give Tesco a BIG THANK YOU for their efforts on Friday and Saturday. Seriously, I would. And do you know why? Well let me tell you - Sue's in-box is bulging with people getting in contact and who are wanting to get involved with DADS. So once again Tesco - THANK YOU! We couldn't have done it without you.

Does Fenner actually live in Dawlish? this will turn a lot of people off supporting his team, maybe they could play matches on the green roof of the proposed supermarket!!!!!!

Jimmy - why does this supermarket need to be sited in the Sandy Lane area?

Jimmy Bragg I suggest you move to INVERNESS - they must have thought they were modern and forward thinking at some stage - I bet they're not now...
Go to tescotown.co.uk, and see what your precious Tesco's have done there...
If Tesco's is what you want they have THREE stores there - so there'll be lots of cheap housing (its the only way people can get out of the place). LOTS of jobs - with three stores to choose from - there's sure to be a great selection for you. And at every street corner / junction there will be a Tesco employee giving away free sports equipment and kits / help and advice about how best Tesco can help us all / promises of whatever our hearts desire....
What planet are you from Jimmy Bragg???

Mr Bragg - Why do we have to have change, and in what context is Dawlish dying? The cost of housing for your information is appalling country wide - how is bringing a Tesco's into Dawlish going to make housing more affordable? Exactly what decline have the residents of Dawlish made to the town. Don't you think that stopping Tesco's from building at Sandy Lane is modern and forward thinking - I certainly do. As for driving and wasting hours and hours of driving time - do you ever have to go out of Dawlish for anything else? So can't you do your grocery shopping when going out of town for other things? Do as I and my neighbours do - if we go out of town shopping we get each others! Shame on you if you do not support your local supermarket (co-op), whose Ethical Food Policy is exemplary. Do you honestly believe that Tesco's would help the community, once it had built its store? The only things that will be offered to a community are given as a bribe prior to planning permission. This large majority of Dawlish that want all the goodies that you mention - do you think Tesco's will give this stuff out of the goodness of their hearts?
Mr Bragg, may I remind you of what Local Yokel said on December 3rd: large supermarket chains are companies whose aim is NOT, first and foremost, to meet the society's interests. They aren't too concerned about being excellent grocers, or supplying the nation with good-quality, wholesome food, or supporting British farmers or treating Third World workers ethically or helping working mothers to feed their children better, or preserving open green spaces as is the case here at Sandy Lane - or any other goal which many of us would approve. The bottom line is they are stock market-driven corporations whose overarching goal is to keep their shareholders happy. Do you think they make billions in profit by being kind, considerate and caring, and do you REALLY want this type of supermarket taking away YOUR leisure facilities, in YOUR town???

In swift response to Jimmy Bragg's comment. Have you seen the front page of this site? I ask you "what's in it for you Jimmy?"

The housing issues you mention, the education problems, the social problems, bringing families closer together - do you REALLY think these will be solved with one supermarket? If so, why do those problems still exist - and are exacerbated - in towns where Tesco's exist. I've heard of brainwashing but this is ridiculous. Get a reality check!

I would just like to say Thank you to Detestco for the wonderful answers given for the Tesco leaflet thingy! I have copied it word for word, and sent it off. Just in case anyone hasn't done theirs or are not aware you can also email your answers to them, to tell them to stick it!

Capitalism and true democracy are opposing forces as Tesco well know. Every penny you spend at Tesco and the like ensures the greater power of these greedy oppressors to control our elected Governments and all our lives from birth for their own selfish profit before people ends. Good to see Tesco is hell bent on destroying itself by those very values and tactics. Dawlish is not for sale.

I feel that the inclusion of a Tescos in Dawlish is simply a great idea. Slowly Dawlish is dying there are no new houses for young families and the cost of housing is appaling, soon the schools will be loosing classes. This decline is all due to the short sighted nature of certain residents in Dawlish. We need Dawlish to be a modern forward thinking town. The inclsuion of Tescos is a super opportunity that will allow many families more time together rather than wasting hours driving to and from either Exeter or Newton Abbott.
Opportunities for new jobs for the unemployed are so needed in our holiday resort, as so many are dependant upon the seasonal trade. Having a local National store will provide the community with the opportunity to ask foe help/support/donantions for local issues. These could range from new sports kits for youth teams, visiting opportunities for Cubs, Guides, local schools, Work experience!
This is wanted by a large majority of Dawlish residents, maybe you need to work out the proportion of the 13 000 people who live here, who have signed the No campaign!

Anyone thinking of voting yes wants their heads examined! Can you imagine the summer with caravans and Tesco lorries trying to get through Star Cross?

Calling DAWLISH COMMUNITY TRUST! Calling DAWLISH COMMUNITY TRUST! Our town's in need of "benefit from the moral or persuasive support of the Trust" in telling Tesco where to shove its plans for Sandy Lane. YOUR SILENCE IS DEAFENING! YOUR SILENCE IS DEAFENING!

We may need a supermarket, we may not. However not where it is proposed. The playing fields is a safe haven for children and adults to be without the risk of huge numbers of traffic.
We have football, golf, indoor and outdoor bowls, sports centre, hockey, tennis, playshool, community college, playpark, soon to be skate park and youth centre.
Who in there right mind wants to put a supermarket generating abundance of traffic in this beautiful spot.

Do we really want our main road and Sandy Lane turned into the traffic jam that we see in Kingsteignton and in Bitton Park Road in Teignmouth?

re "say no to Tesco" have you been to the presentation? It is NOT just the football pitch! It includes the old hockey pitch as well, which Tesco claim is not part of the recreation ground! This is the area fenner and Co of DTFC wanted to be excluded from the town green application - so they have known all along!

Here is the text of an e-mail sent to Melanie Chiswell (Tescos). You might also like to contact her. Her e-mail address is: melanie.chiswell@uk.tesco.com

SANDY LANE RECREATION GROUND, DAWLISH
Dear Ms Chiswell,
In the Tesco leaflet available at your consultation and which I believe has also been delivered to all households in Dawlish is written:
"7. Will the recreation ground be left alone? Yes.....We have no intention to develop or change the recreation ground".
Sorry, I'm a bit confused. Since when has the area of land, commonly known as The Hockey Pitch and where, it appears, you wish to site the actual store not been part of the recreation ground? SAYS WHO?
Since when has the area of land leased by Dawlish Town AFC from TDC and where it appears you wish to site the car park not been part of the recreation ground? SAYS WHO?
I look forward to hearing from you.

HAVE YOUR SAY: At the very back of the Tesco leaflet there is a small card asking you questions. Can I suggest you complete it as following:
Question 1. Where do you usually go for your big weekly food shop now? Answer: Mind your own business.
Question 2. Do you support our proposals for a supermarket in Dawlish? Answer: NO, NO, NO.
Question 3. What Community Issues are Important to you in Dawlish? Answer: Keeping Sandy Lane Recreational Area (All of it and that includes the land leased to Dawlish Town AFC and the land known locally as the Hockey Pitch) free from development.
Question 4. What does the Community need and what facilities are you lacking or need improving? Answer: The Community needs to be assured that Sandy Lane will not be developed. Facilities? Improvements? We will be severely lacking in green outdoor space facilities if you go ahead with your proposal. Please go away and stop threatening us. That in itself will be an improvement.
Question 5: Please add any other comments you would like to make: Answer: Go away and leave the Sandy Lane area alone.
Question 6: Name, address etc etc: Answer: S. Odoff, The Hockey Pitch, Sandy Lane, Dawlish

For those residents who didn't receive the Tesco propaganda leaflets through their door yesterday, don't worry. There are oodles and oodles of the things at the consultation. So..... when you go along today to find out what Tesco have planned for just behind your back gardens simply pick some up (oh yes, you can pick up as many as you like!) and tell Tesco what you think of them and their idea. See posting above for suggested response to their questions on the pre-paid post-card.

I am informed that Tesco delivered some few thousand leaflets around Dawlish today in order that people may vote by post. Very selective distriution though.... I live on Exeter Road (with a proposed car park backing onto my house), and I did not recieve one. Another example of vote rigging I feel........

I dont understand how people can be for this idea. The whole of Dawlish use the playing fields and even though they are saying its just the football pitch that is going to be built on, that is right outside my back gate and many others. I do not want to open my gate and see a Tescos!!!
Also, its just not the residents of Dawlish, what about Starcross and places where all the traffic and big lorries are going to be traveling through!!!!
Worst idea in History is my thought!!!

Have been to the consultation if that's what they want to call it. Hardly a consultation. just talking at us. Trying to say things we KNOW are wrong. only building on the football pitch. Pah! Regenerate the town. Pah!. No intention to develop the recreation ground. Pah! Lies lies all lies. I counted my fingers after I shook someone's hand there. The way they are going we should boycott their other shops. ASDA here I come.

On the subject of dog poo..... instead of using a poop bag why not use a Tesco plastic bag? I do! How's that for recycling?

Just been to listen to the Tescoply presentation - they seem a little shellshocked by local response. However they are lying on at least two points. 1. 200 jobs will be created! Rubbish! They include within this figure a notion of re-birth and re-generation in the centre itself bringing jobs and 2. they do not believe the old hockey pitch, on which they intend to build the store, is actually recreation ground - how convenient!

John Burley asks why the football club was given permission to fence off it's ground. The answer was that before every game the staff had to walk the pitch and remove large amounts of dog excrement and litter before playing. Just the problems Dawlish United are finding! Irresponsible dog walkers spoil the area for others - pick it up!

Need to eat does raise some interesting and relevant points, particularly as he has personal experience from elsewhere. But I assume that he, like many of us, picked Dawlish as our home for several reasons. For us it was its difference, its uniqueness. There has been some rundown of shopping, mainly as a result of supermarket presence in other local towns. But there does remain the essentials of local shops supplying locally produced food with regard to fairtrade. Any supermarket will destroy the centre as it stands. The main changes will be an increase in charity and seasonal shops. Dawlish will fall of the coach tour operators' day out. And finally need to eat; the proposed supermarketwill not stock the full range of produce you deam of. You will still need to travel at least monthly to get the full range of goods you want. I am unsure why you are still here - support Dawlish traders or get back to Tescoply Homiton!

Just one point for "need to eat". Why does he feel this supermarket should be on Sandy Lane? There are other places to stick it? Why does he want us to lose our playing fields? It's a very selfish attitude. I assume you don't have kids!

Tesco really does seem to have a problem with facts & geography doesn't it? Not only has it confused Exmouth with Exeter (see Shaney's posting below) but now, it seems, it's also confusing what land is leased from the Council by Dawlish Town AFC and what is not. And confusing Dawlish Town AFC and Dawlish United. Now, correct me if I am wrong but were we, were we not, all led to believe that Tesco wished to build on the site of the football club? Indeed their advert in our local papers last week said: "A brand new small, environmentally friendly Tesco supermarket on the site of the football club". And so, bad enough as that was, and is, we all thought "They mean the fenced off land which is leased by Dawlish Town AFC". Oh but how wrong we were! For it seems that Tesco also intend building on the land to the side of that pitch, the land where Dawlish United presently play and which abutts onto the gardens of the houses in part of Exeter Road and Henty Avenue. Hmmm! Going back what seems like light years now when the original Town Green application was submitted the objection from Dawlish Town AFC against our application was that not only should its leased land be excluded but also the land presently used by Dawlish United because, Dawlish Town AFC claimed, this land had been fenced off in the past (thus making it automatically ineligible for Town Green status). This, as many of you in Dawlish pointed out, was a load of bunkum! And do you know what? I remember thinking at the time that it was all just a ploy to keep the potiential amount of land available for development to the very maximum - and how right I was! It would seem that when Tesco also said in its advert last week " We would like to take this opportunity to stress that we do not intend to develop on the recreation ground behind the club" they didn't mean what a lot of us thought they meant (ie the unfenced land where Dawlish United play) oh no, what it seems they meant was the land between the present site of Dawlish Town AFC and the Leisure Centre. You know, that bit of land that is scheduled to have a brand new Youth/Community Centre and Skate Park built on it. Where lots of our children will be congregating. Right next to the proposed supermarket and carpark!!!!!! Please can I ask this of all of you. GO AND TELL 'EM TO STICK THEIR PLANS WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE! Many thanks.

Hey, Need-to-eat, do you REALLY live on Henty Avenue? I've asked friends and neighbours and nobody knows anyone on Henty who's moved from Honiton.... You wouldn't be messing with us now would you???

And another thing - you may cut down on carbon emissions, by not driving but you'll be choking on the added pollution when everyone turns up here in their cars!

Well, need-to-eat, you won't have far to go if you live in Henty Avenue, as Tesco's will be IN YOUR BACK GARDEN! As far as Tesco's helping local shops to thrive - how's that then? Honiton must be some sort of miraculous place - the only place in the UK where Tesco's didn't kill off local shops in about two years. Please please go and have a good long look at tescopoly.org. Then go and have a look at your town centre, that will be KILLED off if Tesco materialise here. You must know full well it's not a strong thriving town. Tesco will put the final nail in the coffin. And finally, if you really really wanted to live in a town where there is a supermarket - why didn't you move to one? There are plenty of them around.... like practically every town in the UK. Tesco-towns, a monotonous faceless high street full of the same old faces.
I, for one, prefer to live life with imagination, and to shop with integrity. Buying from local stores, staffed with REAL people. Buying REAL food, that IS honestly come by. If you honestly think that Tesco's is going to do us any favours, you need to think again.

Thank you for informing me of the possible proposed Tescos development in Dawlish. I can understand your concerns that Tescos arriving in Dawlish may undermine trade in the town. I have witnessed businesses surviving and thriving along side supermarkets, if the businesses are sustainable in the first place. The old Tescos in Sidwell Street, Exeter, posed no threat the other small businesses in the same vicinity, they thrived. As for the Tescos in Honiton, and it’s so called demise to the Town. I have lived, worked and went to school in Honiton, and have experienced how Tescos coming to the town, was a breath of fresh air. As a child in the early seventies, I remember New Street having a Butchers, Bakers and a Grocers. By the early eighties, the owners had retired. Honiton’s food sellers had dwindled well before the arrival of Tescos. The butchers and the fishmongers in the High Street were thriving before Tescos arrived and still are now. I had the chore of having to drive to Exeter or Taunton to buy any other food supplies, on my day off, because Honiton had nothing to offer, apart from fish and meat. The residents of Honiton welcomed the arrival of Tescos, they didn’t have to drive miles to buy groceries. As far as your concerns on noise pollution and extra traffic, my experience with the Honiton Tescos, bearing in mind my house was opposite Tescos. I did not once hear delivery lorries manoeuvring and unloading or being inconvenienced by extra traffic. My house was the same distance in Honiton as where I live now in Dawlish, in Henty Avenue.Tescos has brought Honiton to life, and trade is thriving there. The value of my property went up when Tescos arrived. I enjoy living in Dawlish, but have always said, it would be a perfect place to live if it had a ‘Progrown up supermarket’ like Tescos, Sainsburys, Asdas or Morrisons I am tired of having to travel to Newton Abbot or Exeter to buy my groceries, and would definitely welcome a supermarket in Dawlish. I will be cutting down carbon imitations because I will not have to use my car any more to buy groceries.

Going back to Finn's question of maintaining the land should the Town Green be granted - the Open Space Society says: "Registration as a green is concerned with rights to use the land for lawful sports and pastimes. The owner's responsibilities remain the same." So everything continues as before - except that the land is totally, totally protected against development - we don't have to keep looking over our shoulders to see a supermarket or housing developer on the horizon waving a wad!!!!

Some of you must have had the flyer from those that hold the majority on Dawlish Town Council. Yet those same people have objected to the application to allow Sandy Lane playing fields, to become a “Village Green”.
They have proclaimed no development on Sandy Lane, except for youth and leisure projects and are working hard to ensure that is their stand.
It doesn’t take much to write a letter and withdraw their objection for the area to become a village green - does it, so where does this “working hard” bit come in?

Please can someone explain to me, because for the life of me I can't see it, why a supermarket needs to be located in the vicinity of Sandy Lane playing fields. Please note I am not saying "no supermarket" I am asking why this location? It is a leisure and recreational area for young and old alike. So why spoil it with a supermarket? (of whatever size)

The enormous volume of traffic that would be generated by a Tesco at Sandy Lane makes this development unthinkable. It would be a serious hazard to the many, many children who use the leisure facilities and play area on a daily basis. (Not only that but what would the effect be on the A379?) And speaking of traffic I haven't yet seen a Tesco that doesn't require a vast eyesore car park. A Tesco development would take up a huge amount of space - would the football ground realistically be large enough for them?

A grass roof - who is going to get up there and cut it every couple of weeks -its going to look a terrible mess. Not only will residents backing onto Sandy Lane have an enormous blot on the landscape to look out on, it will be topped off with a jungle. Very thoughtful and caring of Tesco's. Do they think we are a bunch of brainless country bumpkins who can be hoodwinked by a grass roof?
Lets be clear about WHO we are dealing with here - large supermarket chains are companies whose aim is NOT, first and foremost, to meet the society's interests. They aren't too concerned about being excellent grocers, or supplying the nation with good-quality, wholesome food, or supporting British farmers or treating Third World workers ethically or helping working mothers to feed their children better, or preserving open green spaces as is the case here at Sandy Lane - or any other goal which many of us would approve.
The bottom line is they are stock market-driven corporations whose overarching goal is to keep their shareholders happy.
Do you think they make billions in profit by being kind, considerate and caring, and do you want this type of supermarket in YOUR town???

Terignbridge Friends of the Earth wish to see Sandy Lane playing fields & recreation area retained for leisure and recreation only, and not developed for supermarkets or housing. Loss of this land would be detrimental to the town.

It's not only the Town Traders who are effectively prohibited from attending the consultation. What about those with mobility issues? If they don't have their own transport or can get a lift how on earth are they supposed to get to the Langstone Cliff Hotel? Are you complying with the DDA (Disability Discrimination Act) Tesco? What about the elderly?What about the sick? What about those who work Fridays and Saturdays? The list goes on and on doesn't it Tesco. You don't seem to be too aware of equality issues, do you? Talk about vote rigging! President Putin would be proud of you.

"OPEN THE BOX PART 1"
For those who cannot attend the Tesco Consultation, here's a glimmer of what's on offer...
As a gesture to pacify the “green element” amongst us, Tesco's tell us the store they are proposing will have a grass roof. Of course, grass does tend to grow better on the ground than on roofs, and they seem to forget that not only can we not watch/play football on their roof, but the environmental, economic and community-damaging effects of building a store on the football pitch at Sandy Lane’s much-loved and well-used recreation land, will far outweigh any benefit their roof-top turf could bring!

So much for Tesco's claim of "we want to support local trade!"
They've chosen to hold their consultation on one of the few late night shopping evenings in Dawlish, in the busiest month of the year for any town centre trader!
Now any trader who deigns to stay late that night is immediately prevented from attending the Tesco consultation. Or they can attend the consultation and lose trade immediately. Are you starting as you mean to continue, Tesco's?

Did anyone see the article on page 56 in this weekend's
Dawlish Post? Headlined "Farmers call for supermarket ombudsman". Talks about the NFU saying there's a need for ombudsman "to ensure fair play in supermarkets' dealings with farmers". Apparently the Church of England which owns 125,000 acres of agricultural land has "warned that the British obsession with cheap food and the buying power of the big supermarkets were putting farmers' livelihoods at risk".

Don't forget to visit our Campaign Page. If you want to tell our local councillors what you think of Tesco's proposal then who to contact and how to do so can be found there. (And remember to tell Tesco as well!)

Anyone else notice that the time and location of Tesco's consultation doesn't exactly lend itself to enabling all those who wish to, to express their opinions. And one of the groups excluded because of the timings? THE TOWN CENTRE TRADERS!

Eric B's got a point you know. Why doesn't the football club stay where it is? If Tesco were to locate its proposed store somewhere else then Tesco would have a foothold in Dawlish. Tesco Wins. Tesco still pays for upgrade of facilities that football clubs needs. Football Club Wins. We keep the Sandy Lane area free of supermarkets. We win.

Win, Win, Win. (Bet ya Tesco won't play though)

I really don't know what to say? It beggers belief, I have only lived in Dawlish for six years, one of my main reasons for moving to this lovely town and in particular this estate was for what it had to offer in terms of my children being able to play safely, to kick a ball about, fly a kite for us just to sit quietly and have a little picnic looking at the view out to sea. My youngest son is just approaching his second birthday, and I would very much like him to have the same safe upbringing of being able to go OUT and play on open GREEN land, or shall I let him become a goverment satistic obese kid that can't go out and play as there's nowhere available outside of his own garden?
I will NOT be supporting this ridiculous idea of Tesco. They can go and get stuffed, and that's putting it politely!

Eric B, I think you will find in the lease document which you can down load from this site. That in case of fire, the insurance wil be paid to the joint parties, ie, Teignbridge and the DFC. I think it also say's, that should the payout not cover the rebuilding of the grandstand (that would suggest that in the insurance agreement, there is/could be a betterment clause) Then someone would have to make up the difference. As I never go to the football ground, I do not know if the grandstand was rebuilt, if not why not?

Just what is wrong with where Dawlish Town Football Club's current ground? If they need new stands - why can't they be built there? C'mon DFC - support your community and stay put! We've supported you!!!!!

If that supermarket gets built on the site of the Football Club then I think it will just be the thin edge of the wedge for the whole Sandy Lane area. The road system will need to be altered (widened?) for a start. If then houses get built on land to the north of the golf course (James Plantation area) then that part of Sandy Lane which presently still is a lane and which runs up past the Leisure Centre and Scout Hut could, sure as eggs is eggs, get developed and widened and become an access road for the new housing estate.

WAKEY! WAKEY! ALL THOSE WHO LIVE IN KINGSDOWN CRESCENT AND WHOSE HOUSES BACK ONTO THIS LANE.

Suggest readers log onto www.riverford.co.uk
This is where I get my fruit and veg from. It's always organic, and locally produced if possible. If not local then UK. Over the past 18 month period it has averaged 88% UK produce. Last year 92%. They do home deliveries. Give 'em a try and the supermarkets a miss. Much better for you, the environment, and the local economy.

Couldn't find the guestbook so I hope you will forgive an intrusion from an outsider - but I just wanted to say good luck. I live in Brighton and was invovled some years ago in stopping an out of town application, I know Lynne well and am glad you have such a doughty campaigner on your side. In the kind of world facing us we don't need more big stores, but we do need strong communities , local shops and leisure facilities so keep going.

So much for Tesco supporting the local town trade... They told me one of their "sweeteners" is a "park and ride" scheme from Tesco's into the town. Obviously this must run the opposite direction too - taking shoppers from the town to Tesco's....! Perhaps what one might call bitter-sweet.

Dear Tesco,

As I'm sure you monitor this website you might be interested in this: In yesterday's Dawlish Gazette you are quoted as saying " We will also have to ask if the public are keen to have a store in the town as opposed to having to travel to Exmouth, Newton Abbot or Torquay".

I think you mean Exeter don't you?! Geography doesn't seem to be your strong point does it? Are you sure you know where Dawlish is?

Re the football club being fenced off and its lease (see John's comments below). Unfortunately, that the football club is fenced off is relevant in that by preventing public access, that particular part of Sandy Lane Recreational Area could not qualify to be included in the amended Town Green application. Because, also, the football club leases this part of the land from TDC it also means that the holder of the lease, the football club, can grant an option to another, third party, over their lease.

Yes, you are correct to say there are clauses attached to the lease. Indeed I have been in correspondence with TDC about this whole thing. Here is an extract from the response I have received.

"The Football Club have a lease from the Council. They have granted an option to the purchaser over their lease. If this option is exercised then the person with the benefit of the option will become the lessee. The Council's permission was not required by the Club to grant the option".

and

"If the option is to be exercised the Council's consent will have to be obtained for the assignment of the lease from the Football Club to the person with the benefit of the option. The other clauses in the lease also mean that the Council's consent would be required for any new buildings, change of use or alteration of the premises. In summary, the option just means that given the right circumstances the Football Club's interest can be acquired from the Football Club. The Council's consent would still be required for any development of the site".

Back in 2005 TDC commissioned a study into the retail habits of Teignbridge residents. The results of this survey were published in Sept 2006. The document is quite long (over 100) pages and costs £40 to acquire a hard copy. However, if you log onto
www.teignbridge.gov.uk/media/pdf/d/0/Teignbridge_Retail_Study_Update_2005_-_2016-Restricted.pdf

you should be able to access the information. Whilst Dawlish is referred to throughout the document you might like to visit pages 7, 27, 28, 29, 30, 45, 46, 47, 85, 90, 91. Also look at Appendix E.

It surely is immaterial that the Football Club area has been fenced off for some years. Quite how they managed to get permission to fence it off is another important question that needs to be asked. But all leases do have conditions - and it must be that the lease appertaining to this section of the area of Sandy Lane stipulates quite clearly that it must only be used for recreational purposes. So the "aquisition" of this "lease" by Tesco doesn't mean it can ask for planning permission to build anything other than, perhaps, a grandstand!
John. W. Burley

Shh! Listen up everyone. Can you hear it? Listen carefully. Yes, you can hear it now, can't you? That silence. That deafening silence coming from the direction of the football club. Now, why would that be I wonder? Would it be that they have nothing to say on all of this? Nah, surely not. Or that they are not allowed to say? And if the latter who, or what, is gagging them?

Hi Finn
Glad to hear you're with the majority in not wanting a supermarket here. And you raise a valid point - after all there won't be many team sports played on a housing estate or up and down Tesco aisles! As a village green the land is protected against development (except for leisure) and it's up to the public what they want to play on it - whether it's cricket or football, etc. The general public use the playing fields "as of right" anyway and have done for many years, co-existing with the footballers, cricketeres, etc, so why should the village green change that? It may mean there are NO FEES for the organised clubs to pay though!!!

Hi Finn. You are not alone in NOT wanting a supermarket located in the vicinity of Sandy Lane. I was in the town on Saturday and I can't tell you the number of people who told me exactly the same thing! Whether or not Dawlish needs/wants a supermarket is an issue many may be divided on, but should we have one and then for it to be located anywhere on the land at Sandy Lane (including the leased, fenced off land, used by the football club) appears to be one big NO, NO. and we simply MUST get that over to all and sundry when the supermarket does its consultation. NO SUPERMARKET ON ANY PART OF THE LAND OFF SANDY LANE AND THAT INCLUDES THE LEASED, FENCED OFF LAND PRESENTLY USED BY THE FOOTBALL CLUB.

So, Finn, and everyone else who feels the same, MAKE YOUR VOICES HEARD ON THIS MATTER.

Re the Town Green application and the issues that you raised. I will respond to that in a separate posting. Meanwhile you might like to google Town Greens Defra. This should bring you to www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/issues/common/town-villagegreens/index.htm

This will give you lots of info about Town Greens.Scroll down the page and click on Advice and FAQs on the Implementation of Section 15 of the Commons Act 2006 on Town and Village Greens generally.

Look at FAQs nos 22 + 37

I don’t support a supermarket on Sandy Lane, but I do question the wisdom of the ‘village green’ application. The Independent, a few years ago highlighted the case of a cricket club that had to close, once its pitch became a village green, because picnicker and dog-walkers had the right to use the pitch. Can DADS give an assurance that team sports can continue to played at Sandy Lane. Who will do the grounds maintenance if Sandy Lane becomes a village green?

Just a bit of background info about supermarkets. There is an article in The Observer Magazine 25.11.07 by Lucy Siegle. It is mostly concerned about how supermarkets are moving in on the demand for 'eco' products. Nothing wrong with that you might say. Well, read the article and find out more.....

The article also states that " In the UK the 'big four' (Tesco, Sainsbury's, Asda and Morrisons) sell 75% of the country's groceries, with Tesco controlling 30% of the market, and own enough 'banked' land to increase superstores in the UK by 50 per cent".

A suggested read is "Shopped: The Shocking Power of British Supermarkets" (£7.99, HarperPerennial) by Joanna Blythman

Visit also www.choosethealternative.co.uk and www.beunpackaged.com

My fourth response to Stuart's posting.

Stuart you say that "Supermarkets aren't run by stupid people. They must know there is a need and they can make money in Dawlish, otherwise, why do it?" Stuart, I couldn't agree with you more. Surprised at that perhaps? Why? Of course they will only locate where they think they can make money. They're not going to locate where they think they will make a loss are they?! And the most telling phrase in your comment Stuart is this " they can make money". THEY, Stuart, THEY. Perhaps you could tell me how their making money and profits for themselves and their shareholders is going to benefit Dawlish. Will the money that residents of Dawlish and immediate environs spend in said supermarket be ploughed back into Dawlish and its immediate environs? I doubt it.

Whilst I am very much against the building of any Supermarket or Housing, indeed any development not directly associated with leisure activities and the enjoyment of this special area, called Sandy Lane, by the people - it may be argued that there is a need for a supermarket somewhere else within the Dawlish area. The obvious candidate being the Shutterton Area. Some years ago the Dawlish Town shopping area could boast a Men's Outfitters and a high class Ladies Outfitters as well as a general hardware shop and two camping shops. Sadly these shops were never replaced and that gave rise to the dubious addition of Estate Agents and Betting Establishments. For some considerable time there has been opposition, from the existing Traders, to certain Businesses coming in. So - is it surprising then that larger businesses, i.e. Supermarkets, and the like, are now lining up to set up "out of town" shopping. Perhaps we should blame the blinkered attitude of our existing shop owners for this rush to build on our green and leisure spaces - to the disadvantage of us all! John W. Burley.

Can I just point out, yet again, that just because the playing fields off Sandy Lane are presently not for sale does not mean that they cannot be built on! I am fully aware that Cllr Connett's mantra is "Sandy Lane is not for sale". Indeed, he occasionally adds "and this includes the site presently leased from Teignbridge District Council by Dawlish Town AFC".

But not for sale does not mean cannot be built on. There are such things as leases. And remember..... MONEY TALKS!!! (and who doesn't have much money? Both Teignbridge District Council and Dawlish Town Council. And who has pots and pots of money? Major supermarkets).

I have not only woken up - I am most definitely smelling the coffee.!

I'm looking into the future. I can see the bean counters at the council sitting round murmuring that Sandy Lane pitch and putt doesn't make any money... (which is primarily because it's not being promoted and hasn't been for ages!)
They're delighted. It's not making money - so they can build on it!!!! Asda, Sainsburys, housing development, both!!!! Loads of income! STOP STOP STOP .....STOP!!!
For lords sake, lots of things don't make any money! Does it mean we should build on them just because they don't turn a quick buck? How about building a new sea-wall so we can build shops and houses on the beach? After all the beach doesn't make any money! Or why not re-direct the brook? Could get a few shops down there on the lawn!!!! "It wouldn't happen", "Sacrilege", "they couldn't". Remember that these were the words uttered about Sandy Lane Playing fields. And now look what's on the cards!

I heard on the grapevine that Tescos are working WITH Teignbridge District Council in order to get the Football club to move so that Tescos can move in there? Does anyone know about this?

You may be interested in viewing some comments posted on the discussion forum at Dawlish.com regarding this topic...

"So, turning to Sandy Lane" and my third riposte to Stuart.

I agree with you Stuart that we do not yet know the size of the proposed supermarket (plus obligatory car park) or its exact location. Indeed for all I know we may have two supermarkets bidding for a site on Sandy Lane somewhere. However, whatever size footprint, whatever location in the Sandy Lane area and whatever brand of supermarket,the amount of traffic there would automatically increase.

This then would be in area where there is shortly to be located a Youth/Community Centre and Skateboard Park. This then to be in area where a seconday school is in close proximity (children walking to and from school etc). This then to be in an area which is presently mostly residential and recreational. There are immediate health and safety let alone environmental issues that come to mind. And you say "supermarkets aren't run by stupid people". Really?

Concerning internet shopping. Why not let the shop come to you instead of the other way around? I know I suggested a Farmers' Market in Dawlish earlier on in this debate but another alternative is to have LOCALLY, ORGANICALLY, PRODUCED fruit and veg delivered to your door. Such systems are already up and running here and I know that because that's how I get my fruit and veg. And....with the supplier that I have, if produce does need to be imported for any reason it is from another organic farm and IS NOT AIR FREIGHTED - unlike lots of produce found in supermarkets.

Well it certainly looks like the debate is starting to gain momentum. I would like to reiterate that as a member of DADS I am against development on Sandy Lane and not anti-supermarkets - otherwise I would have started another group called DASO (Dawlish Against Supermarkets Only). Therefore, (sorry Stuart) although your letter gave a balanced view point w.r.t. the need of a supermarket and how time rolls on – you would appear to have a very biased view of what DADS is trying to achieve. I am a father of one, with another on the way. I want to retain the green so they don’t become obese T.V junkies – and lets face it if children have nowhere to go and play this is more of a reality (not to mention the potential future increase in crime due to boredom). I therefore ask the question – can you justify ‘progress’ at the expense of our children? We must be the only European country that has such pathetic leisure facilities and here we are trying to justify why we should keep one that actually exists, or lose it for the sole purpose of helping the ‘older’ generation get their bread and milk easier. I will fight to save my children’s future but please feel free to build a supermarket elsewhere if this is really what the people of Dawlish want ? One last point for Stuart – if he wants to move with the future then why don’t we encourage internet shopping – look at the carbon footprint we could all save then (not to mention the traffic jams in our ‘lovely’ road system in and around Dawlish)

To continue with my response to Stuart's posting ( see below). Herewith my second instalment.

Please can someone explain why we seem hell bent in this country on removing playing fields? What about our kids' (and adults') sporting and leisure needs? Why do they always seem to take second place to the needs of developers?

I always smile in quiet ironic amusement when I see playing fields being sold, especially when it is for housing. Not that I am against housing developement per se you understand for I fully accept that we have a housing crisis in this county. It is more that where you have housing, you have families and where you have families those families are going to need somewhere to take part in both formal and informal sporting and leisure activities. So why build on the playing fields in the first place? Is it me that's lost the plot (if you pardon the expression) or others? I frequently wonder.

Yes, I know that (at the moment) it is only part of Sandy Lane playing fields that is being eyed up by a supermarket chain. But that isn't how it has been in the past is it? 12/18 months ago or so I understand overtures were being made to build houses there as well.

Which brings us to the issue of Sandy Lane playing fields in particular as opposed to the building on playing fields in general. A separate posting will follow..

I am a little surprised by some comments, especially from those that write so eloquently giving the impression that there is no moisture behind the ears.
Most people know the difference between a need and a want. Some may want a supermarket in Dawlish, but does Dawlish need one and more to the point, do the majority of residents want one? Comments by some, suggest some obviously do, but have they thought about the consequences, no matter where it would be built in Dawlish, if it ever is?
“Dads” is mainly about protecting “open spaces”, a provision that is sadly lacking in Dawlish. It just so happens that Sandy Lane playing fields are on the radar of some supermarkets as a preferred choice and it is a choice that cannot and must not be accepted. I for one would drop tinfoil to confuse the radar operators.
That open space, with all its facilities, which is easily accessible from many parts of Dawlish, is the envy of many, why do some want to destroy it?

Stuart, I'd just like to ask you one question: Exactly WHO is saying that the overwhelming majority of Dawlish doesn't want a supermarket? Certainly not our group. All we are saying is what we're being told left, right and centre by residents; sentiments that are underpinned by the recent survey carried out by DARE. "THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY DO NOT WANT A SUPERMARKET ON SANDY LANE."
So, to summarise - DADS is about keeping Sandy Lane green, open and available for leisure use. It is NOT an anti-supermarket group. We'd all be interested to know who has told you it is.

Stuart, there is so much in your posting to which I wish to respond that I've decided to do it in little chunks. Here is the first installment.

You seem to think that DADS has been set up as an "anti-supermarket in Dawlish" campaign group. Whilst there may indeed be members of our group who do indeed feel that way, I think I need to point out that the one and only aim of DADS is to stop the land off Sandy Lane, also known as Sandy Lane Recreational Area, from being developed for retail, commercial or residential purposes. Although the website informs visitors what the DADS acronym stands for it seems you may have missed it, so I will repeat it for you here. DADS = Dawlish Against Developing Sandy lane. That is not synonymous with "No new supermarket in Dawlish" although as I have said individual members of our group may be of that opinion and whilst of course related to the DADS campaign it is ultimately a different campaign altogether. Personally? I am still listening to the pros and cons of Dawlish needing (which is not necessarily the same as wanting) another supermarket but of one thing I am sure - I will fight with every bit of everything I have to ensure that Sandy Lane playing fields do not get built on unless for sporting or recreational purposes.

I will respond to other aspects of your posting separately.

I think it is fairly obvious that the whole concept of DADS is to prevent ANY development of Sandy Lane for ANY purpose - other than recreation. That includes supermarkets, houses, commerce. Indeed anything that takes away this fabulous green space and leisure facility. Let's not get hung up on supermarkets, Stuart, they are only one element of the overall picture.

There is clearly a lot of emotion generated by the threat of a supermarket on the Sandy Lane site. Opinions become fact, positions entrenched, and trenches dug even before information is available. This new pressure group called DADs seems to be fighting it, apparently on our behalf.

The basic premise seems to be whether or not Dawlish needs a supermarket. I for one say yes it does, and I’m not the only one holding this view, despite being told that the overwhelming majority in Dawlish don’t want one. I would caution DADs against holding this presumption, they may be unpleasantly surprised. To drive to Newton Abbot to get choice and low prices is really a bind. I’d rather avoid it, and do it locally if possible.

Supermarkets aren’t run by stupid people. They must know there is a need, that they can make money in Dawlish, otherwise, why do it? Whatever you may think of them, we nearly all use them, and their rapid development throughout the country indicates that the majority of us welcome them. They are usually well organised, with neat and tidy facades and parking areas, and their staff even smile at you! So lets desist from demonisation.

As to the shops in the town centre, well they must take their chance or change. The World moves on I’m afraid. It’s a sad but necessary evolution within business, and ultimately derives benefits. However, I can’t see the Estate Agents, Travel Agent, Charity and specialist shops, Bookies and cafes being unduly affected, and as these are the majority, we don’t have too much to worry about do we!? Its interesting to note, that recently there has been a lot of comment about the “state of the town”, and consultants have been engaged to find a solution. So changing the town centre is underway in peoples minds if not yet physically.

So, turning to Sandy Lane, I haven’t seen any plans. I don’t know the proposed size of a supermarket and ancillary services. Is it a major one, or one of their smaller ones? Will it just cover the football pitch and stadium ( which presumably will be re-located), in which case, why all the fuss as the current public open areas remain. Do we need all of the current space, or will a reduced area still be sufficient? In other words, can we have the best of all worlds?

Admittedly, an “out-of-town” site would seem ideal, it would certainly save on frenetic energy, but from what has been reported, it doesn’t appear to be an option. I find this strange. Perhaps it is an option, but for whatever reason, someone, somewhere isn’t saying. This makes the whole debate, unbalanced, and I’m always suspicious of an unbalanced debate.

Rather than stonewall and draw battle lines, a more sensible option may be to work with these supermarket operators to elicit some of this information, and then present a more balanced view. It might also be possible to persuade whoever to modify their intentions somewhat. To tell us we don’t need a supermarket in Dawlish is clearly contentious; to tell us we need to protect all of Sandy Lane is slightly less contentious, ( unless you live there); to tell us we need to protect sufficient space for public access in Sandy Lane is even less contentious.

Once information is available, I’ll make my own judgement on Sandy Lane. In the meantime, I’m for a supermarket in Dawlish, and open-minded about Sandy Lane as a site.


Stuart Carson

Is there a logical reason why Devon County Council are dragging their feet in processing the application for Sandy Lane recreation area, to be given , "Village Green," status?

So that the pros and cons of the supermarket issue can be aired and debated if by no other way than via this website I would be very interested to know the pro arguments for

1. Dawlish having another supermarket (irrespective of location).

2. For it to be located on Sandy Lane Playing Fields.

3. For it to be located in the Shutterton area.

4. For it to be located in another area completely - hows about The Smugglers Inn/Holcombe area?

I await comments.

I've just seen something on the rants section about the council NOT being cash-strapped. So why do they keep telling us they are? If they are "underspent" can't they invest some in Dawlish, and do things to pretty up the town, promote the pitch and putt, and leisure centre?

Readers might like to log onto www.theargus.co.uk/display.var.1839306.0.0.php?.utag=30823

This will bring them to an article about Lewes, the county town of East Sussex. The headline reads "Supermarket on way despite fears for shops"

Sound familiar?

We could have a new Youth/Community centre complete with skate park bang next door to a supermarket and carpark (well, we will if Tesco get their way).

So, extra cars and lorries caused by the supermarket plus extra youth in the immediate vicinity due to location of Youth Centre and skate park. Result? Huge potential for an increase in the number of RTA's! (Road Traffic Accidents).

Still one way of solving the 'yuf' problem I suppose, and as we know, "every little helps".

NO SUPERMARKET AT SANDY LANE - Car Stickers.

We now have a supply of these (in day glow pink and they just cannot be missed!).

If you would like to have one (or more than one so that you can distribute to others) please leave us your details via the 'contact us' page. Many thanks.

I was walking in Dawlish early this evening at about 6.30pm or so - along High Street. I suddenly became very aware of a very large lorry pulling into the carpark at the back of the co-op. I stopped and watched it for a while and wondered what effect such lorries might have on Sandy Lane and immediate environs if a supermarket were to be located there.

I, for one,(sorry about the split infinitive) am very glad that I don't live in the immediate Sandy Lane area should the building of a supermarket there ever come to pass.

Those of you who live a reasonably quiet life in or around Dawlish had better enjoy it while you can, your quiet life is about to be wrecked, should Tesco get their way and locate another part of their business in Dawlish, along with other developers.
What are Tesco trying to do? Until the problem hits residents full square in the face, it may be too late to answer that question.
The congestion problems that we face in many places can be directly linked to the mega grocery stores that have sprung up all over the country, a country that was once the envy of the world, but sadly no longer. So why do we need to import another problem? A problem that has struck places like Newton Abbot, (or should I say Kingsteignton) Exeter and Torquay to name just a few places near to us now.
Instead of improving our quality of life, it is being destroyed by the day. When will people wake up?

Sue,
Please dont expect a direct answer to a question from Dawlish Councillors, it is impossible as I know from experience.

If there were to be a supermarket at Shutterton then perhaps an unexpected benefit might be that the 85 or 85a bus might be rerouted to go along the whole of the main Exeter Road. At the moment both the 85 and 85a turn off and go down Warren Road thus leaving those living anywhere from the Carhaix Way area through to the Cockwood end of New Road without a regular bus service. I think the little 186 shopper bus may presently serve that area but only very occasionally and not at all in the evenings or on Sundays.

Well Christopher, if you call tearing up a well-used leisure facility, a beautiful green space...

Then replacing it with thousands of tons of concrete, steel and tarmac...

Then the lorry deliveries, 24/7 with pollution and noise, blocking up roads, causing more pollution...

Then the cars for 8000 plus shoppers a day (NOT all from Dawlish obviously) ...

Then the cars that will have to drive Dawlish residents, football teams, etc, to other leisure facilities...

Then the lack of trade going to the town centre...

If you call all this "environmentally friendly" you have a very strange concept of it!

And if you think that because it's closer to town, people won't drive there - you're VERY mistaken. MORE people will drive there because they'll have MORE to carry home (because supermarkets are designed that way - to make you buy more stuff and bigger stuff) and you can't easily lug 5-plus shopping bags back home. Plus there will be the lure of that lovely tarmac'd free carpark - yet another weapon against the town centre traders!

So as no-one wants a supermarket on Sandy Lane, what vested interest do *you* have to put one there?

And why Sandy Lane? Why not put one at Shutterton? We'll still get some of the awful effects listed above, at at least it will eliminate THREE of them! ......... Martyn West. EMAIL: mrwest@btinternet.com

I'd welcome tesco at sandy lane , it would mean residents of dawlish wouldn't have to travel in cars to visit a good supermarket. Surely that would help the environment .

Ref Lynne's comment on road widening, roundabouts, etc, I've been told that a number (four or six) of houses on Exeter Road have sold options on their property to Tesco's, at 25% over the market value. Now you may say that's all hearsay - but I've also spoken to the relative of one of these people directly! They didn't know I was involved in DADS and if they had known I'm sure they wouldn't have told me! But they confirmed it's absolutely true!

In reply to Lynne, There has already been development in close proximity to the bowling green. Three houses have been erected. This is where the groundsman used to keep all of their euipment, to enable them to keep the whole site in good condition, and I commend them for that. They should get the 'Green Flag Award'.
Their equipment is now housed under the leisure centre, which I think does not comply with certain regulations, (another story).
The drive leading up to the three houses, has a double gate (Sandy Lane end) which can be locked. That is the only quick entrance for emergency services, should there be an incident on the 'astro turf'.

Hello,
My Mum is typing this for me but these are my words.

I am 12 years old and I go to DCC. Already there are lots of cars at Sandy Lane at the end of the school day. If you added another couple of hundred of cars and lorries to that because of the supermarket there would be major traffic problems. I walk home from school. What about my safety? There would be more of a chance that me or any of my friends who walk home of being in an accident

Would I be correct in thinking that Teignbridge District Council also owns the land where the bowls club play, and the car park and the land where the football club house (Seasiders?) is located? Cos if so, isn't that another potential area for future development? And haven't I heard somewhere about a plan for there to be a road widening scheme and a roundabout at the area where Sandy Lane meets Exeter Road? Does anyone know anything about any of these issues?

Farmers' Markets. Why doesn't Dawlish have one on the lawn? Maybe not all year but certainly during the High Season. Would be a way of getting locally produced (and hopefully organic) products so would help local farmers and the environment plus, by drawing both residents and tourists into the town, could also be an economic help to the town centre traders.

Unfortunately Sandy Lane was not given to the people of Dawlish, it was bought by the then Dawlish Urban District Council and transfered to Teinbridge D.C when they took over.

Having said that, we do need to stand up to them and fight for what is right. Having any sort of Supermarket on this land is not right for Dawlish Town & certainly not right for its residents.

Readers of this page might like to know that the Guardian newspaper is conducting its own poll about supermarkets and how they impact on our lives. Log onto:
guardian.co.uk/business/retail

John has a point. You don't need to "own" the land to build a supermarket. The fact Tescos have the lease is enough isn't it? That way Tescos pay a nice fat rent to Teignbridge, PLUS any other upfront "costs" to facilitate it - like money/new ground to move the football club... etc. MS

Can I ask readers to ask themselves a question, which is:

If Tesco have an option on the lease of the land that is presently used by Dawlish Town AFC then does it make any difference whether or not the land is for sale?

In other words do Tesco (or anyone else for that matter) need to be owners of land in order to build on it. Surely if they have a lease all they would need is planning permission.

And if I am right, then Cllr Connett's statement that "Sandy Lane is not for sale" need not mean quite what many of us have taken it to mean.

Your thoughts anyone?

We need the people of Dawlish to express their views as fervently as possible. The removal of the space whether it be for a supermarket, or for housing, would be sacrilege. Although I am fairly new to the area, I heard that the land was bequeathed to the people of Dawlish to be used for recreational purposes? We need to let the council know that we will not allow them to treat us like fools – we need a plan of action that everybody can follow whether it is a signed petition or something else? … but we need to act fast !

I have read that this beautiful green area, called Sandy Lane, has been used for recreational purposes for "over 20 years". I can personally confirm that I and all of my family have enjoyed the recreational use of this area for over 43 years. We should all be striving for more, not less, open green recreational areas. It is very evident that most of the objectors are intent on keeping options open for possible future development and not ringfencing the Sandy Lane area for the enjoyment of future generations - they should all be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. The Dawlish Trust - is a complete waste of time - just who do its members think they are? John W. Burley, Retired lecturer, Faculty of Technology, Exeter College.

Re Ellen C's posting. It isn't irony that the supermarket's indulging in - it's HYPOCRISY!

Just how ironic is this?

Despite being told that Sandy Lane Recreational Area is not for sale, it seems that a certain supermarket chain is nontheless determined to build a store there. Indeed, they have stated their intent to hold their own consultation exercise with the townsfolk of Dawlish in order to explain the benefits(!) such a store could bring to the town.

Given that Sandy Lane is quite literally a green field site where lots of sports and leisure activities take place and given that should a supermarket be built there a substantial amount of the land would be lost, it is somewhat ironic that the same supermarket chain is presently promoting itself as a champion of sport!

Oh yes, tis true! For every £10 you presently spend in its stores you can get a free sports equipment voucher for schools and clubs.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Fantastic site, just what is required for people to air their views.
Public participation has been effectively blocked for the moment, by our Town Council, "they cannot accept criticism."
We need more open space, not less!
The arguments put forward by some, begs the question, "just who do they represent?"

love love love the tescopoly link. if you haven't been to the site yet - I suggest you go there.
JP

I cannot understand for the life of me why someone would want to take this recreation space away from Dawlish. We have used this area for years, my children and grandchildren have played there. And why aren't Dawlish Town Council and Community Trust helping? why are they objecting to the town green? Arent they supposed to be the elected voice of us residents? They aren't voicing what we want at the moment.