Regulation 18 Draft Local Plan 2025 Online Version and Consultation

Support

Representation ID: 1176

Received: 01/02/2026

Respondent: Torquay Neighbourhood Forum (Statutory / General Consultation Body)

Suggest add “Development within the Conservation Areas of rural villages will not be supported.” Development in Conservation Areas should follow good design guidelines and mirroring established architecture in that area. ie: pitched roofs in an area where they are pre-dominant. Flat roofs which are unattractive and unsustainable (need frequent repair) shall be discouraged. Building height must be compatible with surrounding buildings. New Policy is welcomed but should be strengthened by changing “will” to “shall” Having observed the debacle over the Maycliffe Hotel, while we support the objectives of Chapter 10, we strongly urge the Council to be more proactive and consistent in its use of existing powers. Specifically, we advocate for the wider implementation of Article 4 Directions across all of Torquay’s Conservation Areas to prevent the incremental loss of historic windows, doors, and boundary features that define our town's character. There is a clear community perception that the Council has, in the past, failed to consistently enforce heritage standards, leading to a visible 'erosion of character.' The new Local Plan must be backed by a commitment to rigorous and consistent enforcement; whether a development is a minor alteration or a major regeneration project, the standard for protecting our Victorian and maritime identity must be applied equally. Our heritage assets are irreplaceable, and the Council must use every tool at its disposal—including Article 4—to ensure they are not further diminished by unsympathetic or unauthorized works

Support

Representation ID: 1177

Received: 01/02/2026

Respondent: Torquay Neighbourhood Forum (Statutory / General Consultation Body)

New Policy is welcomed but should be strengthened by changing “will” to “shall” - same comment for policies HE4 and HE5

Support

Representation ID: 1178

Received: 01/02/2026

Respondent: Torquay Neighbourhood Forum (Statutory / General Consultation Body)

Strongly support the high standards for design and place-making particularly Policy DES and DE1. For these policies to be effective, they must be applied with consistency. We urge the Council to use the design standards here as a mandate to implement Article 4 Directions across our Conservation Areas, ensuring that 'minor' alterations do not continue to erode Torquay's historic character. New developments, especially in the TC and along the Waterfront, must respect the prevailing building heights (DE4) and use materials that reflect our maritime and Victorian identity. No more 'generic' architecture; every new building should enhance not detract from. Also should Reference Design Guides and SPDs

Support

Representation ID: 1179

Received: 01/02/2026

Respondent: Torquay Neighbourhood Forum (Statutory / General Consultation Body)

Significant development should be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable, through limiting the need to travel and offering a genuine choice of transport modes. Currently, no sustainable transport infrastructure is planned to support many development sites and so that must be caveated in the local plan. – This could be rectified by developing an Infrastructure Delivery Plan

See supporting table in rep 2 pdf for site specific comments.

Identify several proposed sites (e.g., H3T.1, H3T.2, H3T.4, H3T.15) as not sustainable due to flood risk, lack of mains drainage, poor walking/cycling access or unwilling landowners.

Support

Representation ID: 2980

Received: 01/02/2026

Respondent: Torquay Neighbourhood Forum (Statutory / General Consultation Body)

Support the use of Policy TC10 to drive environmental enhancements that bridge the visual gap between our waterfront and the retail heart.

Object

Representation ID: 2981

Received: 01/02/2026

Respondent: Torquay Neighbourhood Forum (Statutory / General Consultation Body)

Policy – loss of car parking in town centers should be acceptable as part of a vision led transport statement and realistic plan in order to maximize use of town center brownfield sites and to reduce car dependency. Table 13 should be a separate table for ‘Maximum Parking Standards’ in ‘Town Centre and Accessible Locations’ – the e.g should be statement. The active travel management section should not be an add on – all development should be supported by vision-led transport planning’ and this must be realistic, monitored and enforced as planning conditions. Unsure whether a shared cycle or car club spaces are currently a useful provision? Is it something likely to be in operation in Torbay anytime soon? Electric Vehicle Charging provision – a % of provision should be accessible EV charging Cycle Parking needs minimum size standards and guidance that vertical storage is not acceptable and provision for storage of non-standard cycles. 6.32 – should mention the onus on developers to fund or part fund creation of controlled parking zones if required to manage local demand. 6.33 – car parks should be ‘accessible and safe’ – add ‘to all users’ – too often pedestrian access is secondary in these designs and given that 2 people died in Torquay in 2025 within car parks this issue is extremely pertinent. Parking is fundamental and should not be left to an as yet unpublished SPD.

Object

Representation ID: 2982

Received: 01/02/2026

Respondent: Torquay Neighbourhood Forum (Statutory / General Consultation Body)

Must state where SuDS cannot be used: gradients
and potential discharge onto highways, or where
there is land instability.

Support

Representation ID: 2983

Received: 01/02/2026

Respondent: Torquay Neighbourhood Forum (Statutory / General Consultation Body)

Could this be strengthened? To ‘only supported if
it secures ‘green lights’ unless there are specific
site and scheme constraints?

Support

Representation ID: 2984

Received: 01/02/2026

Respondent: Torquay Neighbourhood Forum (Statutory / General Consultation Body)

Should electric vehicle charging points be added to
#2? – Accessible EV charging

Support

Representation ID: 2985

Received: 01/02/2026

Respondent: Torquay Neighbourhood Forum (Statutory / General Consultation Body)

Amend line 1: “The height style, and roof form of
new buildings. . . “