22 November 2016

After several years in the making the Cornwall Local Plan is finally adopted at a meeting of the Full Council today

The Cornwall Local Plan covers the administrative area of Cornwall Council and replaces the majority of the policies of Caradon Local Plan First Alteration (2007). Saved policies are set out in Appendix A of the Plan and include CL8 and CL9 of the Caradon Local Plan.

The Adoption Statement, Adopted Local Plan and associated background documents are available to download below:

Statement of Adoption (November 2016)
Adopted Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies (22nd November 2016)
Cornwall Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal Adoptiion Statement (Nov 2016)
Policies Maps (available shortly)
Cornwall Local Plan Inspector's Report and Schedule of Major Modifications (Sept 2016)

12 October 2016

+++ THE INSPECTOR AGREES THE CORNWALL LOCAL PLAN SUBJECT TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A NUMBER OF MODIFICATIONS +++

The hearings for the Cornwall Local Plan Examination in Public were concluded in May 2016 and in June the Inspector confirmed to the Council what further changes were required to make it sound. These changes were subjected to further consultation in August 2016 and the Inspector’s recommendations are as follows:

Cornwall Local Plan Inspector's Report.

The Council will now consider the Inspector’s recommendations and adoption of the Local Plan at a special meeting of Full Council being planned for 22nd November 2016.

Below is the latest version of the emerging Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies Document containing the Main Modifications recommended and further minor modifications proposed by the Council:

Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies Combined Version.

THE INSPECTOR'S SUMMARY:
This report concludes that the Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies Plan provides an appropriate basis for the planning of Cornwall, providing a number of modifications are made to the Plan. Cornwall Council has specifically requested me to recommend any modifications necessary to enable the Plan to be adopted.
With one exception, all of the necessary modifications were proposed by the Council and were largely accepted or agreed as required changes. The exception is the change to the threshold of the affordable housing policy to which the Council was specifically opposed, but where a change is required to be consistent with Government policy. Where necessary for clarity, I have edited the detailed wording from that published by the Council and I have recommended their inclusion after considering the representations from other parties on these issues.

The Main Modifications can be summarised as follows:

An increase in the overall housing requirement from 47,500 to 52,500 dwellings and a revised apportionment of this figure to the main towns and Community Network Areas.

A clearer explanation of this Plan’s role in taking forward the Council’s economic strategy and the identification of a jobs target of 38,000 new jobs.

An increase in the proposed floorspace for B class employment development to give needed flexibility in delivery and a revised apportionment to the Community Network Areas.

Updating future retail capacity for the main towns, resulting in much lower capacity estimates compared with the submitted Plan.

Deletion of the place-policies for individual CNAs and related text referring to housing, employment and retail requirements which have become out of date given the above changes.

Greater clarity on the role of the Council’s Site Allocations Plan and of Neighbourhood Plans in delivering necessary allocations to take forward the requirements of this Plan.

Amendment to the policy on affordable housing to ensure that the proportion of such housing sought from market developments is consistent with the evidence on viability and that the threshold for such requirements is consistent with Government policy.

Introduction of a new policy to ensure that there is adequate mitigation of recreational pressures on European protected natural habitats arising from new residential development.

The rewriting of policies for the natural and historic environment to ensure that they are comprehensive, clearly structured and consistent with national policy.

Various changes to other policies to ensure consistency with national policy.

163.Policy 9 in the submitted plan is entitled affordable housing led schemes and is a policy to enable affordable housing schemes in smaller towns, villages and hamlets. The Council accepted at the hearing in May 2015 that this policy is intended as a rural exceptions policy as referred to in paragraph 54 of the NPPF. Such schemes are defined in the Glossary of the NPPF as small sites for affordable housing where sites would not normally be used for housing. The policy allows up to 50% of the homes or land-take to be market housing where it is essential for successful delivery.

164.As explained in my PF (5.15-5.16), for some time the Council had been applying a rural exceptions approach to large schemes where it considered them a departure from the development plan. But this confuses 2 distinct matters. To avoid any lack of clarity about the scope of the policy, it is important to refer to it as a rural exceptions policy so as to engage the definition in the Glossary of the NPPF. For the reasons given in PF 5.17 and 5.18 the reference to local need should apply only to the affordable housing element and requiring local community support is not justified. These and consequential restructuring of the policy and text are made in MMs 63-66 and 69.

For more information see the Council's website... Cornwall Local Plan

7 March 2016

Cornwall’s Local Plan's public consultation

Following the first hearings of the Examination in May 2015, further work has been completed and a number of proposed changes to the Draft Local Plan have been made.

A public six-week consultation seeking feedback on Schedule of Further Significant Changes expired on 7th March 2016 and the results are now being analysed.

The final Policies Document will look something like this... Combined Policies Document but only the changes were being consulted upon.

Just two policies (CL8 and CL9) are being carried forward from the soon to be superseded Caradon Plan to the emerging Cornwall Plan.

Looe Strategy Group's Submission 6 March 2016

Dear Local Plan Team,

We wish to advise you that the following request by the Inspector at the preliminary examination has not been implemented in the revised document currently under consultation...

Inspector’s advice on other matters dated 9^th July 2015 as follows...

8.16) “PP15 Liskeard and Looe CNA. Paragraph 18.10 of the Plan states that Liskeard will be required to accommodate the majority of dwellings in the CNA, but in policy PP15, 1,250 dwellings are allocated to Liskeard and 1,400 to the rest of the CNA, so the majority is not allocated to the town. Is this text still the strategy? Should the wording or the numbers be changed?”

The contradiction in the wording that the Inspector highlighted has not been corrected as the new allocation of 1,400 dwellings for Liskeard is still less than the 1,500 going to the rest of the Community Network Area.

With regard to Looe, the draft policy is not properly informed because it does not take account of a significant number of constraints to sustainable development that are missing from the Sustainability Appraisal as follows:

• Recent instability of the Looe’s sloping hillsides has resulted in a large number of landslips, damage to highways/ road closures of St Martins Road, Elm Tree Road, Bass Hill, North Road and Hannafore Road harming business and in one instance leading to loss of life.

• This week the reserved matters application PA14/10838 for 82 dwellings on land designated in the development plan for housing was refused due to concerns over recent history of surface water drainage causing land stability issues and downstream flooding.

• The underlying geology of the town and impact of increasing levels of winter rainfall due to climate change is not yet examined or understood.

• The town also suffers tidal flooding and over the last couple of years significant damage to quays and sea defences. The town centre and essential services; Fire Station, Health Centre and Police HQ are all close to sea/ river level and susceptible to flood disruption.

• The roads connecting Looe are sub-standard and routes to Liskeard, the main town in the CNA, contain sections of single track.

• Other infrastructure provision, e.g. health service, sewage treatment works is under strain with no capacity for further growth.

• Looe does not have 360 degrees of land available for housing growth with sea and rivers taking up more than half. Any development would inevitably be coastal, hilltop AGLV or within the setting of an AONB and would impact landscape character.

• The land surrounding Looe is either grade 2 or 3 best quality agricultural land found in Cornwall (the Sustainability Appraisal contains an error in this respect).

• There is a shortage of employment in Looe and a need to travel for work. There are no well paid jobs and unemployment in the 16 to 24 years age group is high.

Few of the above are listed as Key Constraints in the Sustainability Appraisal, which we believe is not fully up-to-date and needs revising.

Looe Strategy Group

Map of Liskeard & Looe Community Network Area (CNA)
comprising the 'main town' of Liskeard plus 17 surrounding parishes described as 'the residual'

link to >> Map of Cornwall's Community Network Areas

MAP OF LISKEARD & LOOE CNA - PP15

The following maps are from Cornwall Council's Sustainability Appraisal 2016 Technical Annex Part 4

15 December 2015

Changes to Cornwall’s Local Plan overwhelmingly approved:

Today, at the meeting of full council, Councillors debated the changes to the Plan as directed by the Planning Inspector.

Many will not like the changes, or like the Plan at all because the focus is on housing development rather than employment and infrastructure improvements. However, without a plan, Cornwall is at more risk because it cannot prove there is adequate housing supply for five years as required by Government*. Furthermore, if the Council did not agree a plan by 2017, the Government would impose its own figures on Cornwall.

For those who have not read the Plan, or the changes, a link is provided here >> Documentation

For the Local Plan to be approved it cannot ignore the Inspector, and his direction was for the Local Plan housing numbers to be increased by 10% over the previous submission figure of 47,500 for the period between 2010 and 2030. This is further broken down by 7% to take into account second homes, and 3% for 'market churn', ie, those for sale, in probate and not in occupation.

The figure the Council settled on is 52,500, a 10.5% uplift, and this takes into account the 36,500 new homes that have either been built, or have planning permission to be built since 2010 leaving a further requirement 16,000 needed before 2030 to meet targets.

As for the main vote, this was carried by all but two councillors who voted against, and one who abstained. A webcast of the meeting can be viewed here >> full council webcast 15/12/2015

The next stage of the Plan's journey will be to subject it to a public consultation lasting for six weeks starting in January. From this, the plan will be re-submitted to the Planning Inspector for him to approve or otherwise.

* The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that councils need to ensure that their Local Plans meet the ‘full, objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing in the housing market area’, identifying and updating annually a supply of deliverable sites sufficient to provide 5 years worth of housing with an additional buffer of 5% to ensure choice and competition. Where there is a persistent record of under delivery (which is not defined in more detail) an additional 20% buffer is required. Beyond 5 years the NPPF requires Local Authorities to ‘identify specific, developable sites or broad locations for growth, for 6-10 years and, where possible, for years 11-15’.

4 August 2015

Cornwall Council’s Local Plan is temporarily suspended...

During the examination of the Cornwall Local Plan the Inspector has recommended the plan should be suspended for various reasons including insufficient housing numbers. He found the need for a 7% uplift to the submission target of 47,500 giving a new requirement of 50,825 dwellings over the plan period to cater for second and holiday homes taking some of the allowance. This would represent a 20% increase in Cornwall's housing stock which is currently around 250,000 dwellings.

From The Inspector’s Notes…

3.15 At the hearing, the only specific suggestion for an uplift was the modest 10% required by Inspectors in a few other Examinations recently. But for Cornwall I consider that the 7% I am requiring to recognise second homes/holiday homes is a more specific, evidence-based adjustment to the demographic projection to reflect the realities of an important element of the housing market in Cornwall.
3.23 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) does not identify second/holiday homes as a “need” and therefore such homes should not be counted as part of the objectively assessed need (OAN) required by the NPPF. But the acquisition of future new dwellings as holiday/second homes would remove those dwellings from the stock available for the needs which have been assessed. More generally, if at 2030 the proportion of the total housing stock occupied as holiday/second homes is similar to now, additional existing homes would have been acquired as holiday/second homes and be unavailable to meet assessed needs, even if newly built homes in some locations are not attractive for such use. Accordingly, in converting the OAN into a housing requirement for the plan, an allowance should be added for second/holiday homes. It is reasonable to assume that the proportion of holiday homes will not decline over the plan period, especially given recent and planned improvements in transport connections serving Cornwall.

With regard to PP15 Liskeard and Looe CNA the Inspector queries Paragraph 18.10 of the Plan which states that Liskeard will be required to accommodate the majority of dwellings in the CNA, but in policy PP15, 1,250 dwellings are allocated to Liskeard and 1,400 to the rest of the CNA, so the majority is not allocated to the town. Is this text still the strategy? Should the wording or the numbers be changed?

Other points raised...
2. Housing Distribution to the CNAs
2.1 My Preliminary Findings identified inadequacies in the SA in testing the distribution of housing to the different CNAs, particularly where the submitted Plan deviates from the proportionate distribution (eg Policy 2, part 7 and Policy 3) which is stated to be the selected broad strategy.
2.2 I envisage that I will require a substantial hearing discussion on the justification for the broad approach to distribution and the adjustments made in specific CNAs/main towns to deviate from the broad approach. Putting aside for the moment the specific role of SA in testing the plan’s proposals and reasonable alternatives, it may be helpful for the Council to have in mind the type of questions I am likely to need to explore in relation to the justification for the distribution. The Council may wish to ensure that, taking into account the distribution of the additional housing requirement and the revisions relating to the economic strategy, that there is a succinct summary document which explains the following, among other matters. page1image24152

2.3 How the distributional strategy for housing is consistent with/complementary to, the economic strategy expressed in policy 2. In relation to the towns highlighted in policy 2, part 8, why housing provision significantly above or below a main town’s/CNA’s proportionate share is appropriate?
2.4 How the distribution to each CNA and the split between the main town and the rest of the rest of that CNA (the CNA residual) has had adequate regard to the following considerations (or whether these are relevant factors at all):

Major environmental constraints/designations, particularly the AONBs (See A.17) and World Heritage Site (WHS) and their setting?
The opportunity to re-use previously developed land or land of lesser environmental value (NPPF, paragraph 17; National Guidance - Paragraph: 024 Reference ID: 8-024-20140306; Plan policy 22). Council to produce a table showing for each CNA (preferably split between the main named town(s) and the residual CNA) the percentage of SHLAA capacity which is previously developed land. If the figures could also be broken down into each 5 year period that would be particularly useful. (As requested in ID.04.1, paragraph 3.)
The identified capacity in the SHLAA to deliver housing sites. Is there adequate headroom shown in the SHLAA for each CNA (and in each main town/residual area) to have confidence that there are sufficient sites for delivery and to provide some choice in the selection and allocation of sites for development from the SHLAA “menu”? The Council should show for each CNA and the main named town(s)/residual CNA, the SHLAA capacity against the outstanding delivery from sites to be allocated.
Overall deliverability, including viability and past delivery rates. Council to prepare an updated table to show the Plan’s proposals against the past rate of development (ie updating Table 2 in A.12). (As requested in ID.04.1, paragraph 7.)
The broad findings of the Sustainability Assessment (A.5 and previous iterations and subsequent update).
The timely delivery of any critical/strategic items of infrastructure required to support the level of housing proposed (see C.28.1-22).
The comparative sustainability (with regard to provision of services/employment etc.) of different settlements as assessed by the Council (eg Settlements: Settlement Hierarchy and Categories 2012 Update C.13)

2.5 Table 1 in the Plan states that the broad distribution of housing will be a minimum of the figures shown. Should this be reflected in the CNA policies which generally refer to around in relation to housing numbers?
3. Housing Delivery
3.1 The Council needs to be aware that I have found it difficult to get to grips with housing delivery issues. Apart from Table 1, the Plan contains nothing to indicate how delivery is to be achieved. There is no housing trajectory. Whilst Table 1 shows the outstanding residual requirement for each CNA (as of April 2014) all the CNA policies refer only to the overall requirement for the area with no indication of what needs to be delivered by way of additional allocations in subsequent plans.
3.2 Housing Trajectory: As previously requested in ID.04.1 (paragraph 6) and irrespective of how much detail needs to be included in the Plan for soundness , the Council should prepare a housing trajectory (updated to 1 April 2015) to show expected delivery year-by-year over the plan-period from different sources eg completions and commitments; allocations to be made in the allocations plan; small site windfalls; remainder to be delivered in other ways eg Neighbourhood Plans.
3.3 Neighbourhood Plans: Also as previously indicated, I will want to be clear what proportion of the Plan’s residual housing requirement at 1 April 2015 would need to be found from Neighbourhood Plans (NPs) for the smaller towns and villages and any other sources, taking into account the Council’s windfall allowance. Council to show what proportion of the remaining requirements in each main town/residual CNA will be delivered by the Council’s Allocation Plan and what would be left for NP/other sources. In the documents supporting the further consultation it would be helpful to have a summary of progress on NPs (making clear within which CNA each NP falls) and, where they have reached a suitably advanced stage, what scale of allocations are being proposed.
3.4 Allocations Plan: I will want to ensure that the Plan is effective in being clear what is expected to be done in the forthcoming Allocations Plan generally and particularly with regard to housing allocations.

Are allocations to secure housing delivery at each of the 15 towns listed in policy 3, part 1 intended to be made in the Allocations Plan?
Where there is an emerging NP for a main town (eg I believe for Truro, Bude and Liskeard) will the forthcoming Allocations Plan allocate any sites at those towns, or will it depend on what the NP is likely to achieve?
Does the text in policy 3 or for each CNA with NPs for main towns need updating or clarifying so that the position is clear?

Where there is an emerging NP for a main town, what is the Council’s intention to secure delivery if the NP is not duly “made” in a timely way?
For delivery at the smaller towns and villages not listed in policy 3 part 1, does any uncertainty over the progression of NPs and the scale of allocations they might make, create a significant threat to delivery of the housing requirement?

more information can be found here >> Cornwall Council Local Plan Examination

11 February 2015

Cornwall Council’s Local Plan is submitted for examination to the Secretary of State

After years of preparation, Cornwall Council's Local Plan has now been submitted to the Sec of State, Mr Pickles, for examination. When finally adopted the Cornwall Local Plan will supersede the Caradon Local Plan and allow local communities who are in the process of putting together their neighbourhood plans the vehicle to have these adopted too.

The submitted Plan is made up of the ‘Proposed Submission Local Plan – Strategic Policies’ published in March 2014 together with a series of amendments published in September 2014 as the ‘Schedule of focussed changes to the Cornwall Local Plan – Strategic Policies’. The full set of ‘submission documents’ along with the complete evidence base will be available by visiting www.cornwall.gov.uk/localplancornwall.

The public examination will take place on the 11th May 2015 where the various sides will be able to put their cases forward. From this, and depending on the formal responses on the examination, Cornwall could have its Local Plan adopted by the end of 2015

24 November 2014
Results of the Latest Consultation…

The latest round of public consultation on the Cornwall Local Plan below resulted in minor variations to the Strategic Policies Document but none of the changes to policy wording requested by Looe Town Council were incorporated. The 40% increase in housing targets for the Liskeard & Looe Community Network Area (excluding Liskeard) also remains.

At a recent Extraordinary Cabinet, the Pre-Submission Draft Plan was debated and approved. The full membership of the Council are expected to give the final seal of approval in December before it then goes through the formal process of submission and examination by the Planning Inspectorate before being adopted in a year or so's time.

18 March 2014

PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON THE DRAFT CORNWALL LOCAL PLAN
open for comment until 5pm 28th April 2014

The Hierarchy of Plan-Making
There are two tiers of plan-making affecting Looe that sit below the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) as follows:

The Cornwall Local Plan - being prepared by the Local Planning Authority
Looe's Neighbourhood Plan - being prepared by Looe Town Council

The Draft Cornwall Local Plan (as opposed to the Neighbourhood Plan for Looe) has recently been revised following a decision by Cornwall's Full Council to increase targets for new house building in the County for the period 2010 to 2030 by a further 12.5% to 47,500 dwellings.

The target for Liskeard & Looe Community Network Area (CNA) which includes Liskeard and the surrounding parishes of Looe, Dobwalls, Menheniot, St.Cleer, Pelynt, Polperro and Polruan etc. per the map below has been increased from 2,000 to 2,650.

Liskeard is to take 1,250 new homes (up 25%) and the remaining area (in which Looe is named as the main settlement) is to take 1,400 (up 40%). These are minimum targets, although an allowance will be made for houses completed since 2010 or with planning approval as per the following table:

The policies in the Cornwall Local Plan will shape future decision making until 2030 and Looe is identified for "significant levels of development" (p.98 Sustainability Appraisal March 2013).

Paragraph 18.9 of the Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies Document states:

Looe has a good range of facilities and services and has a rail connection to Liskeard and could support more growth than other smaller settlements in the remainder of the CNA.

It is our opinion that a) the increase in housing targets should be reversed and b) the above statement should be omitted altogether from the policy document as it has been included prematurely without there being a proper appraisal of the town or evidence gathered as to Looe's capacity to support higher growth either physically or in terms of employment availability.

If left unchanged the data and policy wording will be available to support applications for any new development in Looe such as the 225 new houses proposed for Barton Farm, Polperro Rd, West Looe (see "New Housing" tab), and the Neighbourhood Plan will be powerless to exercise any control because it will not be allowed to conflict with County policy.

The Looe Town Council's consultation response 2013 was as follows:

Policies 6 & 7 – Housing
We would strongly recommend that all housing must be supported by employment and the ability of the infrastructure to accommodate this, ie Healthcare, roads, public transport, schools etc.
The Looe area has recently seen considerable new housing development and together with the existing and potential current developments in the Looe area we consider that we have already taken our share of the development for our CNA, of which we are only a small part, and as such further development should not be considered for the Looe area.
We would support the removal of PP15, Policy No: 18.9.
It is important to have an appropriate balance of jobs, services, facilities and homes. There is no mention of amenities or preserving distinctive character and landscape of areas.

Policy 12 – Gypsy & Traveller Sites
We consider that our CNA has met the requirements with sites in Looe and Pensilva giving a total of four sites for the Caradon area of Cornwall.

Policy 15 – Renewable and low carbon energy
In areas of outstanding Natural Beauty and undeveloped coast – developments would not be allowed except in exceptional circumstances. The words ‘exceptional circumstances’ must be removed. There must be no commercial development of renewable energy projects in AONBs and other sensitive areas of natural beauty such as SAGLV’s and AGLV’s because by their nature they are obtrusive.
Within the Policy 15 of the draft plan we would request a clause preventing wind turbines and solar panels on AGLV, AONB, coastal zones and conservation areas.

Policy 22 Best Use of Land & Existing Buildings
Para d. Safeguarding Grade 1, 2 & 3a land & safeguarding grade 3b agricultural land. The council must resist efforts by developers to appoint non independent surveyors to re classify farmland in order to obtain planning consents for a change of use. Classification of agricultural land should be assessed by an independent expert appointed by the council & paid for by the applicant. The importance of all agricultural land must be safeguarded as a means for food production as a source for primary & secondary income for Cornwall [ food produced then processed then retailed]. Solar Panel installations should be promoted only on buildings where their impact is mitigated or on genuine Brown Field sites. The loss of productive farmland in the time of a rapidly increasing population is a very risky development & a poor inheritance for future generations.
Policy 22 Para 2.91 The Council should seek to expand the safeguarding of the environment through legislation to extend AONB’s, SAGLVS & AGLV’s and to extend the protection from obtrusive renewable energy projects by confining them to Brown Field sites and to isolated sites where noise pollution will not harm residents.
Policy 22 Para 2.95 mention is made of retaining the AGLV’s but not extending them. No mention is made of forming buffer zones from AONB’s and AGLV’s to developments. A new development adjacent to any AONB or AGLV can have just as big an impact as it if was within that area. There is concern that there is a will to downgrade rather than upgrade the status of AGLV’s in order to make life easier for developers. The statement should be that AGLV status should be reinforced not revised.

Policy 23 – Natural Environment
The AGLV and AONB areas of Looe should be preserved and protected, Policies CL6, CL7, CL9, CL18, CL15 all apply to Looe. It is important to protect our coastal zone and heritage coastline and consider that no development should be permitted within these areas.

Policy 24 – Historic Environment
Policy 24 makes no mention of the Historic Core of East and West Looe or the listed buildings therein.
The retention and enhancement of the historic core is essential to Looe together with the protection of the Conservation Area. (Policy within the Caradon Local Plan 2007 Chapter 5 applies).

To download a final consultation copy of the Plan go to… Cornwall Local Plan: Strategic Policies Proposed (Pages 15, 106, 107, 108 relate specifically to housing in Looe) and for information on how the consultation process works go to… Cornwall Local Plan: Consultation

Representations can be emailed to the following address... localplan@cornwall.gov.uk

PREVIOUS CONSULTATION ON THE DRAFT CORNWALL LOCAL PLAN
(carried out March/April 2013)

The target for new house building for the period 2010 to 2030 was previously set at 2,000 for the Liskeard & Looe CNA PP15. Liskeard was to take half of the new homes and the remaining 1,000 was to be dispersed around the rest of the CNA.

The above figures are no longer applicable and have been updated to reflect changes in policy.

The following notes however are as valid as they were a year ago, perhaps even more so, in view of the significant increase in housing targets now proposed for the Looe area . . .

10 Apr 2013
Filling in the response form...

The CORNWALL LOCAL PLAN is in 2 parts: the STRATEGIC POLICIES and the SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL

The questions regarding the Strategic Policies could be answered along the following lines:

Questions 1) & 2) If not known then these could be left unanswered or 'no comment'/ 'not known' or words to that effect,
Question 3) This could be answered by expressing concerns that it has not been established that Looe can accommodate significant levels of development and also by suggesting that the reference to Looe in para 18.9 of PP15 on page 125 is either omitted altogether or rephrased - If rephrased it would be helpful to provide alternative wording.
You may also have concerns re the lack of specific reference to the historic environment of Looe and the need for any new development to be sympathetic to Looe's distinctive character and to enhance its tourist offering,
or other matters such as wind turbine proliferation, or the status of Areas of Great Landscape Value and so on.

It is important to also explain how any proposed revision to the wording of the Plan that you suggest will address your concerns.

We are assured that any personal data entered will not be published - only one's name will be assigned to the comment ◆

EXAMPLE RESPONSE FORM...

Alternative wording submitted by a respondent from Looe:

I propose that the statement referring to Looe in paragraph 18.9 is changed to...

“Looe has a good range of facilities and services and has a rail connection to Liskeard but growth will be subject to the availability of land for building which is restricted by the physical constraints of Looe’s hilly topography, sloping hillsides and flood risk from surface water run-off and high tides. The adequacy of the road network in and around Looe will also need to be addressed before allocating development sites within the remainder of the CNA.”

I feel that if the statement in 18.9 is left as is, then the word “more” will leave the door open to inappropriate development, especially in the interim period before the Neighbourhood Plan is in place and although there are safeguards in other areas of the Plan, it will still be available as a material consideration even though its basis is unproved.

Below are copies of recent correspondence with Cornwall Council in respect of the proposals...

10 April 2013
To the Principal Development Officer, Cornwall Council,

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your reply and for answering the queries raised. We trust that Policy 1 will not result in safeguards contained within other policies of the Cornwall Local Plan being overridden.

Our main concern however is that in PP15 Housing Requirements 18.9 (page 125) Looe is described as being able to accommodate more growth than other smaller settlements in the remainder of the CNA. It is not clear to us whether this is more growth simply as a result of its higher number of existing dwellings or more growth as result of a higher growth rate. Assuming it is the latter then we suggest that, as there has been no comprehensive assessment of Looe's physical constraints (which we outlined previously), it would be better if paragraph 18.9 were either omitted or modified per our earlier proposal.

This year in Looe we have had two occasions of tidal flooding and several significant landslips caused by surface water run-off, one of which resulted in the loss of life and the demolition of a property. Many here believe that some of the cause can be attributed to the 'sustainable' surface water disposal regime of a recently built housing development on higher ground. Also for nearly 6 months one or other of the main roads into Looe has been closed or restricted as a result, and the high rate of expansion of Looe over the past century compared with the rest of Cornwall has challenged the resilience of its infrastructure.

Page 98 of the Cornwall Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal 2013 poses the following question:

A number of the towns within the CNA areas identified for development are already vulnerable to climate change impacts associated with severe weather. Whilst it is recognised that a number are supported with Town Frameworks which have identified critical drainage areas and sustainable drainage solutions, e.g. Penzance, Hayle, CPIR. It is not clear how other areas identified for significant levels of development, such as Looe, which are not covered by more comprehensive assessment as required through a Town Framework process will ensure that development in the town is resilient to future impacts of climate change.

In light of the above, we would be grateful if consideration were to be given to removing or modifying paragraph 18.9.

Whilst writing, we note that although Policy CL9 from the Caradon Local Plan is retained, there is no reference to it in the wording of the Cornwall Local Plan. CL9 is also included, apparently in error, on page 144 in the list of policies that are replaced.

Kind regards

On 10 Apr 2013, at 15:35,
Cornwall Council's Principal Development Officer wrote:

Dear Resident,

Thank you for your email containing a response to the Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies consultation which I acknowledge receipt of. Your comments have been noted and will be able to view on the Council’s website along with all other responses received in due course. Following the completion of the consultation period all the responses will be reported to and considered by the relevant committee, before being submitted to the Secretary of State.

I have also answered your questions a set out in your original email:

1. With most of the policies of the Caradon Local Plan being superseded do you think the AGLV's are adequately protected in the new plan? I see that CL9 is one of a handful of policies being retained for the moment although a re-assesment of the areas is to be carried out?

From the end of March this year the National Planning Policy Framework is now the key document is assessing planning applications where there is no adopted Local Plan. In light of the age of the existing Local Plans across Cornwall there is logic in giving greatest weight to the NPPF and emerging Local Plan along with any saved policies listed in the emerging plan in giving the most up to date and guidance for decision making across Cornwall.

2. Also are you happy that Policy 1 so strongly reinforces presumption in favour of development?

Policy 1 is a national policy that Inspectors have been instructing Local Authorities to put into their Local Plans.

3. Do you know why the target minimum provision of new homes 2010 to 2030 for the remainder of the Liskeard & Looe CNA was increased from 700 to 1,000?

At Full Council on the 12 February 2013 Councillors voted on the amount of housing and how that is distributed throughout Cornwall, they decided the distribution should be of a more dispersed nature and based on a pro rata approach based on existing dwellings.

4. How will the target numbers referenced on page 7 be divided up between Looe, Dobwalls, Menheniot, St.Cleer, Pelynt, Polperro and Polruan? - in proportion to existing populations?

We have not set targets to individual villages in order that communities can shape their own futures through Neighbourhood Plans. This will obviously be shaped by housing need, environmental constraints etc in that individual area.

5. Will you be ensuring that the physical constraints of Looe (hills, rivers, sea, roads, flooding tidal and surface water) are taken into consideration when allocating development targets?

Every application that the Council receives will be judged against the NPPF and the policies within the Plan these includes policies that include design, development standards, the natural and historic environment, flood risk and climate change.

Kind regards

Principal Development Officer

9 April 2013

Dear Councillor,

We wondered whether you and/ or Looe Town Council were looking at the final draft of the Cornwall Local Plan (copy attached) which is out for public consultation until 5pm 22nd April 2013 as we have a number of queries?

With most of the policies of the Caradon Local Plan being superseded do you think the AGLV's are adequately protected in the new plan? I see that CL9 is one of a handful of policies being retained for the moment although a re-assesment of the areas is to be carried out,
Also are you happy that Policy 1 so strongly reinforces presumption in favour of development, and may override other planning policy considerations?
Do you know why the target minimum provision of new homes 2010 to 2030 for the remainder of the Liskeard & Looe CNA was increased from 700 to 1,000?
How will the target numbers (referenced on page 7 of the document) be divided up between Looe, Dobwalls, Menheniot, St.Cleer, Pelynt, Polperro and Polruan? - in proportion to existing populations?
Will you be ensuring that the physical constraints of Looe (hills, rivers, sea, roads, flooding tidal and surface water) are taken into consideration when allocating development targets?

With reference to our correspondence in November below, it is now even more apparent that recognition needs to be given to Looe's physical limitations in the Cornwall Local Plan policy document and that being a coastal settlement, Looe does not benefit from 360 degrees of land available for development.

The sea takes up 50%, the harbour and river take up the central valley, whilst the surrounding landscape is mostly high ground so any development here will inevitably have a disproportionately high impact. The rail connection referred to in the policy is useful but limited, whilst road connections are poor and the primary routes between Liskeard and Looe contain sections of narrow or single track lanes with passing places.

Yours sincerely

_______________________________________

RESPONSE TO CORNWALL LOCAL PLAN

Author Jan Sroczynski 18 April 2013

Para 1.2. Plan ‘ have an appropriate balance of jobs, services, facilities & homes’ No mention of amenities or preserving distinctive character & landscape of areas
Para 2.6 Tourism No mention of any plan for advertising & promotion of the Tourism Product. The challenge to provide ‘better wages’ in a stagnant economy is unrealistisc & would put up costs in a competitive market. No mention of how ‘improved quality & a longer season’ could be achieved. Currently quality of provision in Cornwall is very high.
2.7 & 2.8. Investment & support in Maritime & Newquay Airport is far higher than that in Tourism – although they both contribute far less of the GDP of Cornwall. There is an imbalance here.
Policy 14. Para 2.55 The commitment to at least 20% of energy consumption from renewable low Carbon sources by 2020 has already been achieved with current approved schemes & those with planning permission. The actual voluntary commitment is 30% as promised to the Covenant of Mayors – which Cornwall Council signed up to in October 2011. This target is n0t achievable as the Council is aware because the existing Western Power operated Grid cannot add any more input capacity. Given that there should be an immediate moratorium on further approvals for any renewable energy projects. The piecemeal development of renewable energy projects in rural areas is changing the Cornwall Heritage Landscape for ever & putting at risk the jobs of Cornwall biggest employer the Tourism Industry which supports 31% of all jobs because Tourists will not return to visit places which are spoiled by views of industrial power generation within a natural landscape. 78% of all tourists choose Cornwall because of their wish to see the iconic landscapes of Cornwall.
Policy 14. Para 2.56. ‘Given our aim to be a green peninsula resilient to rising energy costs’ Cornwall is already a Green Peninsula & the current drive by renewable energy firms seeking to profit from very generous Feed in Tariffs is destroying the green peninsula & adding massively to energy costs, pushing more Cornish families into fuel poverty. Latest figures show energy bills have risen by approx. 30% because of implementation of low carbon renewable energy rules – which provide less than 2% of total energy. The aim & the actual outcome is totally contradictory.
Policy 14. Para 2.58 ‘Supplementary Planning Guidance on noise’. As more evidence worldwide is published by the World Health Organisation and other scientific sources of the harmful effects of noise pollution & particularly low frequency noise – Cornwall Council rather than taking a Pro-Active response in imposing safe standards for proximity from Wind Turbines to Homes are confirming they will only have a Re-active response by ‘exploring more widely’. This is actually doing nothing when immediate action is required to protect people from noise pollution now. Cornwall Council are happy to rely on self regulation by the Wind Industry & reliance upon ETSU-R-97 – which is an outdated & insufficient standard which was supposed to be reviewed in 1999. No challenge is made to figures supplied by applicants with regard to surveys & desk top calculations & evidence supplied by Wind Turbine manufacturers. This situation is totally untenable & must be addressed immediately to protect the quality of life of residents as set out in the European Charter of Human Rights, Article 8.
Policy15. In areas of outstanding Natural Beauty & undeveloped Coast – developments would not be allowed except in exceptional circumstances’ The words ‘exceptional circumstances’ must be removed. There must be no commercial development of renewable energy projects in AONBs & other sensitive areas of natural beauty such as SAGLV’s & AGLV’s because by their nature they are obtrusive.
Policy 15 Para 2.59 Within this plan it is not sufficient to say impacts of renewable energy will be progressed formally. Cornwall already has a detailed report they commissioned -The Assessment of Landscape Sensitivity to On Shore Wind & Large Scale Photovoltaic Development – published Jan. 2012. Known as Technical Paper E4. The findings of this paper were recommended to be adopted by the Council in January 2013 and this was confirmed to me by a letter dated 14 December 2012 – ref IAR-101000302475. It was also confirmed that this report was being used prior to January 2013 as informal guidance.
Policy 15 Para 2.60 Confirmation that landscape Character is the key driver in developing the scale & density of development. It should be made clear that massive arrays of Solar Panels covering several acres & tall wind Turbines have a massive impact on all landscapes & their effects cannot be minimised. The Council should have a policy that Solar Panels should be confined to the large areas of new & existing buildings such as warehouses & supermarkets where their impact is actually minimised.
Policy 15 Para 2.61. This refers to the recommendations in Technical Paper E4 the assessment of Landscape Sensitivity to onshore wind energy & large scale photo voltaic development. It should be clarified that Technical Paper E4 is the actual Planning policy for these Developments & not just guidance. Incorporated within in this should be that there are minimum standards for proximity from these developments to dwellings that is binding - to meet the latest recommendations from the World Health Organisation.
Policy 15 Para. 2.62. It is vital that in view of the fact that Western Power have already informed the Council that target of 30% of renewable energy input to the grid cannot be accommodated that there is an immediate moratorium on new applications & consents because their contribution is simply not viable.
Policy 16 Para 2.64 Health & Well being. There is no doubt that there are a significant number of complaints relating to noise pollution from existing Wind Turbines and these have not been dealt with in a proper manner by the source of noise been stopped or curtailed during normal sleeping hours. The European Court of Human Rights contends that environmental noise pollution destroys a persons effective enjoyment of right to respect for home & private life, a violation of Article 8 of the Human Rights Act. By not imposing minimum safe distances from sources of noise pollution or ensuring that these sources in all circumstances meet current noise regulations the Council are aiding & abetting the perpetrators of the noise pollution. The consequent devaluation of a dwelling is a measure of the damage that arises when wind turbines are sited too close to a dwelling causing acoustic radiation and consequent adverse health responses. The Council should immediately consider a safe buffer zone of 2 Km between Wind turbines & dwellings for all turbines up to 2 Mw installed capacity with greater separation for Turbines greater than 2 Mw capacity. The output of aerodynamic modulation which is greater than that foreseen by the outdated ETSU-R-97 particularly in the night hours results in internal wind farm noise levels which provoke an adverse reaction from a listener. As more Turbines are erected near homes more communities are affected by these complex sounds. Noise is the human face of the science of sound and physicians are seeing the results. Within 1,5 Km of turbines people are suffering sleep deprivation, headaches, dizziness, unsteadiness [ inner ear problems], nausea, exhaustion, mood problems & inability to concentrate. These symptoms are now being reported from all over the world. The harmful effects of sound related to wind turbines are insufficiently assessed. The sounds being low frequency travel easily & vary according to the wind and constitute a permanent risk for people exposed to them. French Academy of Medicine as long ago as 2006 said Wind Turbines should be no closer than 1.5 km from homes. The Dti in 2006 also recommended further studies were required. Warning signs of future problems with new technologies have been overlooked or ignored in the past, much to the detriment of Public Health. One only has to look to the history of Asbestos, tobacco, thalidomide etc. Cornwall should be leading the way in ensuring public Health & Safety in imposing strict rules regarding Wind Turbines & regulating on the safe side – not allowing the Wind Industry & their consultants to self regulate.
Policy 17 Health & Well Being. Para 1. So far Cornwall Council has failed to protect residents from noise pollution from Wind Turbines by not imposing minimum distances for wind turbines from domestic dwellings. This may be regarded as negligent in the light of the increasing number of reports confirming that noise pollution causes health problems as in breach of the European Court of Human Rights legislation. It will not be long before legal actions with substantive claims for damages may be lodged against the council & the Turbine operators who may in their defence claim that they were operating within the guidelines leaving the tax payer to pick up the bill. Para 6. A Health Impact Assessment should become a mandatory part of applications to erect Wind Turbines- based on noise pollution levels relative to existing ambient noise levels – day & night & wind patterns.
Policy 22 Best Use of Land & Existing Buildings. Para d. Safeguarding Grade 1, 2 & 3a land & safeguarding grade 3b agricultural land. The council must resist efforts by developers to appoint non independent surveyors to re classify farmland in order to obtain planning consents for a change of use. Classification of agricultural land should be assessed by an independent expert appointed by the council & paid for by the applicant. The importance of all agricultural land must be safeguarded as a means for food production as a source for primary & secondary income for Cornwall [ food produced then processed then retailed]. Solar Panel installations should be promoted only on buildings where their impact is mitigated or on genuine Brown Field sites. The loss of productive farmland in the time of a rapidly increasing population is a very risky development & a poor inheritance for future generations.
Policy 22. Para. 2.88. Cornwalls Natural & Historic Environment. Research by Visit Cornwall shows that 78% of visitors choose Cornwall as a destination because of its iconic landscape. Economic figures released by visit Cornwall for 2011 show that 31% of jobs & a contribution of £1.854 billion comes from Tourism. The single biggest Employer & the Single biggest contributor to GDP. Large renewable energy projects have a massive negative impact on the Landscape. The large Turbines erected at Bodmin & Trethawle – both erected without being approved by a Planning Committee dominate the Landscape for up to 12 miles around. Visit Scotland reports 26% of visitors will not return to areas with wind turbines. Solar farms also have a devastating effect on rural landscapes and will do for 25 years. Tourism supplies local jobs for local people in Cornwall. Renewable energy projects supply virtually no permanent jobs in Cornwall. Risking ruining the key contributor to the Cornish Economy in pursuit of short term renewable energy projects which are in any case unreliable as an energy source is a huge mistake.
Policy 22 Para 2.89. The quality of life & the historic built & natural environment is a key attractor for people & investment into the County. Changing the unique character of the landscape for short term economic gain for landowners & investors & manufacturers outside the County is a huge disservice to the ordinary working people of Cornwall & the majority of small business owners whose income is derived directly & indirectly from the visitor economy. The very strict control of the very intrusive appearance of massive wind turbines & acres of solar panels which are totally alien to the Historic Cornish Environment must be implemented immediately & also with regard to the control of noise pollution & the safeguarding of amenity value of residents.
Policy22 Para 2.90. The council should be aware that the greatest investments in Cornwall are actually made by the small & medium businesses that are already established within Cornwall & who already acknowledge that the Historic Landscape & natural beauty is what supports their businesses. The current policy of the Council to attract investment from renewable energy firms who just establish themselves to make profit without any concern for the long term future of Cornwall will make it difficult for the existing businesses to continue to invest as visitor numbers fall as a result of the massive change in the landscape making Cornwall a much less attractive destination.. Even a 5% drop in visitor numbers will have a massive negative effect on those who make a living thro Tourism & its support structure. Foreign visitors who wish to see the iconic landscapes described by Daphne duMaurier do not want to see acres of reflective glass & massive Wind Turbines.
Policy 22 Para 2.91. The Council should seek to expand the safeguarding of the environment through legislation to extend AONB’s, SAGLVS & AGLV’s & to extend the protection from obtrusive renewable energy projects by confining them to Brown Field sites & to isolated sites where noise pollution will not harm residents.
Policy 22 Para 2.95. mention is made of retaining the AGLV’s but not extending them . No mention is made of forming buffer zones from AONB’s & AGLV’s to developments. A new development adjacent to any AONB or AGLV can have just as big an impact as if it was within that area. There is concern that there is a will to downgrade rather than upgrade the status of AGLV’s in order to make life easier for developers. The statement should be that AGLV status should be reinforced not revised.
Policy 22 Para. 2.98 Planning applications that have an effect on bio-diversity. Solar farms both existing & planned have 2 m security fencing around them. This immediately impedes & curtails the movement of wild animals who are prevented from using their natural & historic trails & hunting areas. The covering of vast areas of farmland with glass panels stops the normal feeding habits of birds. No study has been done of the long term results of covering agricultural land for 25 years & the types of weeds & plants that will start to grow in this restricted environment. It is known that young bats often fly into solar panels – mistaking them for water. The appearance of the landscape is changed from rural to industrial with solar farms surrounded by high wire fences & security cameras not only creating an ugly impact on the environment but severely impacting on bio diversity.
Policy 23 Natural Environment. Para 1. Cornish Landscapes. The introduction of industrial methods of energy production over vast tracts of the Cornish Landscape is totally contrary to the aims of maintaining the landscape & peace & tranquillity . The two ideas cannot be synonymous . These developments will change the Cornish Landscape for the worse for ever. The Council has never sought by way of guarantee or insurance bond any security that the installations which have planning permission for a minimum of 25 years will ever be removed or disposed of in a safe manner without contamination. The fact that within a few years new technologies will be introduced which are safer & more cost effective & less obtrusive, may and more likely will make these Wind Turbines & Solar farms – which are inherently inefficient – obsolete, has never been taken into account or planned for & should be addressed as a matter of urgency.

END of My Brief.

Looe Strategy Group

Cornwall Local Plan

Changes to Cornwall’s Local Plan overwhelmingly approved:

No comments :

Post a Comment