Shock refusal of Bickland Water Road homes development welcomed

Falmouth Packet: Shock refusal of Bickland Water Road homes development welcomed Shock refusal of Bickland Water Road homes development welcomed

Plans for up to 153 new homes on land off Bickland Water Road in Falmouth were rejected by councillors this week, despite the case officer urging them to approve the scheme.

Midas Developments had applied for outline consent to build the homes, new estate roads and create an area of open space on what is commonly known as Pool Field, but Cornwall councillors voted by eight to five to refuse the proposals on Monday.

The reasons for the rejection were the loss of grade two agricultural land and the visual impact the development would have on the setting of the listed Budock Church. There were also concerns over whether the local road network could cope with the additional traffic, and the lack of space at St Francis School.

The refusal has been welcomed by both Falmouth Town Council and Budock Parish Council, who had both voiced their opposition to the scheme.

Councillor Alan Jewell, chairman of Falmouth’s strategic planning committee, said: “This is a site too far. I would like to think that Falmouth would not come any further this way when there is so much land down towards the Channel 4 field more suitable.”

Councillor John Bastin, chairman of the parish council, said: “It was an excellent outcome and means that the grade two land has been preserved for the future. What is needed now is for the Bickland zone to be revisited and removed from the planning option so that this top quality land can be preserved not only for future food production but also to help with flood prevention as the climate gets wetter.”

It was local Cornwall Councillor Neil Hatton, who proposed refusal. He said: “There are so many applications coming in so fast, I do not think we have the infrastructure to cope with all the developments.”

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:30am Fri 14 Feb 14

real_woodworm says...

For those not in the know, where is the Channel 4 field????
For those not in the know, where is the Channel 4 field???? real_woodworm

9:43am Fri 14 Feb 14

Kernowkarmann says...

If you come up past the football club and cross the 2 roundabouts it's the field on the right, originally called the channel 4 field as the transmitter was there when the channel was launched. Didn't know that was its official name though!
If you come up past the football club and cross the 2 roundabouts it's the field on the right, originally called the channel 4 field as the transmitter was there when the channel was launched. Didn't know that was its official name though! Kernowkarmann

9:48am Fri 14 Feb 14

Gillian R.Z. Martin says...

This is good news, Budock Water Parish Council and Falmouth Town Council recommended refusal and Cornwall Council central sub area planning committee have refused it, common sense prevails, with at least five years supply of alternative land it would in my view have made no sense to use grade two agricultural land. The infrastructure problems had not been adequately addressed, in addition to which there is no proven need for housing in the Budock Parish.
This is good news, Budock Water Parish Council and Falmouth Town Council recommended refusal and Cornwall Council central sub area planning committee have refused it, common sense prevails, with at least five years supply of alternative land it would in my view have made no sense to use grade two agricultural land. The infrastructure problems had not been adequately addressed, in addition to which there is no proven need for housing in the Budock Parish. Gillian R.Z. Martin

5:04pm Fri 14 Feb 14

seacom says...

As Councillor Bastin states the loss of top grade agricultural land along Bickland Water road needs to remain as water is in the name and given the current weather you can see why! Hopefully this decision will also see the protection of the fields at Menehay and beyond also protected for future agricultural production.Councillo
r Jewell quite right about the Channel 4 field but what about the Church of England fields beyond that?
As Councillor Bastin states the loss of top grade agricultural land along Bickland Water road needs to remain as water is in the name and given the current weather you can see why! Hopefully this decision will also see the protection of the fields at Menehay and beyond also protected for future agricultural production.Councillo r Jewell quite right about the Channel 4 field but what about the Church of England fields beyond that? seacom

9:29pm Fri 14 Feb 14

MARTIN GILL says...

This Application by Midas Construction, was previously turned down twice by the Council. Only for Midas to waste every ones time and a Government Inspector became involved.
I fully agree with Gillian Martin. and Seacom's comments. Menehay Farm and Roscarrack Farm must be preserved forever against speculators hoping to make a few more Bucks. We have already the prospect of hundreds of Houses being built at Kergillack in a couple of years from now, once the Roundabout at Union Corner has been upgraded.
This Application by Midas Construction, was previously turned down twice by the Council. Only for Midas to waste every ones time and a Government Inspector became involved. I fully agree with Gillian Martin. and Seacom's comments. Menehay Farm and Roscarrack Farm must be preserved forever against speculators hoping to make a few more Bucks. We have already the prospect of hundreds of Houses being built at Kergillack in a couple of years from now, once the Roundabout at Union Corner has been upgraded. MARTIN GILL

8:08am Sun 16 Feb 14

molesworth says...

Let's hope this stops the 'not enough homes for us locals' moaners now. Locals don't want Cornwall to become a huge housing estate. And this judgement proves it. Well done to all involved who stopped it. Can we now stop 'road improvements' which are just making people drive faster?
Let's hope this stops the 'not enough homes for us locals' moaners now. Locals don't want Cornwall to become a huge housing estate. And this judgement proves it. Well done to all involved who stopped it. Can we now stop 'road improvements' which are just making people drive faster? molesworth

9:59am Sun 16 Feb 14

Gillian R.Z. Martin says...

molesworth wrote:
Let's hope this stops the 'not enough homes for us locals' moaners now. Locals don't want Cornwall to become a huge housing estate. And this judgement proves it. Well done to all involved who stopped it. Can we now stop 'road improvements' which are just making people drive faster?
I disagree with you, locals do need homes, but in the right place with the school placements etc facilities and adequate infrastructure, Cornwall Council are well aware of those areas that need extra dwellings and those that do not. For example, I believe Penwith area requires more dwellings than Falmouth.
[quote][p][bold]molesworth[/bold] wrote: Let's hope this stops the 'not enough homes for us locals' moaners now. Locals don't want Cornwall to become a huge housing estate. And this judgement proves it. Well done to all involved who stopped it. Can we now stop 'road improvements' which are just making people drive faster?[/p][/quote]I disagree with you, locals do need homes, but in the right place with the school placements etc facilities and adequate infrastructure, Cornwall Council are well aware of those areas that need extra dwellings and those that do not. For example, I believe Penwith area requires more dwellings than Falmouth. Gillian R.Z. Martin

10:05am Sun 16 Feb 14

Gillian R.Z. Martin says...

Incidentally, out of the 47,500 dwellings in the proposed local plan, 27,000 have already been granted permission and over 7,000 have already been built, leaving the remainder for the next 17 years.
Incidentally, out of the 47,500 dwellings in the proposed local plan, 27,000 have already been granted permission and over 7,000 have already been built, leaving the remainder for the next 17 years. Gillian R.Z. Martin

10:21am Sun 16 Feb 14

real_woodworm says...

We need to be aware though that if an application comes in for the area to the south-east of Hillhead roundabout there won't be much in the way of grounds to refuse it with access straight from the roundabout. Visual impact may be the only grounds, but with the seried ranks so visible up Old Hill and Glasney Road I think that one may be weak!
We need to be aware though that if an application comes in for the area to the south-east of Hillhead roundabout there won't be much in the way of grounds to refuse it with access straight from the roundabout. Visual impact may be the only grounds, but with the seried ranks so visible up Old Hill and Glasney Road I think that one may be weak! real_woodworm

1:27pm Mon 17 Feb 14

molesworth says...

Gillian R.Z. Martin wrote:
molesworth wrote:
Let's hope this stops the 'not enough homes for us locals' moaners now. Locals don't want Cornwall to become a huge housing estate. And this judgement proves it. Well done to all involved who stopped it. Can we now stop 'road improvements' which are just making people drive faster?
I disagree with you, locals do need homes, but in the right place with the school placements etc facilities and adequate infrastructure, Cornwall Council are well aware of those areas that need extra dwellings and those that do not. For example, I believe Penwith area requires more dwellings than Falmouth.
Gillian, if a major town like Falmouth has less 'facilities and adequate infrastructure' than Penwith then I'll eat my old fishing hat (and that would be verging on suicidal). Surely it's better to build on the outskirts of a major town that already has doctors, schools, shops etc. than on some random bit of countryside in the middle of nowhere? Also, if the council knows where all the areas are that 'need' extra dwellings why aren't they suggesting them? Or are they doing so and the locals themselves don't want the dwellings? Like in Falmouth.
[quote][p][bold]Gillian R.Z. Martin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molesworth[/bold] wrote: Let's hope this stops the 'not enough homes for us locals' moaners now. Locals don't want Cornwall to become a huge housing estate. And this judgement proves it. Well done to all involved who stopped it. Can we now stop 'road improvements' which are just making people drive faster?[/p][/quote]I disagree with you, locals do need homes, but in the right place with the school placements etc facilities and adequate infrastructure, Cornwall Council are well aware of those areas that need extra dwellings and those that do not. For example, I believe Penwith area requires more dwellings than Falmouth.[/p][/quote]Gillian, if a major town like Falmouth has less 'facilities and adequate infrastructure' than Penwith then I'll eat my old fishing hat (and that would be verging on suicidal). Surely it's better to build on the outskirts of a major town that already has doctors, schools, shops etc. than on some random bit of countryside in the middle of nowhere? Also, if the council knows where all the areas are that 'need' extra dwellings why aren't they suggesting them? Or are they doing so and the locals themselves don't want the dwellings? Like in Falmouth. molesworth

2:42pm Mon 17 Feb 14

Gillian R.Z. Martin says...

molesworth wrote:
Gillian R.Z. Martin wrote:
molesworth wrote:
Let's hope this stops the 'not enough homes for us locals' moaners now. Locals don't want Cornwall to become a huge housing estate. And this judgement proves it. Well done to all involved who stopped it. Can we now stop 'road improvements' which are just making people drive faster?
I disagree with you, locals do need homes, but in the right place with the school placements etc facilities and adequate infrastructure, Cornwall Council are well aware of those areas that need extra dwellings and those that do not. For example, I believe Penwith area requires more dwellings than Falmouth.
Gillian, if a major town like Falmouth has less 'facilities and adequate infrastructure' than Penwith then I'll eat my old fishing hat (and that would be verging on suicidal). Surely it's better to build on the outskirts of a major town that already has doctors, schools, shops etc. than on some random bit of countryside in the middle of nowhere? Also, if the council knows where all the areas are that 'need' extra dwellings why aren't they suggesting them? Or are they doing so and the locals themselves don't want the dwellings? Like in Falmouth.
My comment was based on one of the full council meetings where the local plan was discussed, as you are probably aware, the council has to allow for an estimated projected growth rate in population over a period of time and balance this with the current need for housing including affordable dwellings to buy and rent, then submit a realistic figure to the government, if it does not, then the government mandate is to dictate to the council what it must build over a period of set time and the figure would likely then be a lot higher. During the council meeting some Councillors stated what needs for their areas were, and as far as I remember, Penwith representation stated they need quite a high number of dwellings and were raising concerns that the local plan may not cater enough for their area. I was not suggesting they build on some random bit of countryside in the middle of nowhere, but adequate facilities have to be available, the government have as far as I know, pledged the building of some new schools where necessary.
I agree to a certain extent that to extend existing towns/villages makes sense but only if there is a proven need for properties in that area and the current schools and doctors etc have the vacancies.
There is currently alternative land supply re Falmouth which I believe the council are looking to use in preference.
Regarding infrastructure, I believe it is sometimes far easier to provide new infrastructure with new towns/estates than to try to alter or add to some existing over-stretched infrastructure where there is little scope for alteration.
[quote][p][bold]molesworth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gillian R.Z. Martin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molesworth[/bold] wrote: Let's hope this stops the 'not enough homes for us locals' moaners now. Locals don't want Cornwall to become a huge housing estate. And this judgement proves it. Well done to all involved who stopped it. Can we now stop 'road improvements' which are just making people drive faster?[/p][/quote]I disagree with you, locals do need homes, but in the right place with the school placements etc facilities and adequate infrastructure, Cornwall Council are well aware of those areas that need extra dwellings and those that do not. For example, I believe Penwith area requires more dwellings than Falmouth.[/p][/quote]Gillian, if a major town like Falmouth has less 'facilities and adequate infrastructure' than Penwith then I'll eat my old fishing hat (and that would be verging on suicidal). Surely it's better to build on the outskirts of a major town that already has doctors, schools, shops etc. than on some random bit of countryside in the middle of nowhere? Also, if the council knows where all the areas are that 'need' extra dwellings why aren't they suggesting them? Or are they doing so and the locals themselves don't want the dwellings? Like in Falmouth.[/p][/quote]My comment was based on one of the full council meetings where the local plan was discussed, as you are probably aware, the council has to allow for an estimated projected growth rate in population over a period of time and balance this with the current need for housing including affordable dwellings to buy and rent, then submit a realistic figure to the government, if it does not, then the government mandate is to dictate to the council what it must build over a period of set time and the figure would likely then be a lot higher. During the council meeting some Councillors stated what needs for their areas were, and as far as I remember, Penwith representation stated they need quite a high number of dwellings and were raising concerns that the local plan may not cater enough for their area. I was not suggesting they build on some random bit of countryside in the middle of nowhere, but adequate facilities have to be available, the government have as far as I know, pledged the building of some new schools where necessary. I agree to a certain extent that to extend existing towns/villages makes sense but only if there is a proven need for properties in that area and the current schools and doctors etc have the vacancies. There is currently alternative land supply re Falmouth which I believe the council are looking to use in preference. Regarding infrastructure, I believe it is sometimes far easier to provide new infrastructure with new towns/estates than to try to alter or add to some existing over-stretched infrastructure where there is little scope for alteration. Gillian R.Z. Martin

9:34am Tue 18 Feb 14

Helston fly on the wall says...

I am sure Falmouth will get their share of houses, just not in a place where only one person seems to want them, the case officer. Falmouth TC. Budock Parish and CC planning don't want them in this particular place. Helston are to get houses and there is a choice of sites and they are discussing with residents their choice of sites.
I am sure Falmouth will get their share of houses, just not in a place where only one person seems to want them, the case officer. Falmouth TC. Budock Parish and CC planning don't want them in this particular place. Helston are to get houses and there is a choice of sites and they are discussing with residents their choice of sites. Helston fly on the wall

8:44pm Tue 18 Feb 14

molesworth says...

Let's hope there'll be jobs for all the people who are gong to live in these esates...
Let's hope there'll be jobs for all the people who are gong to live in these esates... molesworth

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree