Public meeting in Probus

Wainhomes and Cornwall Council public meeting

36 On Monday 16th September, writes John Denyer, a public meeting was held in the village hall. Led by Cornwall Council Planning Department, it was what they call a PACE (Pre-Application Community Engagement) forum. Representatives from Cornwall Council Planning team, Wainhomes, and some County Councillors were in attendance. According to the council website, the object of a PACE meeting is:

• to enable the developer to explain development proposals directly to Members, the Local Council and local residents

• to identify any issues that may be considered in any formal application

• to inform Members and the public of a development proposal at an early stage in the pre-application process

• to inform officer pre-application discussions with the developer

• to enable the developer to shape an application to address community issues.

Wainhomes explained their plans to build a further 50 homes on the field south of Carne View Road and east of Parkengear Vean, that they have an option to purchase from the landowner.

Access to the development would be via a continuation of Rosva Wenton, the new road in Tregony View estate, crossing the bridleway (Parkengear Vean), and continuing into the new development.

We learnt that a small parcel of land at the very bottom of Carne View had cleverly been retained by the landowner (when the Carne View estate was originally built), to provide access should the field in question ever be developed. Wainhomes said that a footpath would be built on this land to connect Carne View with the new development.

It was a heavily structured meeting with the format being slanted if not to the developer’s benefit, but certainly away from the audience’s. Questions could be asked (maximum three minutes per person) but answers were only provided at the very end with no challenge possible. This was not an opportunity for public debate.

The situation was not helped by an inadequate PA system with many people unable to hear clearly what was being said.

Firstly, the developer’s agent explained the broad concept. A proposed development of approximately 50 properties, to be built for, and sold as a turnkey project to, Cornwall Council.

The development would be a mix of different sized properties all for the rental market. Some to be offered at ‘market rent’ with others at ‘affordable rent’.

A plan was projected onto a small screen that was frankly, impossible to read by the majority present. The only handouts provided were the ‘rules’ for the meeting. We were told not to dwell on the detail of the plan as it was likely to change between preapplication and any formal application.

A representative from Cornwall Council planning department explained the planning process, emphasising that nothing is a ‘done deal’ and that each application is assessed purely upon its merits.

A representative from Wainhomes didn’t exactly endear himself to the audience by refering to Probus as a town and by then pronouncing Tregony as ‘Tre Goney’. Not that I suppose he lost a moment’s sleep over that.

The audience was offered the opportunity to make comment or ask questions. I’ve tried to summarise those that I managed to record below:

• Questions over the safety of the Tregony Road junction to the A390

• Concerns about protection of wildlife on the development land

• Access concerns through the new estate

• Impact on Carne View Road - view/screening of the new development

• Safety concerns regarding traffic on Tregony Road

• Several comments to the effect: ‘What is the point of this meeting? Isn’t it a done deal?’

• Concerns over vehicular access to the three houses in Carne View Road who use the parcel of land (still owned by Trewithen) to access their properties

• Concerns about school capacity

• Concerns about waiting times to see a GP

• Allocation of private vs affordable housing

• What percentage of properties will be allocated to Probus residents?

• Concerns about pedestrian access and safety on Tregony Road

• Would a road be built to connect St Austell Road (through the proposed Garden Centre) with Tregony View?

• Another comment: ‘This is a done deal. What Wainhomes says goes, the appeal system is flawed and Cornwall Council is feeble in the enforcement of planning conditions as evidenced by the destruction of the ancient Cornish hedge on the current site’

• How long before development continues all the way to the roundabout?

• Concerns regarding water pressure and reliability of electricity supply

• What Section 106 money went to Probus School from the first Tregony View development?

• One resident explained she had attended each day of the appeal process (for the current Tregony View development) and provided her viewpoints, calling the appeal a fiasco, with abysmal and ill-prepared, legal representation from Cornwall Council losing every argument to the expensive London barristers employed by the developer

The floor was subsequently handed back to the developer and their agent who addressed the questions raised, or at least those that they chose to address.

Again, the answers that I managed to record are summarised:

We were told that ‘statistically’ no increase of traffic has been recorded in Probus since the Tregony Road development was completed.

No serious incidents had occured at the Tregony Road/A390 junction.

A wildlife study will be carried out.

The developer does not believe there are issues between vehicles and pedestrians on Tregony Road.

There were no plans to develop a road through the land thought to become a garden centre and join with Rosva Wenton.

The developers believe that any school children from the new development would walk to school along Carne View Road rather than take the much shorter route via the playing field to Tregony Road and Probus Village Square.

No Section 106 money had gone directly to Probus School, instead it went to a general ‘education pot’ for the whole county.

Owners of the three houses in Carne View Road should take up any concerns with the landowner (believed to be Trewithen).

There were no known issues with water or electricity supply and if there were, they would be addressed during development.

One County Councillor offered his advice to Probus in that we should ‘screw the developer for all we can get’.

The same councillor then said that if this development is turned down at the planning stage, and if the developer decides to appeal, then Cornwall Council will ‘walk away’.

I really don’t think the last comment had been properly thought through.

I think it’s fair to say that the majority of the audience will have left the meeting dissatisfied and not necessarily any wiser. Some left with a certain feeling of inadequacy but for many, a much more profound sense of déjà vu.