Advice on planning applications in St Just and Pendeen

Have your say on planning applications in St Just and Pendeen by visiting the Cornwall Council’s planning website and making comments on-line or write in to Cornwall Council.

When supporting or objecting to a planning application it is important that you use proper planning reasons, otherwise your views will carry little or no weight. See material considerations section below.

Keep an eye on the Town Council Boards, in the car park in Pendeen and near the Co-Op in St Just, for planning applications that are being considered. A new list will appear twice per month, the week before each town council meeting.

Neighbourhood planning (see letter below) is a way that some towns and parishes are beginning to set out how they want their neighbourhoods to look in the future. This can be green spaces or community buildings they want protected or places they regard as most suitable for housing and industry. It can also state infrastructure needs, for the future.

Edwina Hannaford (@EdwinaHannaford)
Some useful planning guidance fact sheets…. fb.me/44ZRd8qwN

MATERIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

Issues that may be relevant to planning applications in St Just and Pendeen.

(There may exist further material planning considerations not included here)

• Local, strategic, national planning policies and policies in the Development Plan.

• Emerging new plans which have already been through at least one stage of public consultation.

• Pre-application planning consultation carried out by, or on behalf of, the applicant.

• Government and Planning Inspectorate requirements – circulars, orders, statutory instruments, guidance and advice.

• Previous appeal decisions and planning Inquiry reports.

• Principles of Case Law held through the Courts.

• Loss of sunlight (based on Building Research Establishment guidance).

• Overshadowing/loss of outlook to the detriment of residential amenity (though not loss of view as such).

• Overlooking and loss of privacy.

• Highway issues: traffic generation, vehicular access, highway safety.

• Noise or disturbance resulting from use, including proposed hours of operation.

• Smells and fumes.

• Capacity of physical infrastructure, e.g. in the public drainage or water systems.

• Deficiencies in social facilities, e.g. spaces in schools.

• Storage & handling of hazardous materials and development of contaminated land.

• Loss or effect on trees.

• Adverse impact on nature conservation interests & biodiversity opportunities.

• Effect on listed buildings and conservation areas.

• Incompatible or unacceptable uses.

• Local financial considerations offered as a contribution or grant.

• Layout and density of building design, visual appearance and finishing materials.

• Inadequate or inappropriate landscaping or means of enclosure.

The weight attached to material considerations in reaching a decision is a matter of
judgement for the decision-taker however the decision-taker is required to demonstrate
that in reaching that decision that they have considered all relevant matters.

Generally greater weight is attached to issues raised which are supported by evidence
rather than solely by assertion.

If an identified problem can be dealt with by means of a suitable condition then the Local
Planning Authority is required to consider this rather than by issuing a refusal.

NON-MATERIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

Issues that are not relevant to the decision are
(There exist further non-material planning considerations not included in this list)

• Matters controlled under building regulations or other non-planning legislation e.g. structural stability, drainage details, fire precautions, matters covered by licences etc.

• Private issues between neighbours e.g. land/boundary disputes, damage to property, private rights of access, covenants, ancient and other rights to light etc.

• Problems arising from the construction period of any works, e.g. noise, dust, construction vehicles, hours of working (covered by Control of Pollution Acts).

• Opposition to the principle of development when this has been settled by an outline planning permission or appeal.

• Applicant’s personal circumstances (unless exceptionally and clearly relevant, e.g. provision of facilities for someone with a physical disability).

• Previously made objections/representations regarding another site or application.

• Factual misrepresentation of the proposal.

• Opposition to business competition.

• Loss of property value.

• Loss of view.

NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING

I read a piece in the Cornishman, on 10 July, that gave the impression that small communities could not afford neighbourhood plans. I wanted to point out that some small Parishes are finding a way that local communities can establish the future of their own community, without excessive costs to tax payers. My letter is below:

“I respond to the piece in the Cornishman on 10 July 2014, headed “Fears of gridlock as more homes planned.” Mr Bennett suggests local plans, called neighbourhood plans, which enable communities to decide the future look and aspirations of their communities, are beyond the reach of smaller parish councils. Having attended some neighbourhood planning training recently, the representative from St Cleer exposed that thought as a myth!

St Cleer is hardly a huge parish and yet they are well under way and believe they are going to do this for less than £2,000! A grant of up to £7,000 is available for each plan so this project will be fully funded, financially.

Neighbouring parishes of St Neot and Warleggan are also working on plans and the Parishes are collaborating together whilst preparing separate plans.

For more information make contact with them as they are proud of their achievements and are keen to be open and transparent about the process. Their website is www.bodminmoorplans.net.

There are also toolkits to follow on the Cornwall Council website and council staff keen to support even the smallest of communities find what is right for them. Not all communities need to embark on a full blown neighbourhood plan.
I hope this offers readers another viewpoint.”