APPENDICES TO PARISH NDP CONSULTATION STATEMENT

1 APPENDICES

Appendix A, page 3: Postal survey from Mawnan Parish Council to residents to determine level of support for a Neighbourhood Development Plan

Appendix B, page 7: Leaflet from Mawnan Parish Council to residents inviting them to a public meeting

Appendix C, page 10: Steering Group terms of reference

Appendix D, page 13: Designation letter from Mawnan Parish Council to Council seeking determination that Mawnan Parish could be used as an area for a Neighbourhood Development Plan

Appendix E, page 16: Statement of Engagement listing all events 2016-2021

Appendix F, page 27: Working group summaries of membership and processes

Appendix G, page 39: Leaflet September 2017 explaining NDP and inviting members of the public to formal launch meeting

Appendix H, page 43: 2018 Parish questionnaire, plus envelopes

Appendix I, page 50: Lists of all freestyle comments submitted with main 2018 questionnaire

Appendix J, page 108: Display panels used at exhibition of results from the questionnaire

Appendix K, page 123: Pro-forma question guide for interviewers of businesses

Appendix L, page 127: Display panels at SEA/HRA results exhibition

Appendix M, page 146: Handwritten comments received at SEA/HRA results exhibition

Appendix N, page 151: Letter launching Regulation 14 public consultation

Appendix O, page 154: E-newsletter launching Public Consultation

Appendix P, page 159: Sample posters for Regulation 14 launch

Appendix Q, page 162: Press cuttings

Appendix R, page 164: Letters sent to owners proposing to record Non-Designated Heritage Assets

Appendix S, page 167: Letters sent to landowners proposing to designate Local Green Spaces

Appendix T, page 170: All comments in full raised at Regulation 14

Appendix U, page 281: Guidance notes on identifying potential N-DHAs and LGSs

Appendix V, page 287: Supplementary Consultation Correspondence entered into during Regulation 14 public consultation

Appendix W, page 368: Extracts from all Mawnan Parish Council Meeting minutes from June 2016 to January 2021 that referenced the Mawnan Neighbourhood Development Plan (MNDP)

Appendix X, page 426: Compendium of all steering group meetings

Appendix Y, page 579: Examples of e-newsletters

Appendix Z, page 589: Examples of entries in the Mawnan Diary

TOTAL PAGES, 592 APPENDIX A TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

3 4 5 6 APPENDIX B TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

7 8 9 APPENDIX C TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

10 11 12 APPENDIX D TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

13 14 15 APPENDIX E TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 APPENDIX F TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 APPENDIX G TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

39 40 41 42 APPENDIX H TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

43 44 45 46 47 48 49 APPENDIX I TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 APPENDIX J TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 APPENDIX K TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

123 124 125 126 APPENDIX L TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 APPENDIX M TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

146 147 148 149 150 APPENDIX N TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

151 152 153 APPENDIX O TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

154 155 156 157 158 APPENDIX P TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

159 160 161 APPENDIX Q TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

162 163 APPENDIX R TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

164 165 166 APPENDIX S TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

167 168 169 APPENDIX T TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

170 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

File Comment Discussion/ Decision Ref

1 From Resident: on 21/8/20

During the NDP progress, I expressed a strongly held view that affordables, particularly single bedroom ones, should be one and a half bedroom - this extra (half) room being big enough to facilitate a single bed and a cupboard.

This would, I iterated, mean, dependent on the domestic situation and age of the resident/s, it could provide space for either a visitor, a carer or indeed an office space or if for a young couple, a bedroom for a baby. It seemed a sensible suggestion.

The world has moved on due to the pandemic and the fundamental move to home-working, this seems to be an opportunity to amend the NDP to include in all future built single affordable accommodation, making the minimum number of bedrooms to one and a half.

The evidence I've seen so far, is that people in lower cost housing are and will be the most impacted by the home-working requirement, often with very limited space and given the NDP is at a point where it could be amended, I wonder what your views might be?

NDP Response: on 24/8/20

It is a really opportune point to raise as a result of the impact on many people’s home lives resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic. I suggest we make it the first question raised in the Reg.14 pre-submission consultation.

I have taken professional advice, and we can add wording post Reg.14 that would support the design of house types that accommodate or provide for home working space. This might not refer back to the number of bedrooms which are, I understand (in terms of affordable housing), specifically defined in terms of need, but in a way which allows even a 1 bedroom apartment to have office or home working space.

The great thing about raising this now is that it relates to a real-life situation experienced by so many people of working age. We will work up suitable wording and see if it stacks up against what we are allowed to say. It also raises a parallel issue, that of whether big house builders pay much, or any, attention to the RIBA space recommendations of new built

1 Mawnan NOP Regulation 14 Comments File

homes; I have always thought there should be firm action to force these standards into legislation - pressure on our MP on this and working space might just help.

NOP Consideration: Add wording to support additional space. ction Req'd

2 From Resident: on 24/8/20 No further action Thank you for the email (well-written and very comprehensive) regarding the launch of the Public Consultation. (NFA) Congratulations to all who have worked so hard to arrive at this stage. Simply to say that I fully support the NOP and all its recommendations. I look forward to the public referendum so that I can vote for it to be made binding. 3 From Resident: on 25/8/20

I've been looking through the very interesting list of non-designated heritage assets and I think there is an error in the listing of Norways Farm Barn, which is described as a former chapel. The barn is built with concrete blocks and looks as though it was built as a barn with the hope of later converting to residential use. Surely the chapel was the building on the other side of the road, a bit nearer the village - Foxglove Cottage, which has the original foundation stones visible.

NOP Comment: Research in progress via NDHA member. Retain Norways Barn & add Foxglove Cottage after consulting owner? NDHA for action

4 From Highways :

25 August 2020 15:11 Mawnan Parish NOP Admin RE: Mawnan Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan (NOP) - Highways England comments Dear Neighbourhood Plan team

Thank you for providing Highways England with the opportunity to comment on the pre• submission version of the Mawnan Neighbourhood Plan. Highways England is responsible for operating, maintaining, renewing and improving the strategic road network, which in this case comprises the A30 trunk road which passes some considerable distance to the north of the Plan area.

2 Mawnan NOP Regulation 14 Comments File

We are therefore satisfied that the Plan's proposed policies will not result in development which will adversely impact on the strategic road network and we have no comments to make. NFA

Kind regards -

Web: http://www.highways.gov.uk

5 From Resident: on 25/8/20

To all you hard working people! NFA I have read through all the latest documents of the Mawnan Development Plan and I wholeheartedly support the document. 6 From South West Water: on 27 /8/20

Dennis thank you for providing details of the above the content of which is noted and upon which South West Water has no specific comment. NFA

Regards

Pre-Development Technical Advisor

� South West Water

3 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

6A From NDP Chair: Re Budock Vean Cottage after telecon with Chair 18/9/20

Thank you for contacting the Mawnan NDP team through the Parish office about the inclusion of your house on the Non- Designated Heritage Asset (N-DHA) list, and for expressing your concerns as to whether the house meets the criteria for inclusion, and a possible adverse effect on value in the long term.

The N-DHA list was compiled to bring together those properties and other structures that contribute to the historical heritage of the Parish, but which are not of such significance as to be included in the national listing (Grades I, II* and II). In a rural Parish such as Mawnan however, they are very much still part of that heritage, all too easily lost, and contribute greatly to the character, charm and attractiveness of the area which makes it so popular and loved by residents and visitors alike.

That a property is not listed nationally does not mean that it is not in line with valued heritage assets as outlined in general terms in the National Planning Policy Framework or the Cornwall Local Plan, just that it is not so absolutely defined. The N-DHA just seeks to identify those properties that are part of that heritage in our Parish and village.

You took the trouble to explain to me your concerns, and after taking further advice on the matter I can confirm the step open to you should you wish to pursue the matter further.

The correct procedure is for you to write to the Parish Council, c/o the Parish clerk, outlining your reasons why you feel your house should not be included. Your response would be formally recorded as part of the consultation, assessed initially as part of the NDP and will be considered by the independent examiner when appointed.

I recommend that you base your ‘objection’, if I may call it that, on factual reasons as to why you feel your house does not match up to the description of being a “Heritage Asset”, i.e. does not have heritage value. Any theoretical potential loss in value is not a planning consideration (being a private matter) and would be considered irrelevant, so I suggest you don’t include it. Don’t forget you have up to the 30th October to register your comments.

I hope this is helpful. Do feel free to contact me if I can offer further clarification.

R esident’s Response: 30/10/20

Re: Budock Vean Cottage, TR11 5LJ

4 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

Thank you for your letters of 8th September and follow up from on 18th September. I will be grateful for Chair NDP SG your consideration of the following comments which I have been invited to make prior to October 30th. 6B It is clear that a lot of very hard, diligent work has gone in to the creation of the NDP and your efforts should be applauded. It is also readily apparent that a listing of non designated heritage assets is a good idea and we are flattered that you consider our property to be special and worthy of inclusion.

I am happy to support the prospect of a local list however, given the extensive renovations made to our property over time, I expect that much of the heritage value has been lost - certainly compared to many other structures/buildings in the area which you might consider to be more worthy of inclusion if the list is to be further scrutinised and potentially reduced in size.

You might be interested to know that despite it's historic origins, our property has a new roof, replacement double glazing on almost all the windows and practically every internal wall and ceiling has been replaced / re-plastered over recent decades. Please see enclosed pictures.

As you will know, since purchasing the property, we have made a number of improvements to the property (hopefully considered to have been done sympathetically) to continue those made in recent decades. We also have a few more improvements which we would like to continue to make in coming years , in a similar style to those recently undertaken, in order to continue to ensure the property becomes more sustainable, energy efficient and suited to modern family living.

Assuming the N-DHA listing will not impact that, we are happy to support it's inclusion - but as mentioned, we believe there are other properties that better qualify and , due to the relative lack of heritage value this property retains, believe Photos show double removal from the list might be sensible and assist others being supported. glazing (4) and new roof. Not included Thank you again for your letters. for space reasons

NDP Consideration: The NDP Chair wrote on 2/11/20 as follows:

5 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

Thank you for your recent email concerning the current inclusion of BUDOCK VEAN COTTAGE on the proposed non- designated heritage asset (n-dha) schedule, and which followed up from our earlier conversation and my letter of 18 September. We appreciate the details you have given, and your overall support for the NDP.

Since we spoke back in September we have sought, and obtained, from advice on the implications (in planning terms) of the inclusion of a property on an NDP n-dha schedule. There are three important principles here, which I hope will set your mind at rest that inclusion will not adversely affect your plans for your home in the future. They are:

1. The n-dha list/schedule is not a ‘listing’ of a property. It is merely the identification of a property as being of historic or heritage value. Other owners have also worried about being included on a ‘list’; so we are trying to allay these worries by referring to a schedule, but perhaps we could find a better word that doesn’t unnecessarily invoke the idea of being ‘listed’ or ‘scheduled’ in some way similar to the national Grades of listing. Time with my 6C Thesaurus might result in something better! It’s more like a shopping list….. 2. Only the local planning authority can create a Local List, this being Cornwall Council, and they do so in collaboration with Historic England. 3. Our proposed list of n-dha properties creates no new, or stronger, controls over what an owner can do, than can already be applied by a planning officer.

Here is what Cornwall Council has said to us:

“….the identification of the properties as non designated heritage assets actually isn’t the same thing as a local list, the properties are not listed and this doesn’t bring about extra planning restrictions. All it does is highlight that this is one of the non designated heritage assets that the community locally value. Non designated heritage assets are already referred to in national and local strategic policy and already the requirement is not to cause harm to them. The NDP is highlighting that this is one of the structures that you value – but without this specific reference a planning officer could still apply their judgment and say that this is a non designated heritage asset…….Only the Local Planning Authority can designate a local list, although NDPs can and do propose the assets for that.”

I hope that with this clarification, and if the Parish Council thinks that Budock Vean Cottage should remain as an n-dha for Mawnan Parish, you will, as you said, be happy to support its inclusion.

NDP Consideration: Retain in NDHA Annex To be confirmed

6 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

From Resident: Re: Cottages opposite Mawnan Stores. Following personal contact with a member of the 7 NDP team, that member wrote to the owner suggesting the comment that might be made:

On 15 September 2020 at 16:26 the NDHA member of the NDP Steering Group wrote:

This relates to entry number 3 of the listing - Cottages adjacent to Square.

I hope this is a fairly accurate account of the views you expressed in our conversation yesterday.

I am sorry that due to ill health you were unaware of the work the NDP steering group and the working parties were doing in the Parish. I hope that I have been able to answer some of your concerns about planning consents.

Please amend what I have written as you feel is necessary and send it on to our Parish clerk if you would like these comments placed on the record. The e-mail address is: [email protected]

These are the comments I would like to make regarding the inclusion of my private home as a non-designated heritage asset in the Mawnan NDP listing:

I am surprised that my private property was photographed and included in this list without asking me my opinion in the first instance.

It is basic good manners to ask people, to gain their consent before going ahead with such a publication. I strongly feel this behaviour is impolite. It appears that I have not been given a choice as to whether I want my home to be included on this list.

I would like to know more information about the implications of inclusion of my private property on such a list. I would like to know more details of how this may affect my ability to sell my property, or to make alterations to it, in the future.

I am concerned that my car is in the published photograph.

7 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

I do not think that it is relevant that the written description includes "All have been extended to the rear to provide additional living space".

There are only 4 cottages in the terrace - Franklin, and numbers 2 to 4.

I think it is a good idea that a photograph of the cottages from the time when they were thatched is be included in the document.

I hope this is a fairly accurate account of the views you expressed in our conversation yesterday.

I am sorry that due to ill health you were unaware of the work the NDP steering group and the working parties were doing in the Parish. I hope that I have been able to answer some of your concerns about planning consents.

Please amend what I have written as you feel is necessary and send it on to our Parish clerk if you would like these comments placed on the record. The e-mail address is: [email protected]

O wner’s Initial Response:

Email dated 23 Sep 20

Dear and Mawnan Parish Council Lead NDHA WG

Thank you for your email .

I have since emailed and spoken with , Group Leader Neighbourhood Planning at Cornwall Council, for advice and clarification regarding my private property being added to the 'Local List'. Also without consulting with me beforehand and also photographing my private property with my car parked outside (and therefore in the photograph) without asking me first.

I am very unhappy and disappointed about how this has been undertaken.

8 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

It is common courtesy and good manners to make direct contact with the owner of the property before going ahead and adding the property to the Local List rather than being informed afterwards that this is what has been done.

There was also no consultation as to the wording relating to the property. What has been altered at the rear of the property is not relevant at all and will only arouse interest for people to try and have a look to see what has been altered. My property is the end terrace which has a passageway running along the side of it to the rear entrance. This could compromise my privacy and security.

On speaking with , she has confirmed that my property could be affected if it is added to the Local List and there CC NDP Lead could be restrictions should I (or any subsequent owner) wish to make alterations to the property.

To clarify, if Planning Permission was needed for any reason there could be restrictions if the property is on the Local List.

Also, if the property is on the Local List it means that the property will be on public view (where it was not before) and arouse interest from the general public and this has never been the case for this property. This could compromise my privacy and security.

One of the main reasons that I bought the property in the first place was because there were no restrictions and it was not a Listed Building or on any lists of historical interest.

It is not up to the owner to check whether their private property is going to be affected by the NDP. The owner should notified and consulted directly before anything has been undertaken.

In light of all of the above and my conversation with , who kindly clarified everything to me regarding my Ditto private property being on the Local List, I do not give my permission or consent for my property to be added to the Local List.

I trust that Mawnan Parish Council and the NDP steering group will respect my decision and the reasons given.

In a PS - It also very important to note that Franklin Cottage (no.1) and no. 3 are currently rented out to tenants. No. 2 is not occupied and is currently on the market for sale. It is therefore highly unlikely that the owners of these properties

9 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

have been informed and are aware that their property has been photographed and added to the Local List. It cannot ever be assumed that the owners actually live at their properties.

On 25 Sep 20 the NDP NDHA member wrote:

Thank you for putting your comments in writing to us following your discussions with myself and . CC NDP Lead At this point the NDP is in a draft form. We will be discussing all the comments being forwarded by Mawnan parishioners to consider amendments and any corrections which should to be made to the draft plan before it goes to the next stage in the process.

I am sorry that you feel your privacy has been compromised and that a heritage listing of your property will negatively affect future planning applications.

Unfortunately, we have not been able to speak personally to everyone with properties on the heritage listing before compiling the list, but this consultation period is the time to communicate with us any opinions, both positive and negative.

With regard to the information we have sent to all the properties on the heritage listing, we have asked for recipients to pass the information to the appropriate person or to let us know their contact details. The consultation period does last for 8 weeks which allows time for this communication to happen. Any information regarding the ownership of empty or rented properties is much appreciated.

On 30 Sep 20 the Owner replied:

Thank you for your email dated 25 September 2020.

However, the points in my email dated 23 September 2020 have not been properly addressed.

I have copied and pasted it again below.

My privacy and security will be comprised. It is not that I 'feel' that they will be.

10 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

I repeat again: I do not give my permission or consent for my private property to be added to the 'Local List'.

As I said it highly unlikely that the owners of the neighbouring properties will be informed about their property being added to the Local List. Currently I am the only owner in the row of cottages actually living at my property.

NDP Consideration:

a. Difficult to remove one attached cottage from a row of 5 that eminently are of Cornish vernacular build in early 19th C Action Req’d and which are full face to a main thoroughfare.

b. Amend wording in the NDHA schedule to remove reference to rear extensions – not material to the case.

c. Re-photograph without car and from different viewpoint. Add thatched photo if available.

d. Further response may be necessary.

8 From Highways and Environment West (Cormac) – not a Statutory Consultee

23 Sep 20

Thank you for your letter received at this office on 9th September 2020.

I note the intended plans in terms of site 22 and intention to designate it a local green space. It is part of the publicly maintainable highway as per our records provided below for your information, as such it is already protected in terms of public rights to pass and re-pass over it in perpetuity, as such any planning application would not be approved here due to its highway status:

11 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

12 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

I’m not an expert in local green spaces, nor whether a public highway can also legally be designated as such, but given the highway status would supersede all else in terms of legal definition, provided it can be deemed to be both, I raise no objection should you wish to add this to your list for Neighbourhood plan purposes.

Kind regards

| Highways & Environment Manager

@cormacltd.co.uk | Tel: 0300 1234 222 www.cormacltd.co.uk Room 106, Western Group Centre, Radnor Road, TR16 5EH

Response by NDP LGS/Heritage on 25/9/20:

Thank you very much for your helpful observations concerning the Local Green Space listing of the site of our village Millennium Cross and seating area at number 22.

Our parishioners will be very pleased to learn that this green space, as being designated part of the highway, is safe from any future development.

I doubt there is any conflict in this area being designated a local green space and a public highway but there will be further scrutiny from the Parish and the County Council to decide if entry 22 should remain in place. NFA NDP Consideration: Retain listing 22

9 From Resident on 20 Sep 20:

Subject: NDP - Inclusion of Carwinion Cottage as a Heritage Asset

13 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

To Mawnan Parish Council

I was pleased to receive your letter informing me that my home, Carwinion Cottage, has been selected as a Non- Designated Heritage Asset. I fully support its addition to the list and will continue, as I always have to date, to preserve as much as possible the integrity of the property in this regard.

The NDP has obviously taken a huge amount of care, time and effort to draw up and I would like to thank you for all the hard work you have done on behalf of all of us in the parish.

Ironically the only planning decision that has significantly impacted my property negatively since I have lived here - and which certainly would not have passed muster under the new NDP guidelines - has been omitted from the list of completed planning applications as far as I can see - I wonder if this could be amended? This was the construction of a new wood clad “Scandinavian style” (well certainly not Cornish!) house on my boundary, together with complete redevelopment of the existing small bungalow plus numerous large outbuildings and structures. Obviously nothing can be done in retrospect and I have to live with the loss of privacy and noise pollution from such close neighbours but I do feel all the planning applications relating to Anvower and its “annexe” (!) - now with a separate address Oak Tree Lodge - should at least be on the list.

I will make every endeavour to ensure that my home will continue to make a “positive contribution to the character of the area”.

NDP Response by Admin: 24/9/20

Thank you for your email of 20 September which has been passed to me by the Parish Clerk. I am delighted to learn that you are pleased with the inclusion of Carwinion Cottage as a Heritage Asset. On behalf of the NDP Steering Group, your heart-warming words of praise for the work we have conducted over the past 3 years is very much appreciated.

We will look into whether the Scandanavian-styled neighbour property (Anvower) should feature in our completed planning applications listing. Thank you for drawing it to our notice.

Unfortunately, modern building techniques and the search for carbon reduction in terms of energy saving can lead to the Scandanavian-styling you mention. However, the NDP seeks to ensure that such builds are in concert with both landscape

14 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

and neighbour property considerations. We would hope that such houses are kept to the minimum. Hence the need to ensure planning authorities take account of non-designated heritage assets such as yours.

NDP Consideration:

Check planning applications. Pre-2000? Earliest data point. Although no major impact on build totals, include in NDP policy Build was c 2011 -2015 document at Table 1, page 9. PA11/08083 and PA14/11064 refer.

15 Mawnan NOP Regulation 14 Comments File

10 From Resident on 17 Sep 20:

Subject: Local Green Spaces

Just for information, there is no Shute Hill resident's association. However, I sent a circular around all the houses and asked for any feedback. The only comment that has been raised is that the grass area between number 47 and the school is also partially owned by the S.H. residents. This does not include the green area with trees in front of the school gates or the area below the school gates on which the electrical sub-station is situated.

NOP Response by LGS member:

Thank you for sending out the Local Green Space information to all the Shute Hill residents and co-ordinating the comments.

Regarding the grassed area between number 47 Shute Hill and Mawnan school. Are the local householders suggesting that No response noted the site merits adding to our LGS list? Do the residents think the green space meets the criteria for being added to our LGS listing?

The site is likely to meet the two criteria of being close to the community it serves, being local in character and not an extensive tract of land. It will also need to be demonstrably special to the local community for it's beauty, historic significance, recreational value, tranquillity, wildlife or other special characteristic. It can be added to the list if your residents think it meets the criteria and should be protected from development.

NOP Consideration: Add to LGS annex? Action Req' d

11 From: ] Resident nt: 22 September 2020 12:05 o: [email protected] ubject: Neighbourhood Development Plan Local Listing

Dear hank you so much for your letter, dated 8th September, in which you have kindly offered to add The Tower House to your local list of properties. fter consideration, we would not wish to be included on the list.

16 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File If you have already added our property to this list, we would request that it is removed. With thanks,

NDP Response by NDHA member: on 30/9/20

Thank you for your comments regarding the non-designated heritage listing of “The Tower House”. We welcome your feedback and will take forward your comments into our discussions with the Parish Council at the end of the consultation period.

NDP Consideration: A very historic and prevalent house at head of road. Action Req’d

17 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

12 By Natural England: on 21 Sep 20 Statutory Consultee

Mawnan Neighbourhood Development Plan - Regulation 14 NFA

Thank you for your consultation on the above dated 25 August 2020.

Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development.

Natural England is a statutory consultee in neighbourhood planning and must be consulted on draft neighbourhood development plans by the Parish/Town Councils or Neighbourhood Forums where they consider our interests would be affected by the proposals made.

Natural England does not have any specific comments on the draft Mawnan Neighbourhood Development Plan.

However, we refer you to the attached annex which covers the issues and opportunities that should be considered when Detailed Guidance preparing a Neighbourhood Plan. Annex that we have taken account of in For any further consultations on your plan, please contact: [email protected]. NDP.

NFA

13 From Resident: on 30/9/20

We recently received a letter from yourselves which initially stated that Mawnan Parish Council would like to add our List No: 82 property to a “Local Listing” in our area. However later, the letter states that our home has already been added to this list.

As I previously worked in property loans and conveyancing I am concerned that this may affect any future works that we chose to undertake, therefore before giving consent for our property to be included in your list, I would like assurance that it will have no effect whatsoever on our, or future owners, home improvements.

18 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

We are very happy living in our village and support it wherever we can but we also have to protect our, and our children’s, future.

PC Clerk Response: on 1/10/20

The listing of local properties via the Neighbourhood Development Plan seeks to ensure that we do not negatively affect the heart of what the local community considers makes Mawnan Parish special with our planning decisions. Our list was created from the 3 years of community consultation events on what makes our parish special to us that have taken place - someone obviously thought your property (or maybe that area down there, as I know the woodland was also included in the Open Spaces listing) was something that should be conserved or was important enough to them to feel it should be included.

Although some weight is given at Local Authority planning level to dwellings on this list it is not meant in any way to preclude the homeowner from making adjustments, repairs or changes to their home. It has no effect on permitted development rights but is solely there to try to protect the general feel of the properties listed. We're not the type of parish who would go mad if you painted your door yellow, swapped out your roof-tiles, or replaced your windows for instance.

Where significant works that require a planning application are made our Local Listing gives us a point of reference to the significance of the dwelling in question to the community and highlights this to the Planning Authority . Sympathetic works, or works in keeping with the character and location of the property will always be considered.

We cannot say that there will be no effect whatsoever but this is equally the same if your property is not listed. By having your property included on this list means that anyone involved in making a decision on any planning application (and we are only talking about works that would require planning applications) would have a baseline to work on from the information in the listing and not from any previously gained personal feeling or knowledge. We would still argue the point if you wanted to pull down part of the house for an extension, add balconies, veranda or dig out for a driveway or even knock down and rebuild - but hopefully you would expect this of your parish council as part of their remit to protect the feel of the local community.

I have passed on this email to the NDP Steering team who may contact you if you still feel you would like to have your property removed.

19 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

NDP Consideration; Email seeking acceptance sent 4/11/20.

Dear , Clarification sought

While compiling all the comments received as a result of our recent Regulation 14 public consultation, I am uncertain as to whether you accept the inclusion of Bosanath Mill in the Parish schedule of Non-designated Heritage Assets. I have noted the response you received from the Parish clerk which indicates that no additional planning constraints would apply if you were to support inclusion. Only in the event of works that require a full planning application would note be taken of such inclusion.

I would be very grateful if you could let me know your wishes.

Kind regards,

NDP Administrator On behalf of Mawnan Parish Council

NDP Consideration: No further communication – assume owner is content with inclusion.

20 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File 14 By National Trust on 29 Sep 20:

Your letter about the inclusion of non-designated heritage assets in the NDP has landed on my desk as the National Trust’s Estate Manager for this part of Cornwall.

The Parish Council’s objectives in compiling this list are consistent with our own approach to the protection of such assets within our ownership, and I can therefore confirm that we have no objection to any properties in our ownership being included on the list.

By the way, our ownership includes Bosveal Farmhouse, about which you wrote in the same vein to our tenants there recently.

NDP Consideration: Note this is an NDHA element, not the full NT response. Include Bosveal Farmhouse in schedule. Included - NFA

15 By Resident on 22/9/20:

Many thanks for sending me the list of buildings which could potentially go on a “List of buildings which have a degree of local significance meriting consideration in planning decisions but which are not formally designated “ including both the pill box on our beach and the house itself.

I have no problem with the pill box ( item89) being included but I am concerned about our home ( item 29 - Porth Sawsen) being on the list because, in my opinion, it could have security implications. Although the house is obvious from the river it is not from the road. I would appreciate your Committee’s comments on this aspect ?

I should also mention that Item23 (Porth Sawsen Boat House ) is in fact owned by the National Trust and should correctly be described as Carwinion Boat House.

21 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

NDP Response:

Thank you very much for your helpful comments concerning Carwinion Boat House, the Pillbox and Porth Sawsen House. By WG member

We appreciate your feedback, especially the information about the ownership of the Boat House.

We do not want to compromise your security and have an alternative photograph of Porth Sawsen House which I took from the river. We will replace the photograph we have used in the draft document if you think this is less intrusive.

Resident Response:

Although for obvious reasons we would prefer not to have Porth Sawsen included in the list of designated properties I think that your ( excellent ) photograph from the river slightly reduces my concern about the security implications.

However you will gather that I am still anxious.

NDP Consideration: Need to confirm consent on Porth Sawsen House New photo

17 By Resident on 28/8/20: Subject NDP

What a great effort. I have read it carefully and I am truly impressed by the amount of work that has been put in to NFA produce such a comprehensive and well thought out document.

22 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

16 By Resident on 3/9/20:

I do not profess to have read the plan in its entirety but a few comments:

All too late with regard to obtrusive and inappropriate development: Elgin Close, no attempt to blend into the landscape though thankfully well hidden by trees. Lowena Field, far too high, poor quality, quite shocking overlooking of some existing homes, shameful in an AONB, need I say more.

I can only hope this plan will prevent further ruination of this village, however with government proposals under consideration to drastically ease planning policies sadly this probably won't be the case.

I have viewed the plan showing tree preservation orders. They are notably few within the village. Almost every building project seems to involve the removal of mature specimens. Developers seem to hastily remove unprotected trees that could otherwise jeopardise their project before submitting applications. I would like to see far more protection given, particularly to mature native trees, within the built up area of the village/parish.

16B NDP Response:

I am writing on behalf of Mawnan Parish Council and the Neighbourhood Planning Steering Group to acknowledge receipt of your comments via the gmail address of 3 September 2020. I sincerely apologise that you did not receive a prompt reply – this was due to a technical issue with my ability to monitor that address. Rather like the Covid technical glitch, the problem has now been resolved!

The NDP aims to put in place planning policies that will make it much harder for developers, private and commercial, to repeat the likes of Elgin Close or Lowena. Those policies have been developed with evidence of support by the wider Parish community and will in future bear significant weight with the authorities during consideration of a planning application. Even at this draft stage, planning inspectors have cited the embryonic plan in recent refusals. Your concerns about future changes in UK planning policy are shared by us, but as we are in a designated area (the AONB) and will soon have a robust NDP, those concerns should be mitigated. It is more important than ever to have the plan that reflects the wishes of the community.

Your concerns about tree removal are noted; the plan and its supporting documents will be inspected to see whether we can do anything further to preserve our landscape and built environment.

23 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

I am very grateful for your input. All comments received will be recorded and put before the Parish Council for consideration and amendment of the NDP where appropriate.

NDP Consideration: Check NDP documents to further protect mature trees. Some protection provided. TPOs are a matter for the PC. NFA

18 By Resident on 3 /10/20 (Originated 7/9/20 but “lost” in email system)

It will be important for residents of the Parish generally to be able to know and understand the issues raised by other members of the public on the consultation documents before we get to the Referendum stages during Steps 6 and 7. Please can you set out how you intend to publish the questions and comments made to you by the public via your contact addresses.

19 By Resident on 7/10/20

I have 2 questions on the above which I would welcome your response to.

Policy 1: Housing Development I am unclear as to meaning and intentions of this policy : 1. The asterisk at the foot of the policy refers to the term “cumulatively” which is itself not specifically referred to in either sections a) b) c) or d) of the policy. Should the asterisk refer to the term “cumulative” which appears 3 times in Policy 1. 2. Within Policy 1 a) b) & c) please can you explain what exactly is meant by the terms “cumulative site” since this is not explained in the asterisk or elsewhere. For example, please can you respond as to whether the NDP plan, as drafted, would countenance under 1 c) a planning application for 6 houses on a site adjacent to the existing Lowenna Fields site. If so, and if approved, could a developer then apply for a further 6 houses and so on and so on, while being in conformance with the terms of Policy 1 c.

Policy 2 : Small Scale Rural Exception Sites The wording within section 2 a) i and the inclusion of the word “contribute” can be interpreted as requiring that only an unspecified proportion of an application for a rural exception site need be devoted to social housing. However the 24 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

wording and reference to an “agreement” in relation to the development within section 2 a) ii implies that the whole of any rural exception site would be devoted to social housing. Can it be confirmed which of the two aims is intended and, if it is not intended that the whole of any such site be for social housing, can the policy state what must be the minimum proportion that must be devoted to such upon completion of the site.

Response by NDP Chair: on 9/10/20

In respect of your first query on September 7, I confirm that all queries, comments and questions will be addressed at the end of this public consultation. What you suggest in your email of October 3 is precisely what the NDP team has been working towards from the start of consultation, and has been standard practice during the earlier stages of the NDP where issues have been raised either by members of the public or the Parish Council, or indeed Cornwall Council. We are responsible for preparing an official Consultation Statement for submission to Cornwall Council at the time of the Regulation 15 stage for legal scrutiny which also ensures we have correctly complied with all processes.

This Consultation Statement is a public document, and will contain a number of schedules setting out the comments received during the preparation of the NDP, and most importantly during this formal and legally required Regulation 14 public consultation now in progress. As well as circulating parishioners about the NDP, we have contacted over 50 statutory consultees, and any responses from these will also be included in the Consultation Statement (CS).

The CS will list all comments, whether questions, observations or suggestions for changes, whether received from members of the public (without identifying individuals), the Parish Council, Cornwall Council, or the statutory consultees. Each will include the considered NDP response, and where appropriate any changes being made to the NDP as a result. In all of this we will be guided, as always, by the planning professionals working along side us.

As you will realise from the above, we aren’t only giving “consideration to listing out points as they come in…” but it is an essential part of the process.

In relation to your further email of October 7, you raise interesting points that I suspect will lead to further clarification in the NDP both with respect to the intention behind Policy 1 c) ie to stop piggy-back development of the sort you describe, and in relation to the rural exception site policies to clarify what the distinction between the affordable properties and the open market properties. Rest assured we will take these points on board and ensure ambiguity is avoided.

25 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

Thank you again for your comments and questions which will be fully addressed in the CS and the ensuing revised policy document.

NDP Consideration: Clarify and amend Policy 1 – use of term cumulative. See Annexes to Supplementary Correspondence.

20 An internal Memo to resolve Norways Barn, amend Tida Apa entry and possibly add Foxglove Cottage, and Pen Meneth to NDHA

NDP Consideration: Amend document Amend NDHA annex

26 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File 21 By Resident on 10/10/20:

I refer to the letter dated 8 September 2020 from Mawnan Parish Council asking if we would agree to you including Ridifarne, which we own, in your Local list as a non-designated heritage asset. My apologies for the delay in replying but this is our holiday house, we have not been here since March and your letter was missed in the post which is forwarded to us.

My wife and I are pleased to see that Ridifarne is considered to be of significance but we would like to consider the implications of inclusion before we decide. I am sorry that we will be too late for your next meeting but I will let you have our answer shortly.

NDP Response:

Thank you very much for contacting us about the inclusion of Ridifarne in the local non-designated heritage list which we have compiled for the Mawnan Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan.

It is a beautiful building and in a prominent position overlooking the . The house also has a significant history due to the use of the building during the second world war.

I am sure you can appreciate why we have included Ridifarne in our heritage list.

This non designated heritage list highlights that these properties are valued by our local community. However, any buildings not on the NDP heritage list may also be judged by planners to have non-designated heritage asset status under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraph 197. Non designated heritage assets are already referred to in

27 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

national and local strategic policy and there is already a requirement not to do harm to them. It is very likely we have not recognised all the heritage assets of value in our Parish and it is fortunate that the NPPF and Cornwall Local Plan have policies in place to mitigate harm to or loss of such structures.

With regard to non-designated heritage assets, no permitted development rights are removed and any matters not needing planning consent are unaffected. Many of the properties on our list have been extended and altered but we have included them because the core of an old or interesting building remains.

The NDP identification of local heritage assets does not have the weight of National listings, Grade 1, 11* or 11.

All comments from our parishioners during this consultation period are being recorded and will be discussed at Parish and County Council level before our NDP and all the background evidence/comments are placed before an external examiner. The final plan can only be passed after a referendum is held in the Parish.

It is our hope that the non-designated heritage list we have compiled will encourage people to recognise, retain and value these community assets which contribute so much to the character of our special Parish.

NDP Consideration: Follow up required:

Response on 2/11/20 –

Thank you for your further explanation of the NDP. My wife and I are pleased that you consider Ridifarne to be of sufficient significance to be included in your heritage list. NFA We are happy for it to be included.

28 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File 22 By Resident on 15/10/20: Email to Parish Clerk:

We live at Meudon Barns and the walls by our gate, number 36 are on the list. We too agree that these walls are worth looking after and upkeeping, due to their age and beauty. That is why in our recent planning application we are sympathetically using these walls as part of our new garage development.

We do, however, strongly object to these walls being on the historical property list because of the reasons stated, ie ¨possible archeological interest on account of its reputed association with Napoleonic prisoners of war (seven years´ war 1756 to 63) where farms were often adapted to act as small prisons.

Having been to the county records office in Kresen Kernow last week and requested all documents relating to the hamlet of Meudon, we can confirm that as far as we are aware there is absolutely no evidence of these claimed links being true.

29 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

If no one in the parish council has any firm evidence of these historical links, then I suggest that you remove us from the list. You cannot simply put a building on to a list of historical importance based on ´heresay´, there needs to be some fact The Meudon walls and evidence behind the claim. and cottage have generated It seems that the historical allegations are inaccurate for a few reasons, most importantly that the 7 years way was 1756 to considerable 1763, which was not in Napoleonic times as Napoleon was born afterwards in 1769!!!! Also, the 2 storey walls were part correspondence. It of a large barn that was built after this date and that can be verified by the building methods. can be inspected in the separate file – I would very much like to invite comment about these suggestions, and if anyone does have any positive evidence of these attached at Annex A historical links, we would be delighted to discuss them. It would be very interesting to find out more history of this “Meudon Walls”. beautiful area. Admin has copy of historic documented NDP Response: on 26/10/20 references to farm prisons. Thank you for your e-mail of October 15th addressed to the Parish Councillors, reference the walls identified in entries 35 and 36 in Mawnan's draft Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP), as recommended for inclusion on a non-designated heritage asset schedule.

I am responding initially on behalf of the NDP working group which identified suitable properties and structures within the Parish considered worthy of inclusion on this schedule.

As you point out, the reference to Napoleonic prisoners cannot be dated to the Seven Years War, so we will correct the error.

However, the case for inclusion on the n-dha schedule is neatly summed up when you said: We too agree that these walls are worth looking after and upkeeping, due to their age and beauty. It is these facts which are relevant, not the attendant summary, and the walls are on the proposed schedule for their historic value, their appearance, age, visibility and major contribution to this, one of the remaining unspoilt historic corners of Mawnan Parish. So we are delighted you have included the street-side walls within your planning application which was supported by the Parish Council following your assurance that the walls (including that in entry 35 which is contiguous with that in entry 36) would not be altered in height.

30 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

Advice from Cornwall Council says "the identification of the properties as non-designated heritage assets actually isn't the same thing as a local list, the properties are not listed and this doesn't bring about extra planning restrictions. All it does is highlight that this is one of the non-designated heritage assets that the community locally value. Non-designated heritage assets are already referred to in national and local strategic policy and already the requirement is not to cause harm to them. The NDP is highlighting that this is one of the structures that are valued - but without this specific reference a planning officer could still apply their judgement and say that this is a non-designated heritage asset. Only the Local Planning Authority (i.e. Cornwall Council) can designate a local list, although NDPs can and do propose assets for that."

This clarification applies to all entries within the NDP n-dha document and is not specific to the walls at Meudon.

However, your comments will be discussed between the NDP and the Parish Council and included in the Consultation statement which is legally required to address and answer all comments. This is then submitted to Cornwall Council for scrutiny. In the meantime, we hope that the assurance given by the Cornwall Council advice that no extra planning restrictions are involved in a non-designated heritage asset list (not listing) will enable you to reconsider your objection, and to support the recommendation that these structures be recognised for their contribution to Parish heritage.

NDP Consideration: (By Admin – no sight of owner’s reaction) at 5/11/20 See Supplementary Correspondence File

23 By National Grid: on 14/10/20

We write to you with regards to the current consultation as detailed above in respect of our client, National Grid. Please find attached our letter of representation. Please do not hesitate to contact me via [email protected] if you require any further information or clarification.

Our Ref: MV/ 15B901605

14 October 2020

Mawnan Parish Council [email protected] via email only

Dear Sir / Madam

31 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

Mawnan Parish Council Neighbourhood Plan Regulation 14 Consultation August – October 2020 Representations on behalf of National Grid

National Grid has appointed Avison Young to review and respond to Neighbourhood Plan consultations on its behalf. We are instructed by our client to submit the following representation with regard to the current consultation on the above document.

About National Grid National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) owns and maintains the electricity transmission system in England and Wales. The energy is then distributed to the electricity distribution network operators across England, Wales and Scotland.

National Grid Gas plc (NGG) owns and operates the high-pressure gas transmission system across the UK. In the UK, gas leaves the transmission system and enters the UK’s four gas distribution networks where pressure is reduced for public use.

National Grid Ventures (NGV) is separate from National Grid’s core regulated businesses. NGV develop, operate and invest in energy projects, technologies, and partnerships to help accelerate the development of a clean energy future for consumers across the UK, Europe and the United States.

Proposed development sites crossed or in close proximity to National Grid assets: A n assessment has been carried out with respect to National Grid’s electricity and gas transmission assets which include high voltage electricity assets and high-pressure gas pipelines. No further action required. Note National Grid has identified that it has no record of such assets within the Neighbourhood Plan area. guidance available for future developments. National Grid provides information in relation to its assets at the website below. Reply sent 15/10/20 • www2.nationalgrid.com/uk/services/land-and- development/planning-authority/shape-files/ – possible Western Please also see attached information outlining guidance on development close to National Grid infrastructure. Power input? No comment from the latter.

32 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

24 By Resident on 17/9/20 Date correct – earlier problem reading Thank you for your letter dated 8 September. gmail account.

We are happy to support the inclusion of our house “Castelnau” No 17 on the Non Designated Heritage Asset listing. No further action.

25 By Resident: NDHA item 45 – The Watch House on 2/10/20

Subject: Heritage buildings in the NDP

I’ve left a message in your office (PC Clerk) to have a chat about the proposal in connection with The Watch House, as Despite email and outlined in the letter from the Parish Council dated 8th September. telephone attempts no contact or We’d like to help with this but there are a number of aspects I’d like to chat about concerning the effect on us and how clarification. the designation can be respected.

If you could send me an email we could perhaps arrange a time to speak on the phone. See Supplementary Correspondence

26 By Resident: on 17/10/20

I' m not sure whether this is the correct forum for registering my response to the draft NDP. Please advise. If it is, I have No further action read the plan and am in complete agreement with all the proposed policies. The NDP is a clear and comprehensive document and shows the impressive amount of work that has gone on to produce it. I'm concerned that the Government's new planning policies will override this carefully thought out plan for our parish. Thank you for all you've done.

33 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

27 By Resident:

COMMENTS RECEIVED ON 21 OCTOBER 2020, SUBMITTED IN HANDWRITTEN FORM BY A RESIDENT

Manan Parish NDP. Regulation 14 Version

• I found this thorough, well presented and largely accessible. • I could not find in any of the accompanying documents a map of the Settlement Boundary (or boundaries, where applicable), as distinct from the Parish Boundary. Surely this is important to the interpretation of Policy 1 (p.39) and much of 8.2, and especially 8.2.4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 13-18; and of Policy 9 b)i and ii (p.56). • I found 8.2.16 difficult to understand; also 8.2.21 and 8.2.25. In general 8.2 could do with copy-editing, to ensure grammatical accuracy, and thus clarity. • p.15 Key (top RH corner) is not filled in, and the key in the bottom LH corner is barely legible. • 8.5.6 (p.53) – 2nd sentence repeats and makes the paragraph difficult to understand. • By contrast, 8.4 is very clear, easy to read and interpret.

Local Green Space Designations • Thorough, detailed comprehensive and obviously completed on the ground.

Parish Design Statement • Well-structured, appropriately detailed, very thorough, though, inevitably (given the topic), subjective in places.

Local Landscape Character assessment • Seems 1, 2, 3, are very useful as an introduction and guide to an understanding of the document. It is helpful to have the document structured round the Landscape Types (which are comprehensively described and illustrated).

Non-Designated Heritage Assets • Introduction is clear and very useful to an understanding of the selection of ‘assets’. Very well presented and illustrated.

A general comment • Although this is as set of comprehensive, thorough, well-presented documents, and represents a great deal of hard, detailed work, the NDP as a whole would not give me much encouragement if I were young. Policies 1-4,

34 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

and 9 pay attention to the development of “truly affordable’ housing and the possibility of enterprise and local employment, but the overall thrust is conservation, preservation and maintenance of the status quo. Perhaps this is inevitable, given the nature of the area (AONB and AGLV) and the demography of the Parish? But I do not want this to become an area so full of second homes and the ageing and those commuting to jobs elsewhere, that it does not provide locally for the young or the enterprising.

(Handwritten version available)

Response by Chair, NDP on 24/10/20

has passed me your very detailed and comprehensive comments on the current (Regulation 14) draft Neighbourhood Development Plan for Mawnan Parish, which is currently undergoing public consultation.

It is not my intention here to answer your separate comments, questions and observations, as some of these will require more analysis by my colleagues on the NDP steering group. But I do want to say I am hugely appreciative of the effort you have put into your comments, and we are well aware of the time you have spent analysing all the extensive documents. Not many others will have done this!

My colleagues who have worked so hard to produce the various documents will take heart from the general approval you place on their efforts, but equally we take seriously the issues you raise over clarity, accuracy and specifically Settlement Boundaries and affordable housing.

Those points you raise about settlement boundaries, for example, will be fully answered in the Consultation Statement we are required to prepare for submission to Cornwall Council at the time of legal scrutiny, and which will be a public document – with identifying names redacted. We will ensure that you see this. It is likely we will change some things following your comments – it is essential that what we send forward as a final draft is totally clear in its objectives and no room is left for ambiguity. All our responses will be discussed with, and ultimately approved by, the Parish Council.

In fact, I think I’ll make sure you see how we are responding so you can see if we have addressed your concerns adequately. Frankly, sometimes it is easier for someone who has not been involved in the preparation of a document to see where clarity can be improved.

35 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

Thank you also for confirming that you are happy for Trebah Wartha to remain on the list of non-designated heritage assets. As you doubtless realise this is not the same as formal listing of a property, but it acts as a reference point so that planners can take into consideration the historical value of a property when reviewing a planning application.

Your detailed comments, support and your on-going interest in the NDP are much appreciated by the NDP team.

NDP Considerations: Numerous points to be researched and dealt with. See Annexes to Supplementary Correspondence 28 By Resident: on 22/10/20

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the truly impressive body of work which comprises the documents which form the Regulation 14 Version (August 2020) of the NDP.

We have been interested in the work you have delivered since moving into the village in late 2017, and have been informed of progress through attending your regular meetings and by your email updates.

Even so - we were impressed by the scale and quality of the consultation documents. It is a hugely impressive piece of work, and a real testament to the vision and energy of a largely volunteer team.

We have carefully read and considered the suite of documents. We hope that you can accept this reply as two separate responses to the consultation process, given that our views correspond exactly.

We believe that it is crucial that any development which takes place in a community is informed by, and subject to, the clearly expressed views of that local community. We believe that it is important to protect the natural and historic environment which has shaped that community. Any development which takes place must accord with the priorities and objectives of the community in which it is proposed.

We believe that the 14 Policies contained within the NDP meet those legitimate and important considerations.

On one specific point, given that Parish has effectively met its housing target in accordance with LP:SP, we agree that any new development must be either “infill” or “rounding off” as defined within the NDP.

36 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

We are pleased to support fully the content and objectives of the Regulation 14 (August 2020) version of the Mawnan NDP.

NDP Consideration: The NDP Chair acknowledged. No further action. NFA

29 By Resident: on 20/10/20

Recently we were sent details of land and properties owned by ourselves that were to be included in the local plan.

Whilst we are not against this in principle, certainly for the land that locals feel adds to the green space of the area, we do have concerns about inclusion of our house and barns here at Boskensoe.

Our main concern would be around any restrictions on future development. There are currently no plans to develop further, however the Barns in particular are a business property and any extra red tape/costs involved with furthering our business would not be welcome. For this reason we would be unable to give our support to the inclusion of the Barns unless we could be assured that there would be no detriment to our business.

And on the Farmhouse (as for the Barns also), it should be noted (as it is) that the house is not without significant modern alteration and it would seem odd to suggest that it may be subject to tighter planning scrutiny as a result of inclusion in the plan.

Maybe we have the wrong end of the stick? If so we would be happy to be corrected.

NDP Response: by Admin on 26/10/20

Further to my acknowledgement email, I and others within the NDP team have considered your concern about the potential planning issues that may arise from the appearance of Boskensoe Farm and Barns in our Non-Designated Heritage Assets (NDHA) Listing in Mawnan Parish. As shown in our introductory paragraphs to the list, there is overall encouragement on Parishes to identify such assets so that planning officials are made aware of their presence when considering a planning application so that harm or loss of the asset can be judged in their determination. If the County Council adopt our input, the assets would be placed on their Local List which again acts as a pointer to the presence of an NDHA. There is no intention whatsoever to introduce the type of planning restrictions imposed by the Grade 1,2,and 2* listings which are controlled by Historic England. All permitted development rights are retained. Only if development

37 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

proposals are put forward via a planning application would officials refer to the presence of an NDHA in the vicinity. We have consulted the planners at Cornwall Council and their guidance is as follows:

“The identification of properties as non-designated heritage assets actually isn’t the same thing as a local list, the properties are not listed and this doesn’t bring about extra planning restrictions. All it does is highlight that this is one of the non-designated heritage assets that the community locally value. Non-designated heritage assets are already referred to in national and local strategic policy and already the requirement is not to cause harm to them. The NDP is highlighting that yours is one of the structures that are valued – but without this specific reference a planning officer could still apply their judgment and say that this is a non-designated heritage asset. Only the Local Planning Authority (i.e Cornwall Council) can designate a local list, although NDPs can and do propose the assets for that.”

However, your comments will be discussed between the NDP and the Parish Council and included in the Consultation Statement which is legally required to address and answer all comments. This is then submitted to Cornwall Council for scrutiny. In the meantime we hope that the assurance given by the Cornwall Council advice that no extra planning restrictions are involved in a non-designated heritage asset list (not listing) will enable you to reconsider your concern, and support the recommendation that these structures be recognised for their contribution to Parish heritage. Indeed, the use of the term listing has caused concern from a few residents because of its possible alignment with the Historic England Grades. At the local level we are likely to use the term “Schedule of NDHA” to avoid further consternation. The document of assets will be amended after this consultation. I hope that I have clarified the position for you and am looking forward to hearing from you.

NDP Consideration: No further communication; assume content? Confirm with PC

30 By Resident: On 21/10/20

I would just like you to know that we are fully supportive of all the proposals put forward in the Mawnan NDP.

Thanks to the committee members for all their hard work.

NDP Consideration: Acknowledged; no further action NFA

38 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

31 By National Trust on 19/10/20 By Admin: The email to which he refers Thank you for your email. has been furloughed since March but will I hope be returning at the beginning of requested comment November. on the NDP as a whole, rather than In the meantime another colleague has had a look through NDP and policies, and we have no further comments to make, just the NDHA thank you. We very much support policies 3 and 5 in particular, which we agree are absolutely core to retaining the response at File Ref character of the parish. 14

Best wishes,

Estate Manager (Mid, S.E. and Heart of Cornwall)

NDP Consideration: Acknowledged by Admin: No further action NFA

32 By Marine Management Organisation (MMO): on 22/10/20

Marine Licensing, Wildlife Licences and other permissions

Dear Sir/Madam,

Please be aware that any works within the Marine area require a licence from the Marine Management Organisation. It is down to the applicant themselves to take the necessary steps to ascertain whether their works will fall below the Mean High Water Springs mark.

Response to your consultation

The Marine Management Organisation (MMO) is a non-departmental public body responsible for the management of England’s marine area on behalf of the UK government. The MMO’s delivery functions are; marine planning, marine

39 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

licensing, wildlife licensing and enforcement, marine protected area management, marine emergencies, fisheries management and issuing European grants.

Marine Licensing Works activities taking place below the mean high water mark may require a marine licence in accordance with the Marine and Coastal Access Act (MCAA) 2009.

Such activities include the construction, alteration or improvement of any works, dredging, or a deposit or removal of a substance or object below the mean high water springs mark or in any tidal river to the extent of the tidal influence.

Applicants should be directed to the MMO’s online portal to register for an application for marine licence

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/make-a-marine-licence-application

You can also apply to the MMO for consent under the Electricity Act 1989 (as amended) for offshore generating stations between 1 and 100 megawatts in English waters.

The MMO is also the authority responsible for processing and determining Harbour Orders in England, together with granting consent under various local Acts and orders regarding harbours.

A wildlife licence is also required for activities that that would affect a UK or European protected marine species.

The MMO is a signatory to the coastal concordat and operates in accordance with its principles. Should the activities subject to planning permission meet the above criteria then the applicant should be directed to the follow pages: check if you need a marine licence and asked to quote the following information on any resultant marine licence application: • local planning authority name, • planning officer name and contact details, • planning application reference.

Following submission of a marine licence application a case team will be in touch with the relevant planning officer to discuss next steps.

40 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

Environmental Impact Assessment

With respect to projects that require a marine licence the EIA Directive (codified in Directive 2011/92/EU) is transposed into UK law by the Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007 (the MWR), as amended. Before a marine licence can be granted for projects that require EIA, MMO must ensure that applications for a marine licence are compliant with the MWR.

In cases where a project requires both a marine licence and terrestrial planning permission, both the MWR and The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/571/contents/made may be applicable.

If this consultation request relates to a project capable of falling within either set of EIA regulations, then it is advised that the applicant submit a request directly to the MMO to ensure any requirements under the MWR are considered adequately at the following link

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/make-a-marine-licence-application

Marine Planning

Under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 ch.4, 58, public authorities must make decisions in accordance with marine policy documents and if it takes a decision that is against these policies it must state its reasons. MMO as such are responsible for implementing the relevant Marine Plans for their area, through existing regulatory and decision-making processes. Marine plans will inform and guide decision makers on development in marine and coastal areas. Proposals should conform with all relevant policies, taking account of economic, environmental and social considerations. At its landward extent, a marine plan will apply up to the mean high water springs mark, which includes the tidal extent of any rivers. As marine plan boundaries extend up to the level of the mean high water spring tides mark, there will be an overlap with terrestrial plans which generally extend to the mean low water springs mark. The East Inshore and Offshore marine plans were adopted on the 2nd April 2014. The South Inshore and Offshore marine plans were adopted on the 17th July 2018. Both plans are a statutory consideration for public authorities with decision making functions. The East Inshore and East Offshore Marine Plans cover the coast and seas from Flamborough Head to Felixstowe; the South Inshore and South Offshore Marine Plans cover the coast and seas from Folkestone to the River Dart in Devon.

41 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

From 14 January 2020 the draft North East, draft North West, draft South East, and draft South West Marine Plans are now a material for consideration for public authorities with decision making functions. This is the final stage of statutory public consultation before the marine plans are submitted.

A map showing how England's waters have been split into 6 marine plan areas is available on our website. For further information on how to apply the marine plans please visit our Explore Marine Plans service.

Planning documents for areas with a coastal influence may wish to make reference to the MMO’s licensing requirements and any relevant marine plans to ensure that necessary regulations are adhered to. All public authorities taking authorisation or enforcement decisions that affect or might affect the UK marine area must do so in accordance with the Marine and Coastal Access Act and the UK Marine Policy Statement unless relevant considerations indicate otherwise. Local authorities may also wish to refer to our online guidance and the Planning Advisory Service soundness self- assessment checklist. If you wish to contact your local marine planning officer you can find their details on our gov.uk page.

Minerals and waste plans and local aggregate assessments

If you are consulting on a mineral/waste plan or local aggregate assessment, the MMO recommend reference to marine aggregates is included and reference to be made to the documents below;

• The Marine Policy Statement (MPS), section 3.5 which highlights the importance of marine aggregates and its supply to England’s (and the UK) construction industry. • The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which sets out policies for national (England) construction minerals supply. • The Managed Aggregate Supply System (MASS) which includes specific references to the role of marine aggregates in the wider portfolio of supply. • The National and regional guidelines for aggregates provision in England 2005-2020 predict likely aggregate demand over this period including marine supply.

The NPPF informed MASS guidance requires local mineral planning authorities to prepare Local Aggregate Assessments, these assessments have to consider the opportunities and constraints of all mineral supplies into their planning regions –

42 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

including marine. This means that even land-locked counties, may have to consider the role that marine sourced supplies (delivered by rail or river) play – particularly where land based resources are becoming increasingly constrained.

If you require further guidance on the Marine Licencing process, please follow the link https://www.gov.uk/topic/planning-development/marine-licences

NDP Response by Admin: on 22/10/20

Thank you for your response. Although we do not currently propose any works below the Mean High Water Mark, your letter acts as a reminder that a licence for such works would be required. A link to your department could be useful in our Plan document.

NDP Consideration: No impact on the NDP, add the license link to Policy 5; however, PC should note contents.

33 By Resident: on 15/9/20 File Refs 33 - ??

Thank you for the letter regarding the Local List. We are very happy for Fern Cottage to be included and would like to Result from a transfer record our appreciation of all the hard work and achievements that have been accomplished by the NDP team. from mawnan.org and could be NDP Response: Acknowledged by Admin on 5/11/20 duplicated elsewhere. I am in the process of creating an electronic file for the purposes of distributing NDP Regulation 14 comment to necessary public bodies. In doing so, I believe that your supportive email of 15 Sep 20 may have escaped response. Thank you for that support and the agreement for Fern Cottage to be in non-designated heritage assets. NFA NDP Consideration: No further action

34 By Resident: on 14 /9/20

Subject: Trebah Wartha I am happy for this house to remain on the Local Listing of the NDP NFA NDP Consideration: Acknowledged by Chair at File Ref 27: No further action

43 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

35 By Chair Mawnan Memorial Hall: on 16 /9/20

We are very happy to have Mawnan Memorial Hall included in the list of designated buildings contained within the NDP

NDP Consideration: Replied by Chair: No further action. NFA 36 By Resident: on 16/9/20

I received a Local Listing letter this morning and whilst I am pleased to be on the list I must tell you the address of my property number 11 on the list is incorrect, the house name should be Roscarrick Villas so could it please be amended.

NDP Response by NDHA: On 22/9/20

Thank you for pointing out our spelling error concerning your property at Roscarrick Villas. We do rely on fellow parishioners to correct any errors in our local heritage listing. We will ensure that a correction is made to the spelling. Amend spelling NDP Consideration: Amend spelling.

37 By Resident: on 17/9/20

Thank you for your recent letter regarding the “Local Listing” in the Neighbourhood Development Plan. We are more than happy for Treveryan to be listed as a Non-Designated Heritage Asset.

NDP Consideration: Acknowledged by Admin; no further action. NFA 38 By Resident: on 20/9/20

Having just read the proposal to list 4 local buildings including the one we think it's a very positive idea and will be in the long term interest of everyone. We therefore wish to be supportive and trust that this email will be sufficient to that end? If not please advise. As an aside, our other house is already listed and having lived there for>

44 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

40 years we would suggest that listed status does make some fairly simple and unobtrusive works a lot more complicated and expensive. One example of this was the need to repair some external plaster work (it's a timber frame structure) and the local authority expert* on listed works told us that we must replace the whole of the particular elevation rather than patch in the damaged areas as had evidently worked well for the past two or three hundred years and use (split chestnut?) laths etc etc. The quote was about £20,000 and in the end the builder quietly patched as needed with a suitable lime based plaster for ~10% of the price. It may be an extreme case but it made me smile when I read the notes about Trerose Vean? NFA NDP Consideration: Acknowledged by Admin; no further action

39 By Devon and Cornwall Constabulary on 23/10/20

Thank you on behalf of Devon and Cornwall Police for the opportunity to comment on the Mawnan Parish NDP.

I note and welcome the references for applications to design out crime within the Design Principles which is fully supported.

I have no further comments at this time. NFA NDP Consideration: Acknowledged; no further action.

40 By Resident: on 26 /10/20

Subject: Riverview 3, Coastguard Cottages

Dear Mawnan Parish Council,

Apologies for the delay but we, as the owners of the above property, are delighted that you have added the Cottages to your Local List and very much support you in that decision

Should you require anything more from us don’t hesitate to ask. NFA NDP Consideration: Acknowledged; no further action

45 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

41 By Historic England: on 27/10/20

Thank you for your Regulation 14 consultation on the pre-submission version of the Mawnan Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan.

I can confirm that there are no specific issues associated with the Plan upon which we wish to comment.

Our congratulations to your community on its progress to date and our best wishes for the making of its Plan.

Kind regards

| Historic Places Adviser South West https://historicengland.org.uk/southwest

NDP Consideration: Acknowledged; no further action. NFA

42 By Landowner; on 28/10/20 & 42B Dear Chair,

NDP Consultation

I have recently seen and been advised that our field, which is highlighted on the attached plan, has The field is included at been included within the NDP as designated woodland. Firstly, this field is quite clearly not woodland Item 18 of the Local and therefore as joint owners we strongly object to this proposal. Green Spaces (LGS) The field has been owned by the family since 1977 when our Dad ( ) purchased the schedule.

46 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

field as a potential development site in years to come. This has obviously taken much longer than he had anticipated and the field is now owned by A number of years ago we had a conveyancing restriction lifted on the basis the field could accommodate a maximum of 3 residential homes. It is our plan at some stage in the near future to promote the site for development and hopefully this will provide homes for the three of us as local people from the village. We have recently been consulting with an Architect and Landscape Architect and all feel there is a natural extension to the village and would provide an opportunity for some biodiversity benefit to the area of Country Wildlife Site located adjacent to the field to offset any development. The site is serviced by an electrical transformer in the corner of the plot and a foul sewer running through the field to provide a drainage connection. We are therefore in strong objection to the proposal and would welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further with a view to having the area designated as an area for potential development (maximum 3 homes).

Plan Showing Field For Proposed Future Development

47 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

48 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

NDP Response: on 28/10/20 by Admin

Thank you for your comment and objection which is noted and will be taken into account by the Parish Council (PC) at the end of this consultation period. Whilst your email is addressed to the Chair of the PC, I may be in a position to clarify some of the points that concern you. Rather than go into detail here, perhaps you could call me on to discuss the matter further.

Telecon with Resident by Admin on 29/10/20: The following points were made:

a. He is right; the field in question is at the end of Carlidnack Lane and adjacent to the Maenporth Woods and is not Remove field from designated other than by our proposal to include it at item 18 of the Local Green Space schedule. Our concern LGS only would be to ensure the public rights of way that give access to the woodland. b. Since the NDP does not have an identified need to allocate sites for future development (para 8.2 of the policy Public rights of way document – the zero figure), then the field could not be earmarked as proposed. Any future development would would be retained. come under the planning rules that exist at the time of application and would be considered by the PC and other planning officials at that time. c. I made him aware of the fact that the field is neither an infill nor a rounding off area but an extension of the Accepted current settlement area into the AONB so would be treated as a RES. The size and scale would probably be ok; but the identified need for housing for locals would have to be established. d. I doubted that the Chair of Mawnan PC could make any forward promise to permit development as Peter has in Accepted mind. To confirm with PC NDP Consideration: Resident was content with the above. Redraw Map at LGS Item 18.

43 By Resident: on 29/10/20 Anna Maria Creek has generated much Many thanks for your invitation to comment on the NDP which I consider to be an excellent piece of work. Having lived on correspondence most Anna Maria Creek for over twenty years and been involved with my immediate neighbours in voluntary attempts to of which improve this area. Based on local knowledge I have noted an apparent inaccuracy in LGS No.28 listing and associated map tables/maps/photos that I ask you to please to check. cannot easily be replicated in this Please find attached comments on the NDP for your consideration. Naturally I shall be available for discussion and document. Annex B clarification if necessary.

49 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

Attachment at Annex B is a folder of all files held. The attachment contains: I respectfully request that the LGS text (No.28 column 5) and the map is corrected before these areas can be inadvertently interpreted as public spaces. See also NDP Consideration: Acknowledged by Admin on 29/10/20; needs to be resolved together with comments at File Refs 44 Supplementary and 48. Correspondence 44 By Resident: on 28/10/20

For the attention of the NDP Administrator: 28th October 2020

Dear Sirs Re. Local Green Space – Area 28 In response to the Mawnan NDP I have some concerns and an objection I would ask you to consider. I refer specifically to the proposed Local Green Space the plan shows in Anna Maria Creek, highlighted in green, as area 28. The NDP is a comprehensive and well written proposal and my objection is small, but I feel it is important.

My home is on Anna Maria Lane which fronts the Anna Maria Creek and the NDP proposes to make my foreshore and that of my two neighbours’ part of the Local Green Space. I have no objection to the creek itself being designated part of the NDP, as it is rich in wildlife and perfect for leisure pursuits such as kayaking and paddle boarding but I object to the private foreshore of the properties being included.

Anna Maria Creek could be a true asset, even beauty spot for the Parish, as it is often the first glimpse of the Helford River that visitors have. The properties are of course in an AONB, they are bound by TPO’s and also subject to an Enforcement Order that was issued in 2010. They are classified C3 Residential for planning purposes. So my objection comes from the long term abuse of the creek, by numerous boat owners who ignore the Enforcement Order, without consequence. In my view the NDP overstates the true picture of the creek as “an area appreciated for its peaceful character where some local villagers moor their boats”. There is often a lot of noise in the creek and I believe the majority of boats and wrecks there are nothing to do with residents of our Parish. My concern is that those abusing the creek already, would misinterpret the new Local Green Space, especially when private foreshore is included, quite regardless of any caveat which might be added about designation not conferring any public rights of access.

50 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

The recent pursuit of significant and noisy repairs being undertaken on the foreshore at the end of the creek, coupled with the increasing regularity with which unviable boats are being dumped there illicitly, would amount to a change of planning use of the creek itself from recreational to general industrial (of the sort which is required to be carried out in heavily regulated premises such as boatyards precisely because of the potential for environmental damage) by default if left to go on unchallenged for long enough. There could hardly be a more inappropriate use of what ought arguably to be the most highly prized example of the upper reaches of the Helford River creeks within Mawnan Parish’s part of the AONB.

With the number of restrictions already applied to the properties on the creek, I don’t believe the small strip of our foreshore land should be included. Its inclusion would not only be fundamentally incompatible with NGS designation official criteria but were it so included it may well undermine the one feature which has enabled some restraint to be placed on even more extensive contravention activities at this location. The 5 landholders directly adjacent to this creek with ownership of such strips of shore have already learnt to their cost that providing voluntary support for such measures, impliedly in the wider public interest, as is now being requested for the LGS, leaves them as the only parties bearing the burden of official restrictions on their property when nobody else – neither the local authority nor still less those acting in breach of the various restrictions - takes any notice. e.g the Enforcement Order.

Anna Maria Creek and its wildlife suffer from people residing on and repairing boats, creating noise, chemical and environmental damage, despite an Enforcement Order which the local authority has failed to act on since 2010. Even intervention by a government minister, and Councillor in 2016, has not yet produced an MP and County improvement in the creek, as since then the number of wrecks deposited has increased by over 50%. Environmental Councillor pollution can be seen in the creek and the surrounding woods, something featured in the TV programme ‘Escape to the Country’ where highlighted the creek as an area where waste plastic could be collected and recycled. This was an appalling advert for the Parish and a very poor reflection of our stewardship of the AONB in practice despite the theory.

So my point is adding more restrictions to an area which has never been managed effectively in the last 20 years seems pointless unless the authorities recognise the existing problem and are able to pursue an effective action plan using the powers that they already have to correct the environmental abuse of this Parish asset. Worse than that, including private land for the reasons I have given would be unacceptable to any homeowner.

In previous times there has been a very positive response from local residents wishing to remove wrecks. I do know that the residents of Anna Maria Lane would be enthusiastic to support a plan to clean up the creek and promote the area as a

51 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

local asset; however the good intentions have not worked well previously, perhaps through lack of support. Creating another jurisdiction could possibly make matters worse if there is no plan to address the issues.

I enclose just a few pictures of the creek where I believe most boats are staked to private foreshore or tied to trees with Included at Annex B TPO’s. are further photos.

52 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

NDP Response by Admin on 29/10/20

Thank you for your letter and comments regarding Anna Maria Creek. We have a similar letter which requests amendment to the text and maps associated with the private foreshores at Item 28 of the Local Green Spaces schedule. These concerns will be addressed jointly by the NDP group and the Parish Council (PC) at the end of consultation. We cannot comment on the general abuse of the creek within the NDP but your letters will be noted by the PC who have been dealing with the topic for some considerable time. See Supplementary NDP Consideration: Acknowledged by Admin: Resolve whether AMC should be LGS and/or amend entry Correspondence 45 By Resident: on 29/10/20

Dear NDP team,

You have achieved so much in your Consultation and research, so many congratulations.

It is vital that Mawnan Smith retains it's unique village atmosphere and charm. The Post Office must be retained in one form or another. Housing is always a major sensitive issue and allowing infill is sensible, but that should be it. Historic artifacts and places of interest should continue to be treasured and preserved.

My wife and I are very fortunate to live in this community.

By Admin on 29/10/20:

Dear ,

Thank you for your kind comments which have been noted for our consultation. Your comment about the Post Office is a concern for the Parish Council and I know they are working to achieve a successful outcome.

NFA – the PO issue is active with PC NDP Consideration: Acknowledged. No further action

53 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

46 By Resident: on 30/10/20

I am very impressed with the document drafted. I have no adverse comments and wholly support it. Thanking you for your combined effort.

NDP Consideration: Acknowledged by Admin; no further action NFA 47 By Resident: on 30/10/20

I am writing to offer a comment on the NPD.

Firstly, I appreciate how much thought and care has been put into what is a very comprehensive plan. My comment relates to Area 20 within Section 3, the woodland on Penwarne Road. LGS annex

On the map this area is shown as extending south to the trees planted on either side of the entrance to Penwarne Manor, our property.

The woods were historically part of Penwarne but no longer are. I therefore have a concern about linking what is a private entrance to the woodland area - a space which is being described as accessible to the public.

I would suggest for simplicity that the two small triangles of trees either side of our entrance are not included in the green highlighted area. They are in any case protected by a TPO.

NDP Consideration: Acknowledged; Review LGS Area 20 See Annexes to Supplementary Correspondence 48 By Resident on 30/10/20

Draft NDP issued for consultation Local Green Space 29 Porth Navas stream and surrounding woodlands

I regret that I have to raise my concerns, amounting to an objection, to this proposed designation. I will make them bullet points for brevity at this stage since I think that on a closer look at this one it will be readily accepted that it is not an appropriate area for such Designation. 54 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

• LGS 29 seeks to cover part of the planning unit parcel constituting my domestic residence subjecting it arbitrarily to a constraint with little regard to the long established features of C3 dwellinghouse use. It would conflict, for example, with significant Permitted Development rights granted via statute which have been in existence for many years. ( This applies not only to the small wooded piece of land to the west of my house but also the shore down to the MHW mark which is also an important part of the curtilage of the house. The shore fronting my house looks as if it has been included in LGS 28 but mention it here since I will be making some representations about LGS 28 which, amongst other things, will be taking the same fundamental point about the inappropriateness of seeking to include any part of C3 developed land parcels in LGS designations.) I attach a scanned copy of the LGS map showing the parts referred to above hatched in red for ease of reference. My house is Tide End – mistakenly called ‘Tides End’- on the map. • Government Guidance (MHCLG 06 03 2014 Para. 008 ) on LGS designation makes it clear that designation will rarely appropriate where the land has planning permission for development. Where the land not only has permission for development but that development has existed for many decades the Guidance could not be more clear. • The same Guidance ( Para. 11 ) makes it clear that if land is already protected by designation then consideration should be given to whether any additional benefit would be gained by designation as LGS as well. My small piece of wooded area is already protected by a TPO and of course the AONB designation which covers pretty well the whole of the Parish and is meant to be the highest level of protection available in the T&C Planning system. Generally, and far from additional benefit, there is a significant risk that designation as LGS could well be counterproductive by virtue of its capacity to be misapplied and not just inadvertently. This will be of particular relevance in relation to LGS 28 but it is instructive to see such capacity being demonstrated by the NDP itself in the draft text for LGS 29 with its reference to “ This Public Green Space” in the 3rd column of the Map Table 1 regardless of its inconsistency with the purported caveat in the 5th column. • Contrary to the Table 1 draft text, LGS 29 does not meet the NPPF criterion for “reasonably close proximity to the community it serves”. Cornwall Council’s ‘ Neighbourhood Planning – Local Green Space & Green Infrastructure’ indicates that “close proximity” should be defined as not more than 2 kms. (1.25 miles). The Table 1 text says it is “about 2 kilometres from Mawnan Smith village”. On my measurement (by road) it is well over 2kms to Mawnan Smith village from either end of proposed LGS 29 at 2.89 kms from its southerly point to the Red Lion and 2.25kms from its northerly point to the Red Lion.

55 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

I would appreciate it if you can consider the above with a view to either amending the designated area map to exclude my piece of wooded area from Area 29 or excluding Area 29 altogether given the fundamental nature of the difficulties outlined above. I would suggest the latter since looking at inclusion of Area 29 reinforces doubts that seeking to designate 37 locations within an NDP area which is already pretty well all designated AONB is an indicator that the Local Green Space Audit methodology called for in Cornwall Council’s ( “CC”) Guide has not been followed risking a finding of unsoundness by lacking appropriate evidence for some other proposed LGS designations as well. If it has been followed can you provide a copy of the LGS Audit form recommended by CC which addressed the Area 29 location which will assist my understanding of how the proposed designation was arrived at as one of the matters being consulted on ?

NDP Response: By Admin

Thank you for your comments and objection contained in the attachment. These have been noted and will be considered as part of a joint consideration with Mawnan Parish Council of all comments raised by the consultation.

NDP Consideration: We received a number of emails in relation to this; they are shown at Annex B See Annex B and the Supplementary Correspondence 48 By Resident: on 30/10/20 A Draft NDP issued for consultation Local Green Space 28 (“LGS 28”) Anna Maria Creek ( at the head of the upper reaches of the Helford River )

This area covers the location which, arguably, is of the highest landscape value of any of the 37 the draft NDP proposes to designate as LGS . It certainly epitomises the fundamental character of the locality adding a distinctiveness to the Parish which sets it apart from many hundreds of others across the country. Anna Maria Creek is confirmed as exceptional in the NDP’ s LLCA Para.3.7.1 in that it is one of the few – perhaps the only – tidal creek(s) within the Parish lending itself to public access from landward.

It is, like most of the Parish, already designated AONB and thus accorded the highest level of protective category available within the planning regime.

56 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

Added to that it enjoys the further protection of being the subject to an Article 4 Direction removing certain permitted development rights, and a fully valid Enforcement Notice making it, in perpetuity, a criminal offence to make any residential use of boats within the Creek area as defined by map.

Yet despite all this it has been allowed to become an eyesore notwithstanding not only the sustained efforts of local residents and local voluntary organisations like The Helford River Association ( “HRA” ) and the Helford Voluntary Marine Conservation group but also the adverse findings of the Local Government Ombudsman on a complaint to him by the HRA supported by the Mawnan PC about the lack of effective enforcement action by the LPA.

The relevance of this to a consultation response ? - A recognition that the area could meet criteria of Para.100 (b) and 100 (c) of the NPPF as is set out in the headings to columns 5 and 6 of Table 1 of the draft LGS. However, I am concerned that the way designation here is being cast might well result, in practice, in more difficulties with being able to arrest its decline and restoring its exceptional natural features rather than less.

Those of us who have been engaged for some years now in the efforts to deliver some meaningful action for the protection of the Creek have learnt that those responsible for most of the problems here will exploit any ambiguity, real or perceived, in the formal management of it to pursue their own agenda.

In my view, the draft LGS section of the NDP and the rationale behind it in its current form would fail Para. 11 of MHCLG on the ground that designation as LGS would not result in any additional local benefit that it does not already have under the other designations/ancillary protective measures referred to above. Indeed I consider that there are aspects of it which would significantly weaken the ability – already quite tenuous -of neighbouring landowners like myself to try to provide a modicum of restraint to the environmental damage being increasingly inflicted on this Creek itself.

My response therefore is that while, in principle, designation as LGS has the potential to be a beneficial addition to the regulatory provisions applying to the Creek, if it came into force as currently drafted it would be more likely to weaken existing protection if anything. In order to satisfy the requirement indicated in Para. 11 MHCLG the detailed material supporting the proposed designation needs to be recast and the current draft amended.

57 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

To that end I have attempted a draft of the amended detail supporting designation given in the Table together with an See Annex B and App 1 amended map. I am finishing the footnote explanations of the justification for the changes against each of them over this to Annex for table and week end and will forward them to you on Monday for your consideration. maps suggested.

I should be more than happy to discuss them with anyone in the NDP team particularly if they have any previous knowledge of the situation at Anna Maria Creek over the past 10 or more years. This is a complex problem with no straightforward solution. The future of the location is finely balanced but the potential advantages an LGS designation could bring, if used appropriately and with care, might provide a turning point for the better. In particular, it could provide an early success for the NDP in stimulating a continuing programme of enhancements and improvements at this prominent location in line with CC’s recommendations on p11 of their Guide Note for Local Green Space and Green Infrastructure.

By Admin: NDP has responded to all correspondence in a holding manner. As the resident indicates, this AMC situation is See also Supplementary a complex matter Correspondence

58 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

49 By Resident: on 30/10/20

I am in receipt of your consultation letter on proposed non-designated heritage asset listings in the draft NDP for Mawnan Parish. You have contacted me about property listing 36, one wall of which (the 2-storey ‘North wall’ of the demolished barn) is a shared boundary with Meudon Barns, now owned by . I shall make comment on this later in my response, but for now I should point out that whilst you have contacted me about listing 36, you have not contacted me about listing 35 (Meudon Cottage) which we wholly own. I shall assume that this is an oversight and so will address it first.

Non-Designated Heritage Asset – listing 35

In theory I have no objection to the NDHA listing of Meudon Cottage because we agree that it has character and is worth saving. But in practice this may result in constraints in the future which we are uncomfortable accepting at this stage. We have consent to convert/extend/restore this building. So far we are focusing on the attached barn at the back (East side) of the building and other elements of our design, but we have already underpinned the SE corner of the cottage and part of the spine wall to help stabilise the whole building. Old buildings with little or no foundations can often only be fully assessed at the time of the work, and whilst we know that there is no sound commercial sense in trying to restore the main cottage, we are trying our hardest to do so. But if more major reconstruction works are required, getting revised planning to undertake them may be more difficult to obtain with the implied constraints of ‘listings’. Therefore we are disinclined to support any non-designated heritage listing on Meudon Cottage whilst its ‘restorability’ is still in question. We should of course remember why all these buildings were in such an appallingly poor state of repair when purchased by the current owners – namely, many years in the Council’s ownership with little/no upkeep or regard for their traditional aesthetic value.

However, if you do insist on giving it a NDHA listing a more informative summary for the listing would be:

‘Single-depth dwelling of killas rubble construction, cement-rendered on the West side only, with attractive symmetrical front elevation and large attached mid c19 open barn to the East. Evidence of an earlier (pre-c18) dwelling at the NE corner of the existing property has been found but the current dwelling is an early Victorian remodelling of two earlier semi-detached late c18 dwellings. Further mid-Victorian and early Edwardian modifications added a two storey gable to the SE corner and a sleigh roof down to first floor level on the East side respectively. Adjacent to Meudon Farm (List Entry No. 1142100)’.

59 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

To arrive at this summary we have done significant research since acquiring it, both in the historic records and in the construction methods and phases of the building(s), and I am happy to share this with you should you be interested. It remains for me to say that if you do wish to leave Meudon Cottage on the NDHA list then I trust you will be sympathetic to all and any actions that we need to take in order to restore or rebuild the original cottage.

Non-Designated Heritage Asset – listing 36

Moving on to listing 36, I can offer the following. There are 3 walls remaining of a large, 2-storey L-shaped barn that was demolished by the council in 1974 we think because it was subsiding. Its subsidence significantly racked the roof of Meudon Cottage (which was tied into the barn roof) and steel bracing (which remains today) was added to the ridge beam of Meudon Cottage to try to hold it together. The subsidence also started to pull the south gable wall away from the rest of the building and structural tie rods will probably be required to stabilize the walls of Meudon Cottage as a result. We know that the barn was built between 1839 and 1877 and was built at the same time as the SE gable extension of Meudon Cottage. We also know that the Western return of the barn originally extended into the front garden of Meudon Cottage and pre-dates 1839. The remaining ruins are a mixture of killas rubble, concrete lintels, concrete blocks, and Victorian bricks, with most of the many windows and doors blocked up. There were two fine flights of granite steps up to the second floor of the Western return but only one remained after the demolition. The north wall, which is the only part in joint ownership, was left standing by the council to act as a boundary wall for what were originally two separate farms. Unfortunately a lack of maintenance/protection and 40+ years of exposure to the SW wind and rain left it in a very poor state.

I note in the draft NDP a reference to the Seven Years War and Napoleonic prisoners. I am not strong on history but I do know that the dates of both do not coincide with each other or the date of the barn, so your researchers perhaps need to look at that point again. Certainly I would be reluctant to condone the admission of misinformation into the public record. Accordingly we recommend that you correct the information you have included for listing 36.

As to the value of listing of the ruins, it feels like a case of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. What was once a substantial and handsome barn is long gone as a result of the council’s demolition of it and it is now a random mix of killas rubble and c20 building materials. I can’t really see an argument for meeting the criteria of interest or significance and in the case of the North wall it is very unattractive on the South side and certainly not representative or anything special. The north side of the wall is better, but it dominates what is otherwise a rather pretty cottage. The West and South walls are much better aesthetically (granite quoins etc.) and structurally, and it is excellent news that they will be

60 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

used in forthcoming development – they will therefore be preserved because of the development, not because of any NDHA listing.

If the ruins of the West and South walls of listing 36 remain on the NDHA list then you should take into account likely modification and remedial work as a result of approved planning application PA20/05635. Likewise, for the North (shared) wall of listing 36 you should take into account changes relating to the preservation of the wall and the restoration of Meudon Cottage which were agreed by us with the vendor (Cornwall Council) and the owners of Meudon Barns prior to us buying the property and which are identified in planning application PA15/02140 approved in April 2015 (lowering the North wall) and planning application PA15/11718 approved in January 2016 (introducing a garden door into the east end of the North wall). There were no objections made to these planning applications and no related planning constraints.

I should also note that notwithstanding the consents listed above:

- Due diligence was carried out with the vendor prior to purchase (due to the Grade II listing of garden walls associated with Meudon Farm/Farmhouse) including discussions with the Council’s conservation officer and the estate services manager. This confirmed that there were no listings or restrictions on Meudon Cottage or its boundary walls. This included the North wall of the attached open barn (which we have had to rebuild and on which we have gone to significant expense to restore to its former glory for the benefit of our neighbours to the North but not to ourselves since we can’t see it) and the shared North wall of listing 36. This due diligence was also informed by our survey which identified: o The derelict and unsafe condition of the shared North wall, including a significant collapse of an area of the South face, and the likely cost of restoration; o The adverse impact that the shared North wall has on the West wall of Meudon Cottage in terms of blocking winter sun, damp and the historic racking of the building. It is important to remember that the wall was built after the Victorian modernisation of Meudon Cottage(s) and has contributed to the degradation of the building over the last ~180 years. - A further structural survey has recently been carried out (August 2020) on the shared North wall and the reports note “a lot of vertical settlement” and a “significant lean” to the north. The specific report on the North wall notes that if “preserved at its current height it is recommended that a number of steel column buttresses are built along the wall on one or both sides, to at least two thirds of its current height and anchored at each base with steel reinforced concrete footings extending out at right-angles to the wall”. The joint owners of the North wall of the ruins will determine the most appropriate long-term preservation of the wall taking into consideration a) the consents referred to above, b) the limited interest and significance of the wall, c) the likely cost of any

61 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

preservation and d) the safety of the residents on both side of the wall. The joint owners are keen to do this before the North wall falls down completely or has to be demolished if it becomes condemned. We certainly don’t let our two young children play anywhere near it at the moment since it is leaning into our front garden.

I note in the minutes of the Parish Council meeting of 20 August 2020 that when discussing the proposed conversion of the West and South walls of the ruin (Agenda item 3220.20), stated that, in the context of the planning application being discussed, the North wall would “not be affected by the development”. This is correct, but as a shared boundary you will be aware that are unable to make a unilateral statement about the shared North boundary wall in any other respect, nor to make or accept any commitment relating to it without the agreement of both parties.

Lastly, I would like to take this opportunity, having read all sections of the NDP from cover to cover, to commend the Chairman of the Parish Council and the NDP Steering Group, the team and all the contributors for what is undeniably a massive effort and a significant body of work. The NDP is essential if we are to protect what we know and love in our beautiful and unique part of Cornwall. Two thoughts came to mind when reading the NDP.

The first concerned the listing of local green spaces. This was great to see, but it did leave me thinking that developers will simply target the space in between. Green spaces connected by housing estates are no longer rural green spaces. I accept that there are definitions for infill and rounding off, but certainly in the case of the latter, I worry this will be a target for abuse.

The second thought was simply that a test of the NDP will be that never again can large estates be built in our village/parish to the detriment of the very essence of what a small rural village is. Lowenna Fields is no doubt a travesty, and it seems there was little accountability in terms of its positioning, size, design, finishes, ridge heights etc. But it is not the only estate to have changed the village. Some progress and growth may be inevitable but we must not end up as a suburb of Falmouth as for example Budock Water is becoming. We arrive in the village from country lanes, and we leave the village into countryside. It must stay this way, and the housing boundary of the village must be constrained within this rural area so that we keep this rurally isolated feeling.

I know that the NDP will have some weight – the question is whether it can define and enforce a covenant on what it means to be, and stay, a small rural community? We hope so – there is so much in the NDP that speaks to this.

62 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

I would be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt of this email. We are of course happy to discuss any of these points further should you wish to do so.

NDP Response : by Admin on 30/10/20

Thank you for your very detailed comments and concerns about the inclusion of Meudon Cottage in our schedule of non- designated heritage assets. I also apologise that you did not receive our letter to owners of such properties – it was, indeed, an oversight. Although all your comments will be considered by the Parish Council in due course, I would simply say at this point that there is no intention to raise the planning stakes on assets to that associated with properties that receive a Listed grading by Historic England. Our schedule just highlights to Parish and Local Authority planning officials that an historic asset exists in certain locations so that harm or loss of the asset can be considered with any planning application.

The Cornwall Council advice is “the identification of the properties as non-designated heritage assets actually isn't the same thing as a local list, the properties are not listed and this doesn't bring about extra planning restrictions. All it does is highlight that this is one of the non-designated heritage assets that the community locally value. Non-designated heritage assets are already referred to in national and local strategic policy and already the requirement is not to cause harm to them. The NDP is highlighting that this is one of the structures that are valued - but without this specific reference a planning officer could still apply their judgement and say that this is a non-designated heritage asset. Only the Local Planning Authority (i.e. Cornwall Council) can designate a local list, although NDPs can and do propose assets for that." I hope that this clarifies the rationale behind our schedule of assets.

Finally, I am very grateful for your wholesome support for the NDP: your thoughts reflect those of the whole team. We will be in touch again when all the consultation comments are considered jointly by the Parish Council and us.

Further response by resident on 4/11/20

Many thanks for your prompt reply, it is much appreciated.

Thank you also for clarifying the rationale behind the schedule of assets. I am indeed aware of council advice and national policy guidance and requirements. You will appreciate that it is largely the issue of loss and/or harm that is important here. If indeed the two listings concerned did/do have any heritage value, then in the case of listing 35, much of the harm occurred whilst in the Council’s ownership and we are now trying to reverse it without losing the building completely. In

63 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

the case of listing 36, the near total demolition (loss) of the building occurred during the Council’s ownership, and the current joint owners of what remains have included the ruins in their respective plans in order to ensure they are preserved, as much as they can be. The detail in our earlier email adds the supporting facts, and I am not sure why we should come under the scrutiny of an NDHA listing given the disregard that has been shown to these buildings in the past.

However, because you have said in your consultation letter that you would like our support, we have offered our in- principle support for listing 35. This is subject to a reassurance in an appropriate form that acknowledges and allows for the challenges of restoring old buildings. In anticipation of a listing we have provided a revised and more informative summary description for listing 35.

In the case of the part of listing 36 that we jointly own with our neighbours (the North wall), any support would be conditional on the correct facts being presented, the clear articulation of detail that suggests NDHA significance and interest, and the recognition of existing consents. I have not read anything yet to suggest that we are close to meeting some or all of these requirements.

Thank you for acknowledging our support for the NDP, it is sincerely meant. Mawnan Parish has been my home since 1977, my father grew up in this Parish in the 1920/30’s – and it was a surprise to find out that my Australian wife’s family originally came from Cornwall. So Mawnan is a special place for us, not just because of our love of unspoiled countryside and old buildings.

Reply by NDP Admin on 4/11/20:

Dear ,

Thank you for your email which neatly encompassed the discussions so far. There is much to consider and your recorded comments and those of other consultees will feature greatly in our discussions with the Parish Council in the coming weeks.

Regards,

See also Supplementary NDP Consideration: Requires resolution Correspondence

64 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File 50 By Resident: on 30/10/20

Apologies for the delay...thank you for letting us know our building has been added to the Local List. So important to Admin determined appreciate & recognise buildings of significance. the resident was at Roscarrick Villas Can you please let me know where I might see the full Local List? Would love to take a look out of interest. NDHA No 12 and pointed to website. NDP Consideration: Acknowledged; no further action. NFA

65 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Comments File

51 By Local Business: on 30/10/20

I am writing to submit representations to the Regulation 14 consultation of the Mawnan draft Neighbourhood Development Plan on behalf of our client Meudon Vean Ltd in relation to the Meudon Hotel and grounds. I would be very happy to discuss or clarify anything within my letter should any member of the steering group or parish council wish. I would be more than happy to assist. Acknowledged. Representation is Please could you acknowledge receipt of our representations including the letter and photographs appendix. at Annex C By Admin on 31/10/20:

Dear , Black Box Planning Your input to the Mawnan NDP Consultation is noted. It is a very comprehensive submission which will require thorough understanding before we discuss further with the Parish Council. We will respond in due course.

Regards,

NDP Administrator On behalf of Mawnan Parish Council

66 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Filed Papers – Not for publication outside NDP/Parish Council members

NDP Consideration: Requires resolution and advice to PC

52 By Resident; on 22/10/20

The Mawnan NDP, if approved, will represent an acceptance and encouragement of the steady future urbanisation of the Parish. The process has already started, since as reported in Section 2.2.2 of the main document “Mawnan Parish NDP 2019-2030 (NDP)”, the scale of dwellings completed has increased 4 fold between the periods 2001-2010 (21 completions) and since 2010 (88 completions). Section 1.1.2 of the NDP explains that the plan adheres to the requirements of and runs in tandem with the timescale of the Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies 2010-2030 document (LP: SP) and, as explained in Section 8.2.1, Mawnan Parish has been allocated under the LP:SP a target of 0 dwellings to be built in the Parish during the period 2010-2030. This absence of any requirement is largely reflective of the situation of 90% of the Parish within an AONB. However, with 113 CNA development commitments already in place for the period since 2010 the Parish has already witnessed building to be occurring on a scale far beyond anything required and, as recognised in the NDP in 8.2.1, “quite clearly the Parish has significantly exceeded the housing target in the LP:SP” With absolutely no requirement for any further dwellings to be built to conform with the LP:SP the NDP will, without any justification and as part of Policy1, allow future completions to continue annually (per 8.2.9) at the “7 or so that might continue under ‘infill’ or ‘rounding off’ applications” together with the additional quantities permitted under the terms of Policy 1. Management of future building in conformance with Policy 1 of the NDP, allowing the continuation of building at the existing rate together with the additional building envisaged, could result in excess of 15-20 building completions annually. Over the next 10 years this could lead to an increase in the order of 20% to the 877 households already in the parish in 2016 (per 1.1.5). It is important to point out that the questionnaire of June 2018 did not seek to ask if residents were happy with the “7 or so” to continue to be routinely built in the future, with an assumption being made that they are. An increase of the above magnitude will not, in any way, either conserve or enhance the unique character of the parish and will in fact cause irreparable harm by diminishing the attractiveness of the area to existing residents and to the flow of tourists and tourist income that the parish and Cornwall is so heavily reliant upon. The continued inflow of tourists and

63 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Filed Papers – Not for publication outside NDP/Parish Council members

associated income, rather like the historic abundance of fish in Cornish waters, is something that cannot be taken for granted. Based on no requirement at all for any further building, an NDP for Mawnan that takes into account the wishes of most residents should be firmly based on a presumption of no further new dwellings to be built, with the only exception being to allow limited building that genuinely meets defined social housing needs of existing residents. The Mawnan Parish NDP, if it is to meet its vision of preserving and enhancing the unique qualities and characteristics of the parish should be re-drafted on the basis set out in the preceding paragraph. Notwithstanding my overall view of the Mawnan NDP, I would like to express my appreciation of the huge amount of work undertaken by the NDP team, acting under the direction of Mawnan Parish Council and on behalf of the population of Mawnan Parish. It is unfortunate that Mawnan Parish Council has misdirected the efforts of the NDP team.

NDP Response: 0n 4/11/20

I must apologise for this tardy reply. Your comment on housing numbers is duly noted. A further response will be given at the conclusion of Reg 14 Consultation after discussion within the NDP Group and ultimately with the Parish Council.

NDP Consideration: The figures for past building are greatly swayed by the Lowenna complex. Author was present at joint Review Policies CC/NDP/PC discussion of the matter in July 2018.

53 By Resident: on 2/11/20

Please accept my sincere apologies for not getting feedback to you in the time specified. I do hope this email may still be of value.

We have read through the documents and would like to first thank the team for the obvious enormous effort that has gone into preparing the Plan. We appreciate the level of dedication, focus and endless hours that this must have taken; for the benefit of all of us in the Parish.

Secondly, we would like to express our full support of the NDP and can only apologise again for the lateness of this response. NFA NDP Response: Acknowledged by Admin. No further action.

64 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Filed Papers – Not for publication outside NDP/Parish Council members 54 By Budock Vean Hotel – on 6 November 2020 (Admin error - Allowed in Consultation due to local business interest)

Thank you for your recent correspondence of September 2020, relating to green space.

Whilst we appreciate the premise in providing and retaining Local Green Spaces (LGS), we have concerns with your proposed designation number 17 on the list you forwarded.

We accept that the valley garden is an important asset and includes a footpath with a right of way over it for a limited and specified list of local residents, who live adjacent to the hotel. The right of way is specified in their property deeds. Its presence is important from the Creek and the trees either side are designated as Ancient Woodland.

The site of the ancient priory is located immediately north of the swimming pool building and is not what one would ordinarily refer to as green space, as it is purely part of the gardens of the hotel. We do not therefore agree with this designation as LGS.

In addition, we do not agree that the golf course should be part of any LGS. This has no public right of access and is a private facility of the hotel, made available to guests and local members, who pay a membership fee. It is not a municipal facility nor publicly owned. It is entirely privately owned and was created as a facility for the hotel. Furthermore, it does not contribute to public landscape value, as it is entirely private and can only be seen by hotel and the properties on The Fairway and Bar Road.

Our ideals are like yours, to protect Local Greens Space within the community. However, while there is a case be made in respect of the valley garden, (albeit this is still a private facility of the hotel), due to the limited access on foot along a designated path by specified neighbours, the same cannot be said for the hotel lawn behind the pool and the golf course, which is an entirely private facility provided for the benefit of the hotel guests and members and has no public access whatsoever.

I would be grateful for your confirmation that you will amend your proposals.

NDP Response: Holding acknowledgement sent by Admin on 20/12/20

Due to Covid and extraordinary working conditions, your letter dated 6th November 2020 regarding the potential entry of Budock Vean Golf Course and Valley Garden in our Local Green Space listing has only just come to the notice of the Mawnan Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) team. Our apologies that you did not receive a reply earlier.

65 Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Filed Papers – Not for publication outside NDP/Parish Council members

We have taken note of your comments, especially the ancient woodland designation in the valley garden and the fact that access to the area is not open to the public at large. Moreover, from personal knowledge, I am aware of existing development rights on this land. Therefore, the NDP Steering Group is most likely to recommend removal of the listing when it meets with the Parish Council in early January.

NDP Consideration: The owners have an extant approved planning application (PA13/01397) to build holiday homes within the grounds of the hotel that includes the golf course and the valley garden. Any LGS designation would restrict the development of a local business. Public access is extremely limited as the hotel and its grounds, including the Golf Course, are subject to resident and member charges. On the face of it, there would be no added benefit to the local community were the LGS to remain in being. Recommend that the LGS designation be withdrawn but extend the NDHA listing to better Needs Review describe the valley garden.

66 ANNEXES:

A. Meudon Walls B. Anna Maria Creek Proposals C. Meudon Hotel Black Box Planning Representation Annex A to NDP Reg 14 Comments

MEUDON WALLS – NDHA List No: 36 on 15/10/20

Comment

We write in reference to the recent letter we received from yourselves about the NDP local list of historical sites.

We live at Meudon Barns and the walls by our gate, number 36 are on the list. We too agree that these walls are worth looking after and upkeeping, due to their age and beauty. That is why in our recent planning application we are sympathetically using these walls as part of our new garage development.

We do, however, strongly object to these walls being on the historical property list because of the reasons stated, ie ¨possible archeological interest on account of its reputed association with Napoleonic prisoners of war (seven years´ war 1756 to 63) where farms were often adapted to act as small prisons.

Having been to the county records office in Kresen Kernow last week and requested all documents relating to the hamlet of Meudon, we can confirm that as far as we are aware there is absolutely no evidence of these claimed links being true.

If no one in the parish council has any firm evidence of these historical links, then I suggest that you remove us from the list. You cannot simply put a building on to a list of historical importance based on ´heresay´, there needs to be some fact and evidence behind the claim.

It seems that the historical allegations are inaccurate for a few reasons, most importantly that the 7 years way was 1756 to 1763, which was not in Napoleonic times as Napoleon was born afterwards in 1769!!!! Also, the 2 storey walls were part of a large barn that was built after this date and that can be verified by the building methods.

I would very much like to invite comment about these suggestions, and if anyone does have any positive evidence of these historical links, we would be delighted to discuss them. It would be very interesting to find out more history of this beautiful area.

Consultant View 16/10/20

I’m sure we can keep on the list, but it sounds like we need to remove the inaccuracies. It’s on the list not just because of those reasons but its historic value more generally due to appearance, age, visibility etc.

Response by NDHA member on 26/10/20

Thank you for your e-mail of October 15th addressed to the Parish Councillors, reference the walls identified in entries 35 and 36 in Mawnan's draft Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP), as recommended for inclusion on a non-designated heritage asset schedule.

I am responding initially on behalf of the NDP working group which identified suitable properties and structures within the Parish considered worthy of inclusion on this schedule.

As you point out, the reference to Napoleonic prisoners cannot be dated to the Seven Years War, so we will correct the error. However, the case for inclusion on the n-dha schedule is neatly summed up when you said: We too agree that these walls are worth looking after and upkeeping, due to their age and beauty. It is these facts which are relevant, not the attendant summary, and the walls are on the proposed schedule for their historic value, their appearance, age, visibility and major contribution to this, one of the remaining unspoilt historic corners of Mawnan Parish. So we are delighted you have included the street-side walls within your planning application which was supported by the Parish Council following your assurance that the walls (including that in entry 35 which is contiguous with that in entry 36) would not be altered in height.

Advice from Cornwall Council says "the identification of the properties as non-designated heritage assets actually isn't the same thing as a local list, the properties are not listed and this doesn't bring about extra planning restrictions. All it does is highlight that this is one of the non-designated heritage assets that the community locally value. Non-designated heritage assets are already referred to in national and local strategic policy and already the requirement is not to cause harm to them. The NDP is highlighting that this is one of the structures that are valued - but without this specific reference a planning officer could still apply their judgement and say that this is a non- designated heritage asset. Only the Local Planning Authority (i.e. Cornwall Council) can designate a local list, although NDPs can and do propose assets for that."

This clarification applies to all entries within the NDP n-dha document and is not specific to the walls at Meudon.

However, your comments will be discussed between the NDP and the Parish Council and included in the Consultation statement which is legally required to address and answer all comments. This is then submitted to Cornwall Council for scrutiny. In the meantime, we hope that the assurance given by the Cornwall Council advice that no extra planning restrictions are involved in a non-designated heritage asset list (not listing) will enable you to reconsider your objection, and to support the recommendation that these structures be recognised for their contribution to Parish heritage. ANNEX B TO NOP REG 14 COMMENTS

File Ref 43

Many thanks for your invitation to comment on the NOP which I consider to be an excellent piece of work. Having lived on Anna Maria Creek for over twenty years and been involved with my immediate neighbours in voluntary attempts to improve this area. Based on local knowledge I have noted an apparent inaccuracy in LGS No.28 listing and associated map that I ask you to please to check.

Please find attached comments on the NOP for your consideration. Naturally I shall be available for discussion and clarification if necessary.

Subject: Mawnan Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan 2019-2030 Local Green Space Designations Regulation 14 Version July 2020

I refer to the subject document and appreciate the hard work and level of detail that has resulted in the production of a good and worthy plan. It seems clear from your public consultation that the majority of residents are deeply concerned to avoid uncontrolled suburbanisation in the interests of maintaining the peace and beauty of our surrounding countryside.

The NOP is appropriately focussed on new developments that could have an adverse impact on this AONB. On the other hand, I take this opportunity to comment, not on the potential for new development, but on an existing development listed as a Local Green Space that has steadily deteriorated to become a thoroughly polluted and hazardous space that is prone to antisocial behaviour.

For ease of reference I reproduce the tabulated text included in the NOP that describes that portion which deals with Open spaces numbered 28 and 29.

Op•nSpac. Grid R.t. Ducriptionand purpoM In reasonablydost Otmonstrably special to a local Localin character proximity to the community and holds a particular and not an community local significance extensivetract of land 28, Anna Marla ossw This Is atidal creek, there Anna Marla creek Is This area Is appreciated for Its A very sheltered Cruk headwaters 76212 are areas of woodland on situated along the peaceful character and the tidal creek,the and surrounding 28003 the riverbank and a long foreshore of the wildlife -Including deer, badger, ground Including woodland. Anna Budock Vean fox, curlew, redshank, foreshore and M�ria is iicreek on the stream which feeds settlement and this sreenshank, egrets and bats. The woodland is th@ North sid@ of into the creek.. area is about 200 old Anna Maria copper mine was about4 hectares. th@ H@lford river. metres to the North open here in the 1800s and early East. 1900s. Some localvill agers moor their boats in the tidal creek. .. 29. Porth NavH ossw Porth Navas Str�am In Mawnan Pari•h the This woodland Is an important Th� woodlandis stream and 75825 follo= the Parish woodland extends wildlife corridor which links the about7 hectares surrounding: 28491 boundary with Constantine along the stream from river with several areds of in total. woodland. Parish so some of the SouthEast of Trenarth woodland and wetland habitat. surrounding woodland is Bridge to West of This wildlife site is on private - outside of the Mawnan Roskellan House. It is propertyand there is no publi NDP. This Public Green about 2 kilometres richt of way. Space refers to all the from Mawnan Smith woodland along the vallev village. which is within the Parish boundary.

The subject document states that for each LGS information is provided giving an analysis of the space. The information listed for area 28 confirms that the space meets the relevant criteria specified in paragraph 100 of the NPPF. What the description in column 5 fails to reveal is the appalling state of this particular space and fails to report the fact that there is no public right of way along the length of the foreshore above the Mean High Water Mark and below the river bank that lies on private property.

1 Anna Maria Creek extends from the road bridge upstream to the Western Boundary of St Anthony on the South Bank and along the boundary of Tide End on the North Bank. Despite in-depth research by the Helford River Association (now defunct), current ownership of the old mine site at the head of the creek (shown in dark green on the map below - see Fig.1) has not been established whereas, downstream of this area, local property deeds confirm that the strip of foreshore between the river bank and the Mean High Water (MHW) Mark is, and has always been, private property.

2 Fig 1. Map corrected to showprivate property above MHW and below river bank Key

The Mean High Water Mark (MHW) forms a line that is separated from the river bank on either side by a dry strip of foreshore that floods during the spring tidal cycle. This strip varies in width along the length of the creek but it is not less than one metre in width at any point. This dry strip is private property over which there is no public access and on which boats cannot be moored without the owners’consent.

The blue line on the NDP map on Grid 2 (see extract Fig.1 above) shows the limits of LGS No.28 as encompassing a significant area of private property including Stimson’s Field together with the private quays, slipways, garden water frontages and the foreshore above MHW directly in front of Clamerkin Quay, The Anchorage and St Anthony on the South side and Tide End water frontage on the North side. Clearly this cannot be correct. There is no public access above MHW and these properties including the private strip of foreshore are subject to existing planning laws.

Accordingly I believe that the description of Anna Maria Creek, item 28 should include a similar sentence in bold print to that which appears under Port Navas, item 29 column 5, where it states that “This wildlife site is on private property and there is no public right of way”. I respectfully request that the LGS text (No.28 column 5) and the map is corrected before these areas can be inadvertently interpreted as public spaces.

It is stated that “Some local villagers moor their boats in the tidal creek”. In fact only a very few responsible local boat owners moor their boats on what has become an uncontrolled marine dumping ground that breaches the strict rules that govern UK boatyards with respect to disposal of waste (especially hazardous waste), the use of equipment and materials, the type of unsupervised repair work that is permitted to be carried out on a tidal foreshore, the provision of safety equipment and registration and insurance of craft using the facility. The few seaworthy craft are greatly outnumbered by numerous wrecks, derelicts and abandoned craft.

Certain boats are used for permanent or temporary residence in direct breach of the Cornwall Council Enforcement Notice issued in 2010. Sewage and grey water is routinely discharged into the creek. The adjacent woodland is used as a toilet and a rubbish dump. Debris is stacked along the banks of the creek and the woodland has been used for fly tipping. The creek water has been fouled by acid from dilapidated batteries, polluted bilge water, food waste, fuel oil, grease and harmful tributyltin leached from long- outlawed anti-fouling paint

3

Many boats have been moored above the MHW mark on private property and almost all have connected moorings to the private river banks without the consent of the property owners. Some of these moorings are connected haphazardly to trees covered by TPO’s and in high winds this can, and has, resulted in damage to protected trees.

It is stated in the LGS that “The area is appreciated for its peaceful character”. The reality is that the area has become a significant nuisance caused by frequent noisy gatherings that often generate foul language. A review of Police and Fire Service records associated with Anna Maria Creek will reveal a history of the discovery of illegal drugs being cultivated in the adjacent woodland, incidents of theft and incidents of violent behaviour including assault, also an explosion and fire ignited on an unsupervised derelict craft that was being used illegally for residential purposes. Fortunately the resident was absent at the time.

In 2003 a meeting was convened in Port Navas Village Hall to determine what could be done to clean up the area. The meeting was attended by representatives of Cycleau, Campaign to Protect Rural England, Cornwall Council, Mawnan Parish Council, , Helford River Association, Helford River Marine Conservation Area, local riparian property owners and two responsible local boat owners.

Despite universal agreement that a major clean-up was needed the meeting was concluded with no solution or suggested action that might have rectified the problem at that time. The condition of the creek has steadily deteriorated since then. A more recent visit by Mr George Eustace MP was arranged by the HRA and he promised to look into the issue; however, understandably, his duties in the current national circumstances will have prevented him from following this up.

The problem is not unique to the Helford. The Harbour Master has been managing similar problems for several years but this has had the unfortunate result that craft ordered to be removed from Truro often end up abandoned in Anna Maria Creek where no such harbour authority control exists.

Owners of waterfront property on Anna Maria Creek are totally committed to the preservation and improvement of this area. Consequently there is likely to be no shortage of volunteers offering assistance in the event that the Parish Council is able to make any headway on dealing with this issue.

In conclusion I will say that, today, Anna Maria Creek falls so far short of an AONB that it more closely resembles an AOMD (Area of Outstanding Marine Dumping). This particular Local Green Space presently contains what is probably one of the largest collection of abandoned glass reinforced plastic hulls and general plastic waste in West Cornwall.

File Ref: 44

For the attention of the NDP Administrator: 28th October 2020

Dear Sirs Re. Local Green Space – Area 28

In response to the Mawnan NDP I have some concerns and an objection I would ask you to consider. I refer specifically to the proposed Local Green Space the plan shows in Anna Maria Creek, highlighted in green, as area 28. The NDP is a comprehensive and well written proposal and my objection is small, but I feel it is important.

My home is on Anna Maria Lane which fronts the Anna Maria Creek and the NDP proposes to make my foreshore and that of my two neighbours’ part of the Local Green Space. I have no objection to the creek itself being designated part of the NDP, as it is rich in wildlife and perfect for leisure pursuits such as kayaking and paddle boarding but I object to the private foreshore of the properties being included.

Anna Maria Creek could be a true asset, even beauty spot for the Parish, as it is often the first glimpse of the Helford River that visitors have. The properties are of course in an AONB, they are bound by TPO’s and also subject to an Enforcement Order that was issued in 2010. They are classified C3 Residential for planning purposes. So my objection comes from the long term abuse of the creek, by numerous boat 4 owners who ignore the Enforcement Order, without consequence. In my view the NDP overstates the true picture of the creek as “an area appreciated for its peaceful character where some local villagers moor their boats”. There is often a lot of noise in the creek and I believe the majority of boats and wrecks there are nothing to do with residents of our Parish. My concern is that those abusing the creek already, would misinterpret the new Local Green Space, especially when private foreshore is included, quite regardless of any caveat which might be added about designation not conferring any public rights of access.

The recent pursuit of significant and noisy repairs being undertaken on the foreshore at the end of the creek, coupled with the increasing regularity with which unviable boats are being dumped there illicitly, would amount to a change of planning use of the creek itself from recreational to general industrial (of the sort which is required to be carried out in heavily regulated premises such as boatyards precisely because of the potential for environmental damage) by default if left to go on unchallenged for long enough. There could hardly be a more inappropriate use of what ought arguably to be the most highly prized example of the upper reaches of the Helford River creeks within Mawnan Parish’s part of the AONB.

With the number of restrictions already applied to the properties on the creek, I don’t believe the small strip of our foreshore land should be included. Its inclusion would not only be fundamentally incompatible with NGS designation official criteria but were it so included it may well undermine the one feature which has enabled some restraint to be placed on even more extensive contravention activities at this location. The 5 landholders directly adjacent to this creek with ownership of such strips of shore have already learnt to their cost that providing voluntary support for such measures, impliedly in the wider public interest, as is now being requested for the LGS, leaves them as the only parties bearing the burden of official restrictions on their property when nobody else – neither the local authority nor still less those acting in breach of the various restrictions - takes any notice. e.g the Enforcement Order.

Anna Maria Creek and its wildlife suffer from people residing on and repairing boats, creating noise, chemical and environmental damage, despite an Enforcement Order which the local authority has failed to act on since 2010. Even intervention by a government minister, George Eustice and Councillor John Bastin in 2016, has not yet produced an improvement in the creek, as since then the number of wrecks deposited has increased by over 50%. Environmental pollution can be seen in the creek and the surrounding woods, something featured in the TV programme ‘Escape to the Country’ where Margherita Taylor highlighted the creek as an area where waste plastic could be collected and recycled. This was an appalling advert for the Parish and a very poor reflection of our stewardship of the AONB in practice despite the theory.

So my point is adding more restrictions to an area which has never been managed effectively in the last 20 years seems pointless unless the authorities recognise the existing problem and are able to pursue an effective action plan using the powers that they already have to correct the environmental abuse of this Parish asset. Worse than that, including private land for the reasons I have given would be unacceptable to any homeowner.

In previous times there has been a very positive response from local residents wishing to remove wrecks. I do know that the residents of Anna Maria Lane would be enthusiastic to support a plan to clean up the creek and promote the area as a local asset; however the good intentions have not worked well previously, perhaps through lack of support. Creating another jurisdiction could possibly make matters worse if there is no plan to address the issues.

I enclose just a few pictures of the creek where I believe most boats are staked to private foreshore or tied to trees with TPO’s.

5 6 7

By Resident on 4/11/20

Attached are the 4 items comprising my suggestion for a redraft of the LGS Area 28 designation material in order to make it NPPF criteria compliant, central government guidance compliant, and subject to full NDP status being achieved, to establish a sound development plan level footing not only for resolution of the immediate problems at this location but also perhaps to provide a stimulus to pursue a Green Infrastructure Action Plan of the kind referred to in Step 3 of CC's Guide Note dated May 2019.

I should be pleased to provide any further information the NDP group or P.C. might find of assistance on the contents and rationale for them.

(Note by Admin ‐ Item 1)

Mawnan Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan 2019 – 2030 Draft NDP for Consultation July 2020

Local Green Space Designations Area 28 – Anna Maria Creek

Appendix to Response dated 30th October 2020 Submission of amendments requested to the detail given in Table 1 and Map

1. Further to my Consultation Response submitted on 30th October, copies of Table 1 and its accompanying Map are attached with the amendments sought printed in red and marked in red manuscript on them respectively.

2. Explanation of the need for amendments to be made Anna Maria Creek ( “AMC”) is, or should be, an asset of the highest environmental quality enjoyed by both the local community and the wider Parish. I am not aware of any other location in the Parish which carries the existing levels of environmental protection coupled with the number of formal attempts to give meaning to that protection as this location does. Notwithstanding this, it has, over recent years especially, been subjected to very significant environmental degradation to the point where it has become an eyesore. Other Responses give descriptions of the decline which need not be repeated here. The NDP’s Local Landscape Character Assessment ( “LLCA” ) description of the Parish’s Tidal Creeks as Landscape Types at Para. 3.7 notes that AMC is exceptional in that it provides public access from landward , mentions the recreational use of AMC including kayaking,dinghies and sailboats and records that “ Problems exist with tidal borne litter, live aboard, and abandoned, decaying boats at the head of Anna Maria Creek.” (3.7.9). AMC has been, paraphrasing the words of the NPPF criterion at Para. 100 (b), demonstrably special to the local community and holds a particular local significance not just because of its beauty, historic significance, tranquillity, and richness of wildlife although all those elements are still just present. It also, and primarily, meets that criterion because of the one remaining factor listed in 100 (b) alone - its recreational value.

8 Like the other features listed, the recreational use of AMC by the local community has been impaired by the recent changing nature of the boat related activities which have started to commandeer this location supplanting the traditional lighter recreational use characteristic of local community use. The latter use has been low in ancillary environmental damage at the Creek and proved to be fairly innocuous as far as the beauty, tranquillity and wildlife of the area are concerned. The former could not be any more incompatible with the high quality natural environment at this location. The damaging changes in the activities referred to include the residential use of boats, the structural repair and reconfiguration of boats, the dismantling and burning of part salvaged boats, the maintenance of boats ( with attendant chemical pollution of the foreshore ), the abandonment of unviable boats, fly tipping of surplus materials or miscellaneous rubbish, and the storage of boats on the foreshore. Some individuals appear to have multiple boats at this location and are starting to colonise sections of the foreshore to the exclusion of the use by smaller day boats. Many boat owners come from parts of Cornwall well beyond the local area.

Any objective observer with a detailed knowledge of the situation here over the past 10 years or more would have to recognise that the existing designations, and initiatives to give effect to them, have failed demonstrably. In the circumstances, it is possible that “additional local benefit” (Para. 11 MHCLG Guidance) could be gained by designation as LGS. However, what would finally consign this genuinely exceptional area to the lengthy list of victims of another perfunctory designation or policy is if the designation as LGS simply added another layer of policy to the pile of insufficiently detailed ones which fail readily to support enforcement in the event of breaches and worse if it inadvertently created any ambiguity in its application.

As you know from my Consultation Response dated 30th October my view is that the designation as currently drafted has to be amended to avoid that. I say so with great respect for, and no criticism intended of, the many local volunteers who, unlike myself , have contributed an enormous amount of their time already to production of this draft NDP.

Accordingly, I have attempted a fairly modest redraft of the parts of the LGS material relating to Area 28 namely Table 1 and its accompanying Map as attached. I also set out below an explanation of the amendments sought where appropriate.

During your consideration of this redraft some reservations or negativity, relating to the appropriateness or otherwise of some of the detailed material I have included in Columns 3, 4, and 5 of Table 1, may well be encountered . I would anticipate that if the basis for those reservations is asked for then it would be no more than a suggestion that experience of previous NDPs elsewhere indicates that no similar material has been included in the others. Such reservations would overlook the fact that the material being questioned is literally exceptional, is likely to be unique to this Parish, and as such was not available elsewhere as evidence to support designation. The material in Columns 3,4, and 5 can all be justified for inclusion by strict reference to the headings of those columns which it is there to address.

As indicated elsewhere I should be pleased to take any opportunity to discuss with the NDP Group the contents of this Appendix and the amendments sought in any Covid restriction compliant forum taking my lack of any worthwhile B/band speed into account. The complexity of the situation at AMC lends itself best to discussion if the LGS implications for it are to be fully understood .

9 3. Explanation of the particular amendments sought (as marked in red )

(a) Table 1 (i) Column 3 - Description and Purpose The recreational purpose is stated at the first opportunity . Clarity on the hitherto often muddled – deliberately or otherwise – understanding regarding the co- existence of private property rights and public rights at and adjoining this Area is provided . The original description would have left a vacuum let alone ambiguity.

(ii) Column 4 – In reasonably close proximity to the community Supports the assertion of nearby settlement use for recreation on a daily basis with the highly valued but free facility at the head of the Creek for the launch and recovery of small day boats.

(iii) Column 5 – Demonstrably special to a local community and holds a particular local significance Makes full reference to the extraordinary efforts made by 2 local environmental organisations and the Mawnan Parish Council to have the protection under the existing designations actually delivered which efforts were not entirely successful. The Helford River Association ceased their existence of the previous 50 years shortly after this failed campaign. Such material could not be more cogent as palpable evidence of the special regard which the local community has for this location and why. More pointedly it is clear evidence that the existing designations are not sufficient to deliver adequate protection so supporting the case for additional LGS designation. Such material is seldom available and far more powerful than the next best evidence under the Column 5 heading found anywhere else in Table 1 ie that for LGS Area 34 where the evidence relied upon is that “In our consultation this area received the most positive comments” with the entries for the rest of the Areas consisting of anecdotal observations only.

(b) Appendix D Accompanying Map for LGS 28

(i) Note 1 Amendment – Removal of Land above MHW as indicated from LGS designated area .

Justification for removal in principle The strip of land on both sides of the Creek hatched red described as “Shore above MHW” on the amended map is in all cases part of the 5 parcels of land directly adjoining the Creek shown on the map. These 5 parcels constitute 5 separate planning units each in private ownership. 3 of those planning units are C3 dwellinghouse and the other 2 are agricultural land. LGS 28 seeks to cover part of these planning unit parcels constituting domestic residential use and agricultural use respectively subjecting them arbitrarily to a constraint with little regard to the long established features of those existing planning uses with which it would be incompatible. LGS designation would conflict, for example, with significant Permitted Development rights granted via statute which have been in existence for many years.

Government Guidance (MHCLG 06 03 2014 Para. 008 ) on LGS designation makes it clear that designation will rarely appropriate where the land has planning permission for development. Where the land not only has permission for development but that development has existed for many decades the Guidance could not be more clear. That Guidance itself reflects the extreme difficulty that such land being used as residential or for agriculture would have in satisfying the criterion under Paragraph 100 (b) of the NPPF that LGS designation should only be used where the green space to be considered for designation is :-......

10 “ (b) demonstrably special to a local community and holds a particular local significance , for example because of its beauty, historic significance , recreational value ( including as a playing field), tranquillity, or richness of its wildlife ; .... ”

Justification for removal in practice The slightest ambiguity about the status of the land in this vicinity and the introduction of a formal element of public interest near, let alone over, any land in private ownership here will be readily exploited by those who have already demonstrated an appetite to do so in the furtherance of their own agenda – an agenda which is demonstrably, by visual inspection of this Creek, at the diametric opposite end of the spectrum to that of the environmental protection intended by designation.

The existing draft for designation of Area 28 and for adjoining Area 29 shows just how such ambiguity can be inadvertently created causing additional difficulties rather than additional safeguarding with the intended environmental protection benefits beyond that existing at present. Indeed the current draft gives rise to significant doubts as to whether the LGS Audit methodology set out by CC has been followed since there are two indicators of flaws in the draft for Area 28 and Area 29 which would probably have been picked up had that methodology been followed. Both indicators show perhaps how greater knowledge of this area over 15/20 years would have better informed judgement in considering the long running and sensitive situation here. The two indicators are :- ( i ) The current draft text for Area 28 indicates that the factor of private land ownership was not recognised or known of when considering designation at this location. Had it been, then the caveat in the 5th column of Table 1, stated in bold script for greater emphasis, and appearing in the other 12 proposed LGS Areas where private land ownership was involved, would no doubt have appeared similarly for Area 28 but it did not. ( ii ) The same caveat - “ This wildlife site is on private property and there is no no public right of way.” - quite correctly does appear in the existing text for Area 29. However, that caveat is contradicted by the Description of Area 29 in the 3rd column which refers to it as “ This Public Green Space.”

Re ( i ) In any event, even if the designation for Area 28 carried the same level of caveat as appearing in those other 12 proposed Areas it would not in my view provide a satisfactory level of clarity about the respective land rights involved at this location. Using such an existing caveat would leave matters too vague and still create the very conditions which are to be avoided. Those with a proven record of success in exploiting ambiguities would have little difficulty in continuing baffle, with surprisingly little effort or knowledge, those who we are expected to rely on for delivery of planning enforcement. Such a caveat would be of little or no effect and be ignored by both groups. For that reason, you will see that I have drafted as succinctly as is possible, given the necessity for the clarity which depends invariably on detail, a text to address the important distinction between private land ownership rights and public rights at this location as an amendment to the two columns in Table 1 where it is expressly relevant ie columns 3 and 4.

Re (ii) If there are such ambiguities on the face of the designation itself as drafted it illustrates how there would be little difficulty for anyone seeking to push and exceed the limits of public rights over and above private land ownership rights to take illicit advantage of those ambiguities.

(ii) Note 2 Amendment – Removal of Agricultural Field as indicated from LGS designation This field is wholly in private ownership constituting its own long standing planning unit with the use being agricultural notwithstanding that it has been left fallow for several years. It has the existing benefit of rights which are incompatible with LGS designation eg Permitted Development rights and inclusion would conflict with Para. 8 of the MHCLG Guidance.

11 The same explanation as is given in Note (b)(i) 3rd para. above applies also to this field under this Note (ii). It is also clear that this field could not satisfy the criterion in NPPF Para. 100 (b) of being a green space which is :- “demonstrably special to a local community and holds a particular local for example because of its beauty , historic significance , recreational value (including as a playing field), tranquillity, or richness of its wildlife.”

(iii) Note 3 Amendment – Removal of Area Beyond Anna Maria Creek as indicated from LGS designated area

The shore above MHW Part of the area hatched in red subject to this Note 3 is also part of the planning unit parcel constituting my domestic residence subjecting it arbitrarily to a constraint with little regard to the long established features of C3 dwellinghouse use. It would conflict, for example, with significant Permitted Development rights granted via statute which have been in existence for many years. The part referred to is the shore down to the MHW mark at the front of my house (Tide End) which is an important part of the curtilage of my house. For ease of reference I attach a copy of the map sent with my Response dated 30th October 2020 about Area 29 with the shore area marked on it although it is included in this Area 28. Government Guidance (MHCLG 06 03 2014 Para. 008 ) on LGS designation makes it clear that designation will rarely appropriate where the land has planning permission for development. Where the land not only has permission for development but that development has existed for many decades the Guidance could not be more clear. The additional reasons why such land which is part of a planning unit with C3 dwellinghouse use is not appropriate for LGS designation are set out above under (b) (i) Note 1 Amendment –Removal of Land above MHW and those reasons are adopted here for this part of the shore.

The whole of the area in Note 3 hatched red including the shore above MHW The MHCLG Guidance ( Para. 11 ) referred to above makes it clear that if land is already protected by designation then consideration should be given to whether any additional benefit would be gained by designation as LGS as well. This area is covered by the same AONB designation which covers pretty well the whole of the Parish and is meant to be the highest level of protection available in the T&C Planning system. There is no evidence that the existing designation as AONB is not providing any protection at this location that designation as LGS could improve upon is so LGS designation is not warranted. Similarly, there is no evidence that the whole area the subject of the ‘Note 3 ‘ amendment for removal from the draft LGS Area 28 and which consists wholly of River foreshore beyond AMC can satisfy criterion 100(b) ie that it is ‘Demonstrably special to a local community and holds a particular significance. It is no different to all the rest of the foreshore beyond AMC running down the south side of Porth Navas Creek all the way to Pedn Billy where it meets the main River and which has not been proposed for LGS designation. This again raises doubts about whether designation proposals have been indiscriminate and arbitrary warranting a sight of the LGS Audit Form. ( referred to also in the final paragraph of my Response dated 30th October on LGS Area 29.) Generally, and far from additional benefit, there is a significant risk that designation as LGS could well be counterproductive by virtue of its capacity to be misapplied and not just inadvertently. It is instructive to see such capacity being demonstrated by the NDP itself in the draft text for LGS 29 with its reference to “ This Public Green Space” in the 3rd column of the Map Table 1 regardless of its inconsistency with the purported caveat in the 5th column.

12 Further, this part of the River going beyond Anna Maria Creek does not meet the NPPF Para. 100 (a) criterion for “reasonably close proximity to the community it serves”. Cornwall Council’s ‘ Neighbourhood Planning – Local Green Space & Green Infrastructure’ indicates that “close proximity” should be defined as not more than 2 kms. (1.25 miles). On my measurement (by road) it is well over 2kms to Mawnan Smith village from either end of the area. Note by Admin: The table and map are at App 1 to Annex B

13 App 1 to Annex B AMC Comments

Tablel: Mawnan NDP Local Green Spaces Designations (Suggested changes by resident)

Open Space Grid Ref. Description and purpose In reasonably close Demonstrabl special to a local Local in character proximity to the community and holds a particular and not an community local significance extensive tract of , land

28. Anna Maria Creek OS SW 76212 28003 This is a tidal creek Anna Mariacreek is This area is appreciated for its A very sheltered headwaters and ,there are areas of situated along the peaceful character and the wildlife - tidal creek, the surrounding woodland. woodland on the foreshore of the Budock including deer, badger, fox, curlew, groundincluding Anna Maria is a creek riverbankand along the Vean settlement andthis redshank, greenshank, egretsand foreshore and on the North side of bank ofthe stream area is about 200 metres bats. The old Anna Maria copper woodland is about 4 the Helford river. which feedsinto the to the North East. mine was open here in the 1800s hectares creek. It provides public access, and early 1900s. Some local Yillagers This site of importance to the head of the creek moor their boats in the tidal creek for it!> recreational, only, along the short While it is much valued locally in wildlife and historical track from the road for meeting some of the need for significance is on the launch and recovery boating recreation, both that light creek andthe private property with of small boats to use the recreational use and the no public rights of way wider environmental character of this area apart from via the short Helford River for are being impaired by recent boat access trackfrom the recreation related activities amounting to road at its north east gevelopment b_y ,;:l:) nge Qf t,Jse Class end to the head of the in breach of planning control ie creek and the right of residential use C3, and structural passage over the repair construction and foreshore and fundus maintenance of boats use 82 by boat in the course of together with the abandonment of navigation when the unviable boats. Two local marine tide is in. environmental organisations supported by the Parish Council have campaigned to try to secure effective planning enforcement of the existing designations with limitedsuccess Map changes sought by resident and referred to in submission. t 'r, 1 # !! () t-1"- 0 ; ; l ·I i t 111) \ Mawnan NDP Regulation 14 Filed Papers

Annex C to NDP Reg 14 Comments

Meudon Hotel - BLACK BOX PLANNING

NOTE: Not to be reproduced without Author's permission

65 30th October 2020 DT/20142

NDP Administrator c/o 5 Chapel Town Close E: @blackboxplanning.co.uk Mawnan Smith T: 07423 754569 TR11 5UU 9 Marsh Street Bristol VIA E-MAIL ONLY BS1 4AA

Dear Sir / Madam

RE: Mawnan Neighbourhood Development Plan – Regulation 14 Consultation

I write to submit our representations to the Mawnan Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) Regulation 14 Pre-Submission Consultation. First and foremost, we would like to commend the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group on collating a comprehensive draft NDP, however, as the NDP will eventually form part of the lawful development plan, it does need to be tested to ensure that it meets the basic conditions, having regard to national policy and guidance, and we have some concerns in this regard.

Our client Meudon Vean Ltd owns and operates the Meudon Hotel on Maenporth Road, TR11 5HT. The property is a country house hotel with an established ornamental garden in the hotel grounds. The hotel and grounds have no public rights of way or permissive rights of way across the land and are principally open to hotel patrons and visitors to the hotel restaurant only. The hotel operation is a local business and employer and a key contributor to the local economy and tourism industry. As is recognised in the draft NDP, visitors come from afar to stay at the hotel and to enjoy the grounds.

The hotel is also solely responsible for the upkeep of the grounds and this is symbiotic with the role and function of the hotel, both aesthetically and commercially. In essence, without the hotel the quality of the grounds would not be maintained. Accordingly, the role of the hotel business is a primary consideration in any designation or allocation moving forward. We would welcome further engagement on matters set out in the NDP which have an impact on the business.

We understand that the hotel grounds are proposed to be designated as Local Green Space (LGS) through the Mawnan NDP process. We have fundamental concerns with this on a practical level and raise objection to this proposed LGS designation. Unfortunately, it would serve to place undue burden on the operation of a local tourism business employing members of the local community, which is inconsistent with the aims and objectives of national policy in relation to the local economy and business and does not meet the LGS criteria set out in national policy and contained within national guidance. It would inadvertently call into

Company Registration: 11444297 question the viability of the hotel operation and the capacity of the business to maintain the hotel grounds which the proposed designation seeks to protect.

National Policy Context The application of the LGS designation is set out in national policy under Section 8 Promoting Healthy and Safe Communities and the sub-heading ‘Open Space and Recreation’ at NPPF Paragraphs 99 through 101. Fundamentally, it is a policy designation tool which serves to protect green spaces that local communities value as locally significant, which would otherwise go unprotected. The inclusion of the policy at this section in the NPPF leads one to believe that it is fundamentally linked, on some level, to recreational value and significance to the local community.

NPPF Paragraph 99 states that the designation of land at LGS through local and neighbourhood plans allows communities to identify and protect green areas of particular importance to them. Designating land as LGS should be consistent with the local planning of sustainable development and complement investment in sufficient homes, jobs and other essential services. LGS should only be designated when a plan is prepared or updated and be capable of enduring beyond the end of the plan period.

NPPF Paragraph 100 requires that a LGS designation should only be used where the green space is: (a) In reasonably close proximity to the community it serves; (b) Demonstrably special to a local community and holds particular local significance, for example because of its beauty, historic significance, recreational value (including as a playing field), tranquility or richness of its wildlife: and (c) Local in character and is not an extensive tract of land.

The NPPF at Section 15 places great emphasis on conserving and enhancing the natural environment. At NPPF Paragraph 172 it is stated that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) which have the highest status of protection in relation to those issues. It is also stated that the scale and extent of development within these designated areas should be limited.

Reasons for Objection

Is the hotel grounds appropriate in terms of meeting the national policy requirements and criteria for LGS designation?

The NPPF sets a significantly high bar for LGS designation. Indeed, the 2012 version stated at Paragraph 77 that LGS designation will ‘not be appropriate for most green areas or open space’. Particular care is required to ensure that LGS policies are not misused and meet the particular criteria set out in NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG).

2 NPPF Paragraph 100 (a) states that an LGS designation should only be used where the green space is in reasonably close proximity to the community it serves. Whilst, the gardens are located within the parish and no doubt the Mawnan community regards them as a local asset, it is stated at Paragraph 2.1.8 of the draft NDP, that the four sub-tropical gardens of Glendurgan, Trebah, Carwinion and Meudon, the village and its gardens attract thousands of British and foreign tourists, along with local visitors, each year. It is clear then that the gardens do not serve solely the local community and the catchment for the ‘community’ which considers Meudon Hotel gardens and other local ornamental gardens special is principally hotel guests and visitors and therefore highly specific and can be far-reaching. Albeit, not of a national significance.

This notion is affirmed by the fact that other local ornamental gardens at Glendurgan and Trebah are non-statutory registered parks and gardens recognised by Historic England and not proposed as LGS. Glendurgan is managed by the National Trust, a national charity and membership organisation, and both gardens are open to the public, have visitor facilities and public rights of way.

NPPF Paragraph 100(b) states that an LGS designation must be demonstrably special to a local community and hold particular local significance. We would agree that the gardens have beauty and tranquillity, however as stated above, this is not of particular local significance. In contrast, it is considered that the local significance is limited. Unless as a hotel guest or visitor to the restaurant, there is very limited recreational value to the local community because there are no public rights of way or permissive rights of way through the gardens. To fully experience and appreciate the gardens, one must be inside them and therefore they can only ever be of limited local significance.

A landscape-based assessment of the local public significance and amenity value gardens from recreational trails and vantage points accessible to the public has been undertaken by a local landscape professional and is provided as an appendix to this letter. This demonstrates that public enjoyment of the gardens is severely limited given the absence of public accessibility and inter-visibility. As shown in the consultation undertaken, no local resident noted the Meudon Hotel gardens as special in the response spot map at Appendix 3 to the Local Landscape Character Assessment (LLCA). It is not understood what the basis is for the LGS proposal, in reviewing the evidence base and local recommendation.

Alongside the criteria set out at NPPF Paragraph 100, the PPG suggests some examples of the types of green area which can be identified as LGS. It is said these could include land where sports pavilions, boating lakes or structures such as war memorials are located, allotments, or urban spaces that provide a tranquil oasis. Notably, these are all recreational features which have implied public access and publicly available amenity. Public access is a common feature of the majority of LGS designations proposed in the parish.

Whilst we acknowledge that the PPG does say that land could be considered for designation even if there is no public access, there is not sufficient justification to designate the hotel grounds as LGS in this regard and would attest that the proposed designation does more harm

3 than good in terms of the aims and objectives of national policy. Indeed, Black Box Planning have been successful in promoting the removal of a proposed LGS designation over private land on the point of there being no public access. Government appointed Inspectors have aligned to this notion given it is a central component considering its place in NPPF. Notably in Cheltenham, where the inclusion of sites as LGS in the proposed Local Plan now forms the subject of Judicial Review on the issue. It can be a highly contentious issue which requires careful consideration and justification. This is also relevance in ensuring that LGS does not conflict with or duplicate the protection afforded by other designations and allocations. This is considered further later below.

Why would the proposed LGS designation be burdensome and inhibitive on the hotel business and not in accordance with national policy for plan-making?

It is important to first draw on a clear distinction between the registered ornamental gardens of Glendurgan and Trebah and the gardens at the Meudon Hotel. Whilst the hotel gardens have a value and are maintained to provide amenity for the hotel, they are not nearly as well- maintained as at Glendurgan and Trebah. The reason for this is principally a financial one. The registered gardens have larger and diverse income streams such as from gate receipts and benefactors and are far more visitor friendly with appropriate parking provision and visitor facilities. Unfortunately, the Meudon Hotel does not benefit from this possibility, due to insufficient access and parking and lack of appropriate facilities, therefore the gardens are maintained on a more constrained budget.

The LGS designation would place a burdensome and unfair restriction and severely inhibit the hotel operation in terms of meeting its business needs and therein maintaining and enhancing the hotel grounds. That does not mean that the maintenance of the grounds is not an objective shared by the hotel, it is. The grounds are a central element of the hotel offer and their retention and upkeep is a self-governing component in this regard. Similarly, the hotel must also continue free of any unjustified constraint which could have an operational impact on it and therefore risk viability. In such circumstances, the upkeep of the grounds would be something which would be impacted, sterilising its distinctiveness.

The proposed designation of LGS over the grounds of Meudon Hotel does not therefore complement investment in local jobs and is contrary to NPPF Paragraph 99. We have previously sought legal opinion on these matters during our involvement in the Cheltenham Borough Plan which re-affirms and draws out the themes from NPPF Paragraph 99 that ‘designating LGS should be consistent with the local planning of sustainable development and complement investment in sufficient homes, jobs and other essential services’. It is further stated in the PPG that ‘designating any LGS will need to be consistent with local planning for sustainable development in the area’. ‘In particular, plans must identify sufficient land in suitable locations to meet identified development needs and the LGS designation should not be used in a way that undermines this aim of plan making’.

The legal opinion confirms that ‘land should not be designated as LGS where it would undermine the ability of the Local Plan to provide for [inter alia] sufficient jobs.’ It is therefore the case that the relevant plan-making authority must first and foremost discharge its duty to

4 make provision for meeting its development needs. Once this task is completed, and only then, does the issue of whether land would be suitable for designation as LGS fall to be considered.

It is questioned whether this duty has indeed been fully discharged in preparing the draft NDP for Mawnan Parish. Whilst generic housing and employment policies exist within the draft NDP, as far as we understand, there is no positive allocation of any land to meet development needs, such as for housing and employment. For instance, the Meudon Hotel could have positively been identified as an opportunity for supporting a prosperous rural economy in relation to draft Policy 9.

On the other hand, whilst well-meaning and well-intentioned, there are 37 proposed prohibitive LGS designations over land. Unfortunately, this fundamentally does not meet the core tenet of the NPPF in relation to plan-making which states that ‘plans should positively seek opportunities to meet the development needs of their area, and be sufficiently flexible to adapt to rapid change’. The NPPF is clear at Paragraph 15 that plan-making should provide a positive vision for the future of each area, a framework for addressing housing needs and other economic, social and environmental priorities. It states at Paragraph 16 that plans should be [inter-alia]: - prepared with the objective of contributing to the achievement of sustainable development – which is a legal requirement under Section 39(2) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004; - be prepared positively, in a way that is aspirational but deliverable; - be shaped by early, proportionate and effective engagement between plan-makers and communities, local organisations, businesses, infrastructure providers and operators and statutory consultees.

Indeed, in relation to meeting housing needs, NPPF Paragraph 14(b) expressly requires NDPs to make land allocations in order to benefit from the safeguards against the presumption in favour of sustainable development potentially arising from any Cornwall-wide housing land supply issues.

Furthermore, Government national policy on supporting local business and economies is clear. NPPF Paragraph 80 states that planning policies should help create the conditions in which businesses can invest, expand and adapt. Significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity, taking into account local business needs. In the Government commitment to supporting a prosperous rural economy, NPPF Paragraph 83 states that planning policies should enable sustainable rural tourism and leisure developments which respect the character of the countryside.

The Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) for Cornwall recognises the site as ‘ornamental gardens’ and the local literature associated with the character type indeed recognises the feasibility and high upkeep and maintenance costs of these ornamental gardens. The PPG states that management of any land designated as LGS would remain the responsibility of its

5 owner. It also states that ‘however, if the features that make a green area special and locally significant are to be conserved, how it will be managed in the future is likely to be an important consideration’.

The tourism industry in general has experienced an unprecedented year, because of the various government restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The proposed LGS designation would place a burdensome and unfair restriction of the hotel property and operation regarding its ability to invest, expand and adapt during these difficult times, to ensure the viability of the hotel operation and the capacity of the business to maintain the hotel grounds, in view of the noted high maintenance costs. Many similar ornamental gardens across the country are in perilous danger of slowly failing and the proposed LGS designation could serve to have the converse effect it intends, and planning policy and guidance is clear that this should be a very important consideration.

Is there a need for additional protection through LGS?

The majority of the Mawnan Parish area, including the hotel and grounds, is already covered by the statutory national landscape designation Cornwall Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The PPG states that different types of designations are intended to achieve different purposes. It states that if land is already protected by designation, then consideration should be given to whether any additional local benefit would be gained by designation as LGS. It is unclear from the documentation if the Mawnan NDP has undertaken this consideration as to whether there is any additional local benefit by LGS designation.

In actuality, the Cornwall AONB statutory designation provides more than adequate protection of the landscape through legislative, national and local policy frameworks. In the Cornwall AONB Management Plan, the statement of significance for the ‘South Coast Western’ segment of the AONB and the Helford River area references an area of ‘great individual character and tranquil beauty’. The sheltered aspect of the landscape provides the perfect growing conditions and climate for the exotic collection of trees and plants found at the large gardens of Trebah, Glendurgan and Bosloe, further contributing to the special sense of place experienced when visiting the Helford landscape’. Whilst, AONB Management Plans do not form part of the statutory development plan, PPG does state that they should be considered a material consideration in decision-making.

As previously stated, NPPF Paragraph 172 requires that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in AONBs, which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues. The conservation and enhancement of wildlife and cultural heritage are also important considerations in these areas.

There is therefore already ‘the highest level’ of protection for landscape and scenic beauty in place for the local area and moreover the hotel property and grounds, furthermore the AONB Management Plan specifically recognises the important botanical value of the area. Therefore, in consideration of the guidance set out in the PPG, the additional local benefit gained by the proposed LGS designation is very much doubtful, notwithstanding the unintended negative consequences that it could give rise to.

6 What are the potential implications of the proposed LGS designation on heritage?

It is noted that the ‘Non-Designated Heritage Assets list and description’ proposes the Meudon Hotel and Valley Garden as a non-designated heritage asset and as having outstanding landscape and historic interest. This means that the hotel building would be considered a heritage asset in the context of NPPF. NPPF Paragraph 185 states that plans should set out a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment, including heritage assets most at risk through neglect, decay or other threats. This strategy should take into account the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets, and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation.

The proposed identification of the hotel building as a non-designated heritage asset is not nearly as inhibitive as the proposed LGS designation. However, as suggested above the proposed LGS designation would place a burdensome and unfair restriction on the hotel property and operation and would only serve to limit the capacity of the hotel operator to continue the business, sustain, enhance and put the hotel building to a viable use consistent with its conservation. The proposed designation of LGS over the hotel grounds therefore indirectly conflicts with a positive strategy for the historic environment which is required in accordance with NPPF Paragraph 185.

Summary As set out at the start of our representation, we do fully welcome the intentions of Mawnan Parish to progress the preparation of a Neighbourhood Development Plan and commend the steering group for collating a comprehensive and well-rounded draft. However, as the NDP will eventually form part of the statutory development plan, it does need to be rigorously tested and will need to fully meet all aspects of national legislation, planning policy and guidance. We hope that you will appreciate our position and comments made and will consider removing the proposed LGS designation from over the hotel grounds altogether to ensure soundness and compliance with national planning policy moving forward. Should you wish to discuss anything outlined in our representation please do not hesitate to contact me, I would be more than happy to assist.

Yours sincerely

Senior Planner

7 Appendix 1 – Intervisibility of Meudon Valley Gardens from Public Viewpoints and Vantagepoints – Richard Sneesby FLI – Richard Sneesby Landscape Architects

8 Viewpoint locations VP 1: View from public footpath between Chenhalls Barn and Bream Cove Some of the mature pine trees in the view are on neighbouring land south of the Meudon Hotel site VP 2: Glimpse view through the hedge along public footpath between Chenhalls Barn and Bream Cove Some of the mature pine trees in the view are on neighbouring land south of the Meudon Hotel site Meudon Hotel

VP 3: View from SW Coast Path looking north. Some of the mature pine trees in the view are on neighbouring land south of the Meudon Hotel site Wooded valley within the Meudon estate VP 4: Panorama view from SW Coast Path looking north. Wooded valley within the Meudon estate VP 5: 270º panorama looking west from Bream Cove beach. Slipway leads to the Meudon estate VP 6: 270º panorama looking north and west from the SW Coast Path above Bream Cove beach. Fence marks the boundary of the Meudon Estate with no public access The land to the left of the five bar gate (in the centre of the photograph) is a neighbouring property. VP 7: View from SW Coast Path looking south. Some of the mature pine trees in the view are on neighbouring land south of the Meudon Hotel site. Wooded valley within the Meudon estate VP 8: View from SW Coast Path looking south. Some of the mature pine trees in the view are on neighbouring land south of the Meudon Hotel site. Wooded valley within the Meudon estate VP 9: View from SW Coast Path looking south. Glimse view towards the tall pine trees, some of which are on neighbouring land. VP 10: View from public footpath bewteen Meudon Farm and Mawnan Smith school looking east. Meudon Hotal amongst the trees. VP 11: View from public footpath between Meudon Farm and Mawnan Smith school looking east towards Meudon Farm. Meudon Hotal site on right hand side of the image. APPENDIX U TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

170 171 172 173 174 175 APPENDIX U TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

176 177 He is however concerned that listing will restrict the family plans for The PC also future given the current semi-derelict state of the cottage. I have noted that walls explained again that the NDHA listing does not stop any development, A & B formed an especially for safety reasons, and in these instances that Parish Council element of would likely take a view of any sympathetic works to the cottage to see it PA20/05635 and retained in its current form, which he seems happy with. that their heritage nature Response by Mawnan PC Clerk on 7/1/21: was known to LPAs. Wall C on We as a parish council are meeting to discuss the full gamut of photo evidence correspondence on inclusions on the various listings supporting the no longer Neighbourhood Development Plan next week and I will make sure that merited this is included in this discussion. heritage listing. The walls were We would just like to confirm that – as far as we are concerned to be removed – inclusion on our NDHA listing in no way would infringe on making from the NDHA improvements to your home. Although some weight is given at Local annex. Authority planning level to dwellings on this list it is not meant in any way to preclude the homeowner from making adjustments, repairs or changes Notes and to their home. It has no effect on permitted development rights but is Actions from solely there to try to protect the general feel of the properties the NDP SG listed. We're not the type of parish who would go mad if you painted meeting on 8 your door yellow, swapped out your roof-tiles, or replaced your windows Dec 20 and for instance. subsequent Recommendatio Where significant works that require a planning application are made our ns to the PC are Local Listing gives us a point of reference to the significance of the attached as dwelling in question to the community and highlights this to the Planning Annexes B and C Authority . Sympathetic works, or works in keeping with the character to this and location of the property will always be considered. Supplementary File. The We cannot say that there will be no effect whatsoever but this is equally decisions of the the same if your property is not listed. By having your property included PC are at Annex on this list means that anyone involved in making a decision on any D. planning application (and we are only talking about works that would require planning applications) would have a baseline to work on from the information in the listing and not from any previously gained personal feeling or knowledge.

We would still argue the point if you wanted to pull down part of the house for an extension, add balconies, veranda or dig out for a driveway or even knock down and rebuild - but hopefully you would expect this of your parish council as part of their remit to protect the feel of the local community.

I would really argue that inclusion on the listing is a positive for your home – it shows that it is appreciated within the community and the esteem it is held in by the wider parish. If a change to the wording used or an alternative photo would sway your mind I am sure something could be considered.

178 By Owner Meudon Cottage on 7/1/21

Dear Parish Council,

You will no doubt have followed the various correspondence on the proposed NDHA listing of Meudon Cottage (draft listing 35).

I wish to request that this building is not listed in our NDP at this time.

By Owner Meudon Cottage on 7/1/21

To NDP Admin:

Many thanks for your reply and thank you for letting me know about draft listing 36.

Regarding draft listing 35 (Meudon Cottage) I have been back through your emails. I appreciate that you have provided a general assurance but I also appreciate that you are probably unable to provide me anything more specific or concrete.

Therefore I want to reiterate my objection to having Meudon Cottage listed as an NDHA in our NDP. I am happy to reconsider a listing once we have completed our project to restore the building.

From NDP Admin on 22/12/20:

Thank you for your emails yesterday. It has taken time to fully understand the situation regarding the walls surrounding Meudon Barn and the jointly owned North wall. Photos of that wall supplied by the clearly Neighbour at show the patched-up nature of the wall and, therefore, that it has lost Meudon Barns much of its heritage value. Moreover, with the walls subject to extant planning approvals the relevant authorities are already aware of their state. As a result, at an NDP Steering Group (SG) meeting on 8 December 2020, it was agreed that they be excluded from the non-designated heritage asset (NDHA) annex to the NDP.

In considering Meudon Cottage, the SG hoped that your agreement in principle to the entry 35 along with the general assurance given on 30 October, that no additional planning constraints applied, would allow us to keep one of the oldest buildings in the Parish on the map. We are at a loss to understand what further reassurances can be given; as you have pointed out, future plans are unknown and dependent on surveys. Those future planning applications will receive the same sympathetic scrutiny as would be applied to any other application.

179 The SG will be meeting the Parish Council in early January to consider the inclusion of Meudon Cottage in the NDHA annex. Perhaps you could clarify what additional assurances you are seeking and in what form.

Regards,

By Owner Meudon Cottage on 21/12/20;

Many thanks for your email concerning the letter that you sent to Neighbour at on 26 November 2020. I appreciate you copying me in on it, Meudon Barns and my apologies for taking so long to reply.

May I ask a point of clarification please? You refer to NDHA entry number 36, but it is not absolutely clear to which walls you are referring. As you know, the ruins of the barn (listing 36) comprise 3 walls. The South and West walls are wholly owned by , and the North wall is Neighbour at in joint ownership. Meudon Barns

If you are talking about all three walls then can you also address your letter to me please so that I can respond. I don’t think that legally I can respond to a cc of a letter that isn’t addressed to me – and unless it is also addressed to me then you won’t have sought the combined position of the owners of one of the three walls.

If on the other hand you are asking to simply reconsider Neighbour at their objection to the South and West walls of the ruin being NDHA listed, Meudon Barns then that is a matter for only them – but I appreciate being copied in on the issue.

I suspect that it is the latter because you have suggested the NDHA entry wording to be ”Visually, one of the best examples of early c19 Cornish agricultural building style in the Parish”. The only wall that this description might conceivable apply to is what remains of the South wall, although even that significantly stretches the imagination. The West and North walls are perhaps the worst examples in the Parish. No doubt you would agree that there are many other agricultural buildings in the Parish that much better represent local architecture and building techniques, and which haven’t been ‘hacked about’ and/or left in ruin for many years, thereby offering some residual historical narrative that is worth protecting.

180 If you could get back to me on my question, that would be great. I can then respond formally, or not, as the case may be. I shall also send you a separate email concerning NDHA listing 35.

By Owner Meudon Cottage on 21/12/20;

Further to my email earlier today concerning NDHA listing 36, I said that I would get back to you on the issue of listing 35. I refer to our emails (included below) sent on 30 October 2020 and 4 November 2020.

As you know, we were reluctant to have Meudon Cottage on the NDHA list but suggested a possible solution to this.

Referring to our email sent on 30 October 2020, we did not hear back from either the NDP Steering Group or the Parish Council on the issue of being “sympathetic to all and any actions that we need to take in order to restore or rebuild the original cottage”.

We took the opportunity to clarify our request in our email of 4 November 2020, this time being clear that we would require a formal statement on the issue, I quote “we have offered our in-principle support for listing 35 subject to a reassurance in an appropriate form that acknowledges and allows for the challenges of restoring old buildings. In anticipation of a listing we have provided a revised and more informative summary description for listing 35”.

Again, we have not received this reassurance, or indeed a reply, from either the NDP Steering Group or the Parish Council. Whilst the regulatory process of public consultation would suggest a two-way flow of information is required, I accept that you may not be able to address every issue that emerges from such consultations.

Accordingly, we now request that Meudon Cottage (listing 35) is removed from the NDHA list. On the assumption that we manage to save Meudon Cottage and restore it, we will be happy to consider a listing in future revisions of the NDP.

By Admin to Owner Meudon Cottage on 22/12/20:

I will be writing to you shortly in a similar vein but it has taken me time to consider again all the correspondence related to Meudon Cottage. Thank you for your emails yesterday. It has taken time to fully understand the situation regarding the walls surrounding Meudon Barn and the jointly owned North wall. Photos of that wall supplied by the how the Neighbour patched up nature of the wall and, therefore, that it has lost much of its heritage value. Moreover, with the walls subject to extant planning approvals the relevant authorities are already aware of their state. As a result, at an NDP Steering Group (SG) meeting on 8 December 2020, it was agreed that they be excluded from the non-designated heritage asset (NDHA) annex to the NDP.

181 In considering Meudon Cottage, the SG hoped that your agreement in principle to the entry 35 along with the general assurance given on 30 October, that no additional planning constraints applied, would allow us to keep one of the oldest buildings in the Parish on the map. We are at a loss to understand what further reassurances can be given; as you have pointed out, future plans are unknown and dependent on surveys. Those future planning applications will receive the same sympathetic scrutiny as would be applied to any other application.

The SG will be meeting the Parish Council in early January to consider the inclusion of Meudon Cottage in the NDHA annex. Perhaps you could clarify what additional assurances you are seeking and in what form.

By NDP Admin to Owner Meudon Cottage on 27/11/20:

Subject: Meudon Walls

I apologise but I have emailed asking for reconsideration of Neighbour at their objection of the walls entry in the ndha schedule. I had forgotten Meudon Barns the element of joint interest in the North wall so copy here the email I sent them.

“Dear , Ditto

Prior to making recommendations to the Parish Council, I have been reviewing the correspondence concerning objections to the entry of Non- designated Heritage Assets (NDHA ) in the Annex to the NDP. In an email on 26 October 2020 our Environment and Heritage Working Group leader wrote to you asking whether you would reconsider your support for the inclusion of Meudon Walls (entry no. 36).

I acknowledge that the historical facts cited may not be entirely accurate and I am aware that harm and loss occurred while the property was in Cornwall Council(CC) ownership. However, to this day, the Meudon area contains some of the oldest examples of Cornish architecture from the early 19th century. Your plans to retain some walls, and use local materials to build a garage, clearly met with sympathetic treatment from planning officials in terms of mitigating against further harm, and I can see no reason why such treatment should not continue. Therefore, it would seem remiss of the NDP not to include your walls in our schedule of heritage assets.

Rest assured, there is no intention on the part of the NDP or the PC to have the barn or walls listed in the Historic England sense or to promote ideas of conservation. There are clear examples at Boskensoe and Tregarne of PC/CC positive engagement with owners who

182 renovate/rebuild older buildings; moreover, the NDP at Policy 8 supports such protection and preservation. If you concur with my analysis, the wording of the entry would be changed to delete the last sentence and replace it with ”Visually, one of the best examples of early c19 Cornish agricultural building style in the Parish.”

I would be most grateful if you could consider these proposals and let me know your decision.”

NDP Admin Reply on 30/11/20

Dear , Meudon Barns

Thank you for your prompt response. Your decision has been duly noted and will be reported to the Parish Council.

Regards,

From Owner Meudon Barns on 25/11/20

Subject: Re: Meudon Walls

Thank you very much for your email of 26th November. We apologise for the delay in response to email of 26th Working Gp October, we have had a response drafted for a while but only because we have been busy, we have not sent it to her. We have decided to just cut and paste that response here so that everyone knows what our thoughts are on the matter. Many thanks to you all for your continued work with the NDP, we think it is a great asset for the Parish in protecting green areas for the future, however we just have differing opinions about the heritage assets list, with regards our walls. With our best wishes,

Meudon Barns (HA list number 36)

25th November 2020

Dear Working Gp Head Re: Number 36 Heritage Assets List - Meudon Barns

183 Thank you for your email of 26th October, we are writing in response to that email because we do feel that there is still misunderstanding about the walls in the NDP historical list at Meudon.

In my first email, dated 15th october, we referred to the walls in listing number 36, our interpretation of which is that listing number 36 refers to only ‘Wall A’ and ‘Wall B’ as per the diagram below. These two walls are in our ownership and form part of the recent planning application PA20/05635. These walls are to be fully retained and not lowered in our forthcoming garage development. Lowering these walls has never been discussed by us, there is no need to do so because they are structurally sound.

‘Wall C’, however, is a party wall with Meudon Cottage, with whom we have joint ownership. Wall C formed part of our 2015 planning application PA15/02140 and it was proposed (with no objections I hasten to add) to reduce the height of this party wall due to the fact that there is a significant lean towards the front garden of Meudon Cottage. On the southern side of Wall C, it is a complete mess and has been patched up in the past by the council with concrete patches and modern breeze blocks. (See photos below) There are also plants and trees growing out of it, making it structurally unsound, (as recently confirmed by a structural engineer) and a large hole in the eastern end, again on the southern side. This is all due to neglect by the previous owners, Cornwall council, who left it exposed to the elements without any maintenance for 40 years since the old barn was demolished. If we leave Wall C at the height it is currently, and in the state it is in, it will simply fall down. If we lower it in height, we can make it structurally more stable, make it

184 aesthetically more pleasing from both sides, and help restore it for the future.

We would also like to refer to your comment from your email of 26th October; “So we are delighted you have included the street-side walls within your planning application which was supported by the Parish Council following your assurance that the walls (including that in entry 35 which is contiguous with that in entry 36) would not be altered in height.”

This is absolutely incorrect. During the Parish Council meeting back in September when our garage planning application was discussed, never did we at any stage comment on Wall C, except to say that it does not form part of that new planning application. Due to the meeting being online, you can play back the recording yourself and verify this. It would have been completely irrelevant to discuss ‘Wall C’ at the meeting due to the fact that it is a party wall and also forms part of a previous planning application. The north wall of our new garage development will be a newly built wall and there will be a gap between that new north wall and ‘Wall C’.

We have spent considerable time recently at Kreson Kernow, looking at the history of Meudon. There is nothing that links Meudon with the Napoleonic Wars or the Seven Years War. Wall C was simply a tall back wall to a barn, therefore any schedules or listings should not include these walls as there are no definitive historical records.

We still stand by our objection to include walls A, B and C (as per diagram above) in the NDP heritage assets list.

Yours Sincerely

Owner Meudon Barns

Pictures below show the poor state of Wall C from the southern side (our side)

185 186 On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 12:38 PM Mawnan Parish NDP Admin wrote:

Dear , Owner Meudon Prior to making recommendations to the Parish Council, I have been Barns reviewing the correspondence concerning objections to the entry of Non- designated Heritage Assets (NDHA ) in the Annex to the NDP. In an email on 26 October 2020 our Environment and Heritage Working Group leader wrote to you asking whether you would reconsider your support for the inclusion of Meudon Walls (entry no. 36).

I acknowledge that the historical facts cited may not be entirely accurate and I am aware that harm and loss occurred while the property was in Cornwall Council(CC) ownership. However, to this day, the Meudon area contains some of the oldest examples of Cornish architecture from the early 19th century. Your plans to retain some walls, and use local materials to build a garage, clearly met with sympathetic treatment from planning officials in terms of mitigating against further harm, and I can see no reason why such treatment should not continue. Therefore, it would seem remiss of the NDP not to include your walls in our schedule of heritage assets.

Rest assured, there is no intention on the part of the NDP or the PC to have the barn or walls listed in the Historic England sense or to promote ideas of conservation. There are clear examples at Boskensoe and Tregarne of PC/CC positive engagement with owners who renovate/rebuild older buildings; moreover, the NDP at Policy 8 supports such protection and preservation.

If you concur with my analysis, the wording of the entry would be changed to delete the last sentence and replace it with ”Visually, one of the best examples of early c19 Cornish agricultural building style in the Parish.”

I would be most grateful if you could consider these proposals and let me know your decision.

Kind regards,

NDP Administrator

187 Initial Anna Maria Creek (LGS 28 & 29) Comment Refs: From Resident on 11/1/21 43,44,48 Thanks for the information on the schedule and I trust that the matter can be resolved in the manner you indicated.

From NDP Admin on 21/12/20

The NDP Steering Gp has decided to recommend to the Parish Council PC ratified this that LGS 29 be withdrawn and that LGS 28 be limited to the sketch and approach. See wording you have provided. The PC/NDP meeting to take our post- Annex D. consultation recommendations is scheduled for 11 January and we hope for ratification of our proposals at the PC meeting on the 21st. The map at the current scale could prove difficult; so, we will explore production by Cornwall Council services of a large-scale variant after the holidays. I will ensure that you receive proofs of the changes before we finalise our documents.

From Resident on 8/12/21

Thank you for your email of 6th December.

An apology goes beyond what was needed and could not fairly have been sought from anyone acting in a voluntary capacity particularly one characterised over a sustained period by significant personal commitment.

Nevertheless the readiness for it to be given, at the same time as the prompt acknowledgement that a correction of the NDP group's position was called for and is being made, is fully appreciated.

We look forward to learning of the outcome of the Group's reappraisal of our suggestions for proposed LSG Areas 28 and 29.

A link for the MHCLG Guidance is :-

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/open-space-sports-and-recreation- facilities-public-rights-of-way-and-local-green-space

Response by NDP Admin on 6/12/20:

188 Thanks you for your email and the representation included with it. I think it is fair to say that as a group of untutored lay volunteers the NDP Steering Group (SG) have been blinded throughout the process by the tendency to look shoreward when attempting to set policies that reflect the wishes of residents as discovered in early consultation. The debate about LGS did set my antenna twitching when considering the inclusion of beaches and I now accept that I was entirely incorrect on the issue of the relevance of the NDP to matters below the MHW mark. Acting under pressure while dealing with other NDP matters, I have attempting to deal with the AMC issue on a personal basis and regret not seeking professional or other guidance in this arena. Therefore, I have no hesitation in apologising for the technically incorrect statements that I made and withdraw them unequivocally.

Covid has placed great strain on the NDP SG to meet and discuss matters face-to-face with the professional advice available to which you allude. Not everyone is zoom capable, but we hope to have overcome the problem and will be meeting within days to reappraise issues that have arisen since the Reg 14 Consultation; this will include the specific AMC objection and all of the LGS matters that you have referred to. I can assure you that the SG will not approach the Parish Council until these issues have been resolved. On current progress that will not happen until January 2021.

Until recently, the SG has been informed by what we considered to be cascaded regulation and advice through the NPPF, the Cornwall Local Plan, and the NDP element at Cornwall Council. As lay people we assumed that all MHCLG guidance had been incorporated into the relevant documents. Despite all my efforts, the one area of guidance that I have been unable to find is your references to the MHCLG. Perhaps you could provide me with a link since I seem unable to trace them.

By Resident on 2/12/20:

Dear , NDP Admin

Thank you for your email of 22nd November. Your readiness to give a substantive response to the points we had made up to that time is fully appreciated as this is not always the case even with properly resourced public sector organisations however much such attention is warranted, or even demanded, by the situation as it was here.

I attach our Representation to the NDP group via yourself about the contents of your email which Representations I regret to say have to take the form of a detailed rebuttal of much of what you have stated. I hope that you will not think that our Representations include any flavour of disrespect for you, nor should they given your crucial role in discharging the burdens of NDP provision over the last few years, but the position as we see it has to set out robustly and unambiguously since the

189 stakes are too high to allow any misunderstandings to continue at this critical stage. It is noted that you do not want, as you put it, a running debate to be continued “at this juncture” but I am afraid the issues that have been thrown up in this ‘statutory’ consultation can only be satisfactorily disposed of by agreement at this juncture since once the draft NDP is formally submitted under Regulation 16 both Mawnan Parish Council as the qualifying body, and the NDP group who are advising them, effectively lose their power to influence amendments or adaptations to the draft NDP and control of the Plan resides instead mainly with the independent examiner. If agreement on the amendments to Areas 28 (AMC), and Area 29 (Porth Navas Stream) cannot be reached at this stage then we would be placed in the utterly undesired position of having to consider making our case for the amendments proposed by us now to the examiner as objections. This situation would then have to involve arguing a case before the examiner that the methodology was flawed and the evidence of special significance simply was not there which by definition would apply equally to all 37 proposed LSG Areas involving unavoidable collateral damage to their designation credentials as well. This is exactly what we have been at pains to avoid to date by expressly confining our representations to Areas 28 and 29 only. It is essential that you grasp the reasons underlying the overwhelming importance of this relatively easily resolved matter being disposed of at this juncture as there will be no comparable opportunity later. In your penultimate paragraph you stated that “Against the background set out in this letter [ ie your email of 22/11], I believe that a satisfactory outcome to the LGS designations can be arrived at.” In ordinary circumstances this would give some grounds for considering that our suggestions would be likely to be adopted. The problem is that you have entirely contradicted that indication of yours giving grounds for a vestige of optimism by what you set out at the start of the same email. There ( para. 4 ) you have opened with a dogmatic stance – “ the NDP...... cannot set policies for activity below the MHW mark and, therefore, is in no position to assist your cause.” Such contradictory statements can only erode confidence in any assurances being given. It is why in the main Representation document attached we have specifically requested that you accept the unsoundness of the two sentences of yours highlighted on Page 1 of our Representation and confirm that you withdraw them. We understand that the PC is to determine this matter amongst others soon. The NDP group will be part of that meeting with the PC and seem to expect that they can be relied upon on to present our suggestions fully and objectively on our behalf to the PC so that the PC can take a view on them. In the light of our experience to date you will not be surprised to know that we do not have any confidence that the NDP group can discharge that role adequately especially when you have just demonstrated your misunderstanding of several aspects so fundamental to our suggestions. In the circumstances, we must approach the PC to seek an assurance that we can explain our suggestions for the LGS designations to them

190 ourselves if they wished for any explanation rather than another party who seem to be impervious to the merits of them so far. We would expect that the Councillors greater familiarity with, and instinct for, the principles of natural justice in the granting of fair hearings would result in our being permitted to make a contribution at such a meeting. Many thanks

REPRESENTATION IN RESPONSE to Mawnan NDP Group Secretary Email of 22nd November 2020 1st December 2020

• Contrary to your belief that two issues are involved here, there is only one and that is the LGS designation issue. As part of this consultation on the draft NDP, every part of the material submitted by us which refers to the efforts – some of them with the active support of the Parish Council - to protect AMC in particular from continuing environmental degradation has been included quite expressly to provide a powerful and cogent evidence base for the purpose of satisfying criterion 100(b) of the NPPF as shown in the amended 5th Column of Table 1. A comparison, which I made in Para 3(iii) of my Appendix , with the other draft LGS Areas’ 5th Column ‘evidence’ markers shows exactly why the NDP group would be quite wrong to characterise the degeneration at AMC as being somehow a separate ” cause” inappropriate for ND Plan making whereas the other 36 proposed Areas were judged by you to be appropriate. That material could not be more relevant to satisfying Para. 11 of the MHCLG Guidance either.

• In seeking to distance the NDP process from being applied to what should be one of the locations most warranting LGS designation in Cornwall let alone this Parish, your 4th paragraph now reveals a truly astonishing misunderstanding of an aspect which could not be more fundamental to the sound preparation of the NDP in relation to the designation of this LGS Area 28 (AMC). You say “ the NDP deals with development on land over which Cornwall Council via their Local Plan has influence. It cannot set policies for activity below the MHW mark and, therefore, is in no position to assist your cause.” Not only is this technically incorrect but, with great respect, is also a bizarre conclusion to have reached. (1) Technical inaccuracy

191 Contrary to your proposition, Cornwall Council ( “CC”) as the local planning authority (“LPA”) has statutory geographical jurisdiction for its Local Plan policies down to the Mean Low Water mark (“MLW “). In AMC this means CC has jurisdiction over the whole of the Creek and well down the whole of Porth Navas Creek to the point where the MLW mark is encountered. The Area Designated by CC on 25th July 2017 for this NDP was the area expressly sought for designation by the Parish Council namely “the entire area of Mawnan Parish”. The accompanying map for the Designated Area (as approved without demur by CC) followed the Parish boundary at the western end of AMC thereby including the whole of AM Creek. That same Parish boundary line is shown in red on the map for proposed LGS Designated Area 28 in your draft NDP map “Grid 2 “ and it follows exactly the line where there is water left in the Porth Navas Creek at MLW to constitute the said MLW mark.. Above that MLW mark there is a common boundary for Mawnan Parish with Constantine Parish which follows the stream from Trenarth Bridge as the boundary line until MLW is encountered as set out above. The first line of the Cornwall Local Plan says “ The Cornwall Local Plan covers the whole of Cornwall”. Its policies apply to the whole of AMC whether above or below the MHW mark and they exert planning control over the whole of AMC – not just “influence” over it. The Mawnan Parish Designated Area specified by map also covers the whole of AMC whether above or below the MHW mark. Your assertion is technically quite untenable. It is so unsound that I cannot think that , or any other professional adviser, NDP Consultant could have taken that view. I must invite you to disclose whether you have taken any professional advice before advancing this proposition and indicate who the source of whatever advice you did obtain was.

(2) A bizarre conclusion Whether you received advice, or you relied only upon your own research, to arrive at that conclusion, a few moments thought should have , at the very least , given rise to doubts about the soundness of it in the light of the following : - (a) The final draft NDP put out for consultation which started this entire exercise contained a map identifying the whole of AMC, including all of the land at the Creek below the MHW, as LGS Area 28 in respect of which Policy 10 of the NDP would be ‘set’ .

192 Your own map flatly contradicts your assertion now that this is something that the NDP cannot do. (b) The Enforcement Notice of March 2010 issued by CC as the LPA contained a map which subjected the whole of AMC, including all of the land at the Creek below MHW, to sanctions for breach of the planning control they have the jurisdiction to impose. You could not have any more powerful evidence than this practical demonstration of CC’s exercise of their powers over all the land at this very location. It also flatly contradicts your suggestion that the land at AMC below the MHW mark is not land that CC’s planning policies have “influence” over. (c) For many decades the LPA ( CC from 2009 to date and before them KDC ) have dealt with planning permissions and planning enforcement matters relating to land below the MHW mark including some well publicised ones. As someone who has been around for sufficiently long enough you will remember the application for permission for the ‘Fisherman’s Road’ over the foreshore below the MHW on the Helford village side and the notorious Gweek Quay Boatyard planning enforcement proceedings in respect of the unauthorised dumping of 500 cu metres of miscellaneous rubble into the River below MHW. Yet more powerful indicators that flatly contradict your assertion. (d) The wholly unpalatable implications of your assertion for the credibility of other parts of the draft LGS designations should have twitched your antennae. On my look at the small scale maps for the LGS Areas in the draft NDP I think there are up to 9 other LGS Areas proposed for designation which have land below the MHW mark included in them. It might have occurred to you that if your assertion was correct then this would mean all those other Areas would need amendment thereby amounting to changes significant enough to require a fresh public pre-submission Consultation all over again. Happily since your assertion is not correct this adverse result will not be triggered but this possibility alone ought to have concentrated the mind on whether your conclusion was looking as if it might just be deeply flawed. (e) An ancillary point to (a) above for clarity since I have some doubt about the part of your assertion that states the NDP “ cannot set policies for activity below the MHW mark “ and in case this was intended by you to be read disjunctively from the preceding line rather than conjunctively I would add the following.

193 The existing draft for Area 28 proposes to have Policy 10 ‘set’ for it as referred to in (a) above as it does for ( up to) the 9 other proposed LGS areas . Our amendments sought involve only the map and table 1 so that exactly the same Policy 10 would be ‘set’ for the amended area 28 at AMC as it will be for all the other (up to ) 9 Areas. The “activity” in all cases in the LGS Areas including Area 28 AMC is ‘development’ as stated in Policy 10 and we are content with that Policy 10 as it is. Our amendments seek no protective policy measures which are different or additional from any of the other 36 LGS Areas contrary to an implication which might be taken from the second sentence of your assertion. In the circumstances I would invite you to withdraw the assertion quoted in bold type above or if you consider that what you have said is still somehow tenable and represents the NDP group’s view then perhaps you will state the basis for that view since I am sure that if this issue cannot be resolved at this stage with agreement for the amendments sought then it will be for the independent examiner to resolve and we would be arguing for a hearing as the right forum to disposal of this issue. I would add only that as far as NDP meetings in 2018 are concerned, not only was anything as detailed as geographical jurisdiction for NDP policies never covered – nor would it be as no draft policies were even embryonic at that time let alone the detail in support required for them - but what you say does itself contain a misstatement, albeit a relatively nuanced one, of the relationship between CC’s Local Plan Policies and NDP draft policies. Far from being prevented from pursuing NDP draft Policies if the CC Local Plan has not covered the topic as you seem to imply, it is an essential function of an effective NDP to provide localised and more detailed policy on for example local character, design or any issue that is of particular local significance by adding policy material where a local issue has not been addressed in the CC Local Plan since you could hardly expect a countywide Local Plan to be able to do so. This is not to be confused, as I believe you have done, with the bar on prospective NDP Policies taking a line that is contrary to existing national and strategic policy. The NDP plan making has to “have regard to” those categories of Policy and in effect must be consistent with them. In the last part of this reply to you below , I will be referring to what was in fact explained to the NDP group in 2018 by two separate respected sources which it is apparent now has long since been disregarded resulting in some of the misconceptions

194 by the group causing the current – temporary I hope – difficulties.

• Can a sound methodology be demonstrated and has an appropriate evidence base for the LGS designations been achieved ? In paragraph 7 of your email of 22nd November you seek to address the issue which I had raised in my email to you of 18th November. The issue was whether the LGS designation process had followed a sound methodology because it appeared that there was hardly any appropriate evidence visible in the draft NDP to support an LGS designation for any of the 37 areas proposed. No additional local benefit which would be gained by LGS designation over and above that which the proposed NGS Areas enjoyed already through their AONB designation appeared to have been identified and set out. In your reply you have acknowledged that the methodology recommended by CC in their Guidance on LGS Designation dated May 2019 (but published by CC on 16th April 2019) was not followed since your consultant decided that you should ignore it. I suspect from the first 4 sentences of your paragraph 7 that in addition the NPD group have not followed the central government contained in the MHCLG Guidance dated 6th March 2014 either. Dispensing with one such component of best practice would be a serious enough threat to the credibility of the LGS part of the NDP. Dispensing with the second component in addition invites post submission failure. I comment on the failure to follow each of the two official Guidance documents below :- (i) CC Guidance You imply that as the Guidance was introduced in 2019 it was too late because the SEAssessment (“SEA”) “had been submitted to CC”. In fact when the CC Guidance was made available on 16th April 2019 the SEA was still being drafted by your consultant and was not finished and ready for submission to CC before the end of July 2019, over 3 months later. However, what is more germane is that in April the relevant NDP Working Group still had not even identified whether any green spaces existed within the Parish that might need protection. In May they were still being pressed to provide the background documents in support of any LGS designations.

195 In the circumstances the CC Guidance could not have been more timely to assist the NDP volunteers in helping to simplify the task for them. It is a great pity that this Guidance does not appear to have been made available to them apparently because your consultant decided that the newly issued Guidance, drafted and just finished by Cornwall’s specialist NDP department with whom he is said to have worked closely , was “extremely onerous and exceeds what examiners needed the guidance for.” The question arises as to whether the NDP group were ever given the opportunity of seeing the CC Guidance and deciding for themselves if it was too onerous or not. With the Working Group under considerable pressure I think that they would have welcomed it especially the Local Green Spaces Audit Form which provided them with a 2 page tailor-made checklist of the considerations they had to turn their attention to. Simply giving the volunteers the 3 broad principles consisting of 5 lines in the National PP Framework relating to criteria for LGS designation bears no comparison to the assistance the LGS Audit Form alone would have given them. In particular The Audit Form would have drawn their attention to the need to consider :- (a) the relevance of existing protective designations (b) advisability of land owner prior notification (c) conflicts with existing planning status of site (d) level of detail required for evidence in support of designation none of which are, or reasonably could be, mentioned in the National document. You have asserted that “We presented our methodology against the actual tests in the NPPF, which reflects what has been approved elsewhere through examination” .

I give one illustration of how obviously unsatisfactory that approach would have been at the time and which has now manifested itself in the fundamentally flawed prospective designations likely to be present in all 37 LGS Areas in this particular Parish’s draft NDP as opposed to others elsewhere. None of the “actual tests in the NPPF” mention the AONB. All 37 Areas proposed for designation in Mawnan’s draft LGS are in the AONB. Without the Working Group volunteers being given either of the two official Guidance documents to help them address the effect of an existing AONB designation on their task , how on earth were they supposed to know that they should direct their efforts into

196 identifying whether any additional benefits, beyond those enjoyed through existing AONB status, would be gained by designation as LGS ? The NPPF 3 bare principles would not have given them any clue at all so the approach that you adopted was bound to lead to a flawed or non existent evidence base which we have drawn to your attention in relation to Areas 28 and 29. We suspect that this would also apply to the other 35 proposed LGS Areas but have elected not to look at them since we wish to confine our objections and suggested remedy through the amendments to Areas 28 and 29 only.

It is futile to cling to an argument that your ‘methodology’ has been approved elsewhere :- (a) the whole philosophy of an NDP is based on the detailed appreciation of the special individual characteristics of that particular NDP designated area (ie Mawnan Parish). (b) “elsewhere” the submitted version of the NDP which got past the examiner stage may not have contained any or very few proposed LGS areas which involved superimposition of LGS designation on top of existing AONB status, or otherwise escaped the examiner’s attention being drawn to the AONB factor either explicitly by objectors or via an exceptional examiner’s own initiative. (c) the introduction of CC’s Guidance in particular may herald a reduction in the latitude extended pre 2019 to marginal justifications for LGS designation now that the Guidance removes any excuse for not adhering to best practice. (d) in the Appendix ( Page 2 Para. 4) to the Response dated 30th October I made an express reference to the possibility of default position negativity being encountered. The reference warrants extraction in full here – “During your consideration of this redraft some reservations or negativity, relating to the appropriateness or otherwise of some of the detailed material I have included in Columns 3, 4, and 5 of Table 1, may well be encountered . I would anticipate that if the basis for those reservations is asked for then it would be no more than a suggestion that experience of previous NDPs elsewhere indicates that no similar material has been included in the others. Such reservations would overlook the fact that the material being questioned is literally exceptional, is likely to be unique to this Parish, and as such was not available elsewhere as evidence to support designation. The material in Columns 3,4, and 5 can all be justified for inclusion by strict reference to the headings of those columns which it is there to address.” (e) The advice, referred to earlier in this document, which you were given in 2018 by one of the two separate respected sources, but seemingly also disregarded, is relevant in advocating avoidance of the “elsewhere “ approach to NDP plan making. I will quote it at the end of this document.

197 Far from the Guidance being for “what examiners needed” the Guidance is for what volunteers in NPD Working Groups needed to give them the direction that they were entitled to expect in their task of gathering appropriate evidence to support any application to designate any LSG. The CC specialist NDP department had clearly gone to the trouble of preparing the Guidance because their considerable experience of countywide draft LGS designations indicated to them that the volunteers in the local NDP groups needed some steerage on their task which they were not getting up to 2019. The purpose of the CC Guidance was set out quite expressly in it –

“To designate Local Green Spaces through your Neighbourhood Plan, it is important to show that you have followed a sound methodology and have appropriate evidence to support the designation. The Local Green Spaces Audit form below can be used as a template in identifying which sites are suitable for Local Green Space designation and ensure that appropriate evidence is collected to support any application.” The view that this Guidance, and in particular the use of the Green Space Audit forms recommended, was to be avoided on the basis that they were “extremely onerous and exceeds what the examiners needed the guidance for” could not have been more demonstrably shown to be unsound by what has happened in this case. Restricting these comments just to Areas 28 and 29 alone, lack of consideration of some of the essential features for prospective LGS designation of these Areas are those to which the NDP volunteers’ attention would have been directed by use of the recommended Audit form if they had been allowed access to that CC Guidance. (ii) Central Government MHCLG Guidance In my email of 18th November I raised the doubt (at this stage in relation to Areas 28 and 29 only ) as to whether the MHCLG Guidance on LGS Designation had been followed. Despite the fact that you have not referred specifically to this Guidance in it, your reply of 22nd November appears to confirm that it was not. I say this because in the first sentence of your paragraph 7 you state that your consultant “has put me right on an important issue”. The next three sentences reveal what you have been enlightened about and they are no more than a paraphrasing of Para 11 and 8 of the MHCLG Guidance. You and the Working Group volunteers engaged on the identification and processing of candidate areas for proposed LGS designation would have been all too familiar with this expression of how the bare principles of the NPPF Para. 100 criteria should

198 be interpreted if the MHCLG Guidance had been made available for your assistance but you were not.

Overall the effect of disregarding both of the two official Guidances on how those bare principles set out in Para. 100 of the NPPF should be interpreted – both essential aids in all the wide variety of situations that inevitably are encountered during the real process of applying the Para. 100 principles in practice - was that no sound methodology was followed and what little evidence exists to support the designation is tenuous. By comparison with the other 36 proposed designated Areas, the amendments we have proposed for the Table 1 columns establish a modicum of a sound evidential foundation particularly for the proposition that the Area is ‘demonstrably special to the local community and holds a particular local significance’ by being able to point to the efforts the community has made to protect it in recent years against the adverse pressures which are also available as evidence and described. It is likely that with the amendments proposed AMC Area 28 becomes the most soundly supported of the 37 LGS Areas proposed by virtue of this exceptional evidential base being available and now utilised properly to support designation as it should have been had the volunteers not been handicapped by the absence of access to the Guidance. As a more general observation it is a great pity that the advice the NDP group were very fortunate to have had in 2018 separately from the two highly respected professionals referred to earlier was disregarded during the production of the draft NDP. That advice was :- (a) NDP SG meeting minutes 3/12/18 advice Audience •Neighbourhood Plans• member and Opportunity to provide localised and more detailed guidance, planning e.g local character, design, or any issue that is of particular local consultant. significance •Whilst can reasonably assume that local residents won’t be overly familiar with NPPF or Cornwall Local Plan, NP will need to focus on adding something that is not already addressed, or where you might want to add some local context. What you can’t do in the NP is take an approach that is contrary to national and strategic policy.

(b) NP Steering Group Meeting Minutes 17/12/18 c. Consultancy. From the floor, , a local resident and the CEO of the Cornwall Association of Local Councils (CALC)commented that when the steering group meets with the consultant, they try to

199 identify where his time is best focussed to get the best value for money. She believes some policies are not sufficiently robust and there is some suspicion that consultants cut and paste planning policies which then lead to weakness which developers can use. It will be important to get best use of his expertise.

Summary It is clear that by April and May 2019 the provision of all of the LGS material - if any designations were to be considered – was well behind the schedule which the NDP group had set themselves and it was in some considerable difficulty. Corners were then cut including departure from any adherence to best practice. The inexplicable decision to deprive the LGS Working Group volunteers of the official Guidance documents for LGS designation hindered not only the speed of their work but also the clarity of purpose which the recommended Green Space Audit forms in particular would have brought to their efforts. The result is that, on anything closer than a cursory examination, it seems highly dubious if a sound methodology could be shown and an appropriate evidence base to support any of the designations for proposed LGS Areas provided. As I hope will be noted from what has been stated here earlier in this representation, we have elected not to look at any Areas other than Area 28 and Area 29. I have suggested fully appropriate and deliberately modest amendments to the Map and Table 1 text for Area 28 (AMC) plus Map and text amendments also for Area 29 (Porth Navas Stream) coupled with the suggestion that Area 29 should be removed from the listing altogether given its non-compliance with criterion 100(a) of the NPPF. The amendments suggested would remedy the lack of an appropriate evidence base to support designation in Area 28 (AMC). In those circumstances, the proposed amendments should be accepted. Since we have been conscious of the need to avoid impeding the swift progress of the NDP as far as possible, we have kept the amendments to a minimum so that adoption of them would avoid any question of having to re-issue the presubmission amended draft NDP for public consultation again. For the same reason we have expressly confined our formal Responses to Areas 28 and 29 only and have no wish to take any formal points on the other 35 proposed Areas at this stage.

200 I must make it absolutely clear that our intention has in no way been to criticise any of you who have worked selflessly in all capacities as volunteers over such a very long period of time on behalf of the rest of us to get the NDP this far. Anyone who has had even limited experience of these type of projects will recognise just how understandable any need by you to bring these matters to an early as well as a successful conclusion is. We trust that the NDP group will recognise the positive, if relatively limited , contribution to achieving that end that we have suggested above and accept our amendments so that the process can move forward expeditiously.

1st December 2020

Response by NDP Admin on 22/11/20:

I have not replied directly to your original email of 18 November as it contained a significant amount of formatting code. Moreover, I have had to conduct research and discussion since then to arrive at a reasonable response.

Thank you for acting as central point of contact for your neighbours. I do not have an email address for .

There are, I believe, two broad issues at stake and I will address each separately.

First, the problem of abandoned boats and other debris in the creek. I and members of the Parish Council have been around sufficiently long enough to be fully aware of the problems you have experienced and are fully sympathetic with the lack of regulation and enforcement which lead to the activities you have described. Unfortunately, as was explained to you in a 2018 NDP meeting to promote the first draft of the policies, the NDP deals with development on land over which Cornwall Council via their Local Plan has influence. It cannot set policies for activity below the MHW mark and, therefore, is in no position to assist your cause.

In raising the issue via your various responses to the NDP Regulation 14 Consultation, you already have the full attention of the Parish Council. Moreover, once the NDP team have met with the PC to determine our responses to the consultation comments, the Consultation Statement will be made public thus ensuring wider knowledge within the Parish of the harm being done within the creek. Such support and a recently announced charity venture to clear abandoned vessels could lead to a short-term solution. Longer term it may be possible to engender wider resident engagement to seek acknowledgement of the problem through the Local Authority and other agencies.

201 Second, the LGS issue. I think you will agree that you have provided sufficient information to enable the NDP Chair to advise the PC on how we deal with LGS areas 28 and 29. There are 3 options – amend the entry details, amend the mapping as requested, or remove the listings. Only the PC can determine the outcome and we will be meeting them soon to deliberate. It is not possible to sustain a running debate at this juncture.

Our consultant has put me right on an important issue. The AONB is designated for its specific purpose, to safeguard its overall natural beauty, whereas the LGS is designated for the reasons outlined in para 100 of the NPPF. Thus, it is appropriate to consider specific places within the Parish for such designation. Since an LGS limits development, it is accepted that great care needs to be applied to redrawing the maps so as not to include private residences. Turning to the CC guidance given at www.cornwall.gov.uk/media/38409117/local-green-space-and-green- infrastructure-guide-note-gh-16042019.pdf - this was only introduced in 2019 when the Mawnan NDP had been submitted to CC for Strategic Environmental Assessment. Our consultant, who works closely with the CC NDP department, considers the guidance, which is not mandatory, to be extremely onerous and exceeds what examiners needed the guidance for. We presented our methodology against the actual tests in the NPPF, which reflects what has been approved elsewhere through examination. Therefore, we have not exposed our choices of LGS to the audit suggested and cannot supply copies of the audit forms requested.

Against the background set out in this letter, I believe that a satisfactory outcome to the LGS designations can be arrived at. I must point out that this phase of consultation has ended and that the decision of the Parish Council should be awaited.

Kind regards,

From Resident on 18/11/20:

Thank you for your email of 5th November acknowledging the Appendix and 3 other items in support of my Response to the proposed designation of LGS Area 28 – Anna Maria Creek (“AMC”).

I regret the delay in replying but I needed to confirm the views of my neighbours who are the other 3 landowners here with homes, like mine, directly fronting the Creek where the curtilages to their houses include part of the shore at AMC which is proposed for designation in the current draft Plan as LGS. 3 items by way of reply to your email :- (1) The 3 neighbouring house owners referred to above are at From this point, Clamerkin Quay, at The Anchorage, and Author acts as at St. Anthony. spokesperson They have all had copies of my Consultation Response on LGS Area 28 for the group. dated 30th October 2020 plus the Appendix to it and 3 items referred to in it sent to you with my email of 4th November 2020.

202 I have copies of their Responses sent to you ie of 24th October 2020 and of 28th October 2020. E 43 & 44 of They all concur with the views given in the material which I have sent to main consult you about proposed LGS 28. file. All four of us have learnt to our cost that voluntarily accepting restrictive Planning measures on our properties, theoretically in the public interest in order to assist in achieving a level of planning control at this Creek reasonably expected of the LPA and ancillary authorities, leads to the situation where we are the only ones penalised while those in breach not only continue, but now start to widen the categories of, their illicit activities without being troubled by any serious attempt at enforcement initiatives. (2) “MHCLG” stands for Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government. (3) In both my Response document and the Appendix to it I have gone to some lengths to indicate that the situation at AMC is longstanding, complex and needs some attention to detailed information preferably in discussion with those within your team who have had at least 10 years or more knowledge of the situation here. I infer from your email of 5th November that your view is that a decision will be made by the NDP team without having such a discussion or needing any other further information from me or anyone else from this area. Unless you have in mind accepting the amendments to LGS Area 28 sought in my Response and Appendix without such a need, then I would urge the NDP team , and the Parish Council as the qualifying body, to reconsider and not to decline adequate consideration of the issues raised in this consultation at this point in the process. In that connection there is a request that I made of you that has not been responded to. At first sight, seeking to designate 37 locations within an NDP area which is already pretty well all designated AONB gives rise to doubt as to whether MHCLG Guidance (Para.11) has been followed. When one looks at the draft specific to the only two Areas ( ie Areas 28 and 29 ) which I and my neighbours wish to concern themselves with, a number of basic flaws are evident now suggesting that in addition CC’s guidance has not been followed either since those flaws would have been avoided if it had been. In particular, the CC guidance calls for a Local Green Space Audit at the outset stressing the need to follow a sound methodology in marshalling sufficient appropriate evidence to support any application for LGS designation. It goes on to recommend the use of the Local Green Space Audit Form provided . In the Form attention is directed to a number of the considerations to be addressed including several of considerable importance which do not appear to have been considered . I had requested , in my Response in relation to Area 29 dated 30th October, a copy of the LGS Audit Form to understand how the proposed designation for Area 29 was arrived at. Since then, having reviewed proposed Area 28 similar concerns arose hence the reference in the Appendix to the LGS Audit methodology. I

203 should therefore appreciate a copy also of the LGS Audit Form for proposed Area 28 as well please. I confirm that I will be responsible for the payment of your reasonable copying charges. I look forward to the early provision of this material so that the issues on Areas 28 and 29, and restricted to them, can be resolved speedily. I would expect to confirm that resolution of these type of NDP Consultant matters is much more practicable at this Regulation 14 stage than at any other after a Regulation 16 Submission.

By NDP Admin on 5/11/20:

Many thanks for your very comprehensive and detailed Appendix in support of the comments provided on 30th October. These are duly recorded and will aid our deliberations within the NDP team as we consider our recommendations to the Parish Council. As Anna Maria Creek is clearly an object for further debate, you might wish to consider sharing this Appendix with your neighbours who have also brought these matters to our attention. Despite my best efforts could you please decode MHCLG.

As you might imagine, there is a lot of comment from around the Parish that we have to analyse and, therefore, it will be some time before we can inform you of the decisions made.

204 25 NDHA 44: The Watch house – 4/2/21

Following a telecon between the NDP SG Chair and the owner, the latter Retain in NDHA accepted that the Watch House should be included in the NDHA annex. He was most supportive of the NDP. His concern was for the future preservation of the Helford Passage area, possibly as a Conservation Area, and for the number of small boats that now littered the roadway above the foreshore. The Chair advised that these were Parish Council matters that should be addressed to them.

Dear , on 3/2/21 SG Chair

Thanks so much for being in touch. We are generally at the Watch House for a couple of weeks every 6 weeks or so but of course sadly haven't been able to visit for some months due to the pandemic and restrictions. I'm grateful to for trying to contact us. WG Lead

I'm sorry for the difficulty over the communication. I would have replied to an email.

Anyway now we're in touch, I'd be pleased to ring you to have a general chat about the proposal.

Best wishes and thank you all for your work on the NDP steering group,

Owner On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 at 11:34, wrote: SG Chair

Dear Owner I have been passed your email below addressed to as I am chair of the Mawnan NDP steering group. PC Clerk

I’m sorry that nobody has been able to speak to you, but this was not for want of trying. A colleague of mine, who is leader of the environment and heritage working group on the NDP, rang the number you previously left with a number of times, visited The Watch House also a number of times, and finally after failing to make PC Clerk contact left a letter (attached below) in October. And I telephoned the new number yesterday that you had given , and left a message asking you to call me back.

If you would care to call me I would be delighted to talk with you abut the NDP, and with a bit of luck would hope to be able to answer any questions or concerns you may have. The formal consultation period is over, and we hope to be able to submit the final draft plan to Cornwall Council very soon, but this does not prevent us from engaging with residents and owners.

205 My phone number is , and I look forward to hearing from you. If I am unavailable just leave a message and say when it would be convenient to call you back.

Sincerely

Chair, Mawnan NDP steering group ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Owner Sent: 28 January 2021 20:53 To: Subject: Re: Parish Council response to your NDP Public Consultation comment

Dear , PC Clerk Thanks for your email. I had hoped someone was to telephone me to discuss the proposals. I don't think we would seek to object as we value the area so much but I hope for a clearer view of what it means to be included, and whether there are matters that can be addressed which we raise to help to keep the immediate area special.

Is there someone I could speak to about this? I'd certainly be grateful for a discussion. We can be contacted on or I'm very happy to make a call.

Hope all is going well with you and you are coping with all the restrictions. Best wishes,

On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 at 12:29, wrote:

Dear , Owner We thank you for taking the time to comment at the Public Consultation phase of the Draft Neighbourhood Development Plan‘s journey. Apologies that it has taken quite so long for the Parish Council to make an official response to you on this but hopefully contact has been made in the intervening time by the NDP Steering Group.

We have finally managed to have a discussion between the NDP Steering Group and the Parish Council on all of the comments received and how they should impact on the draft NDP document.

206 In some cases, we as the Parish Council have made the decision to retain an entry on one of the subordinate lists (Non-Designated Heritage Asset or Local Green Space) against the personal wishes of the land/homeowner as we feel that it is important for an entry to remain.

The inclusion of local properties on our list seeks to ensure that we do not negatively affect the heart of what the local community considers makes Mawnan Parish special with our planning decisions. These lists were created from, and following, the 3 years of community consultation events that took place focussing on what makes our parish special, and after consideration your property was, we believe, something worthy enough that it should be recorded and included for its heritage value. Whilst we understand that some of the objections to being on these lists have focussed on security worries, we have tried to work with these residents by altering or amending the entries – either in wording or images – but in most cases do not feel that complete removal is necessary or appropriate, and therefore we have decided to retain the entry.

Our decisions will be incorporated into the next submission version of the NDP, which should hopefully be going to Cornwall Council fairly soon to begin their review and public consultation process, during which there will be the opportunity for you to make further comment if you feel it necessary.

We, the Parish Council and NDP team, would like to thank you for your participation in the process and for the patience you have shown with our extended response times during the current pandemic.

Yours sincerely

PC Clerk On behalf of Mawnan Parish Council

207 208 209 The following interchange refers to Comments File Refs 19 and 52

210 I have been followingyour exchange of emails with Dennis McQuillan, and want to thank you for your continuing interest in the Mawnan NDP.

In respect of your firstquery on September 7, I confirm thatall queries, comments andquestions will be addressed at the end of this public consultation. What you suggest in your email of October 3 is precisely what the NDP team has been working towards from the startof consultation, and has been standard practice during the earlier stages of the NDP where issues have been raised either by members of the public or the Parish Council, or indeed CornwallCouncil. We are responsible for preparing an officialConsultation Statement forsubmission to CornwallCouncil at the time of the Regulation 15 stage forlegal scrutiny which also ensures we have correctly complied with all processes.

This Consultation Statement is a public document, and will contain a number of schedules setting out the comments received during the preparation of theNDP, and most importantly during this formaland legally required Regulation 14 public consultation now in progress. As well as circulating parishioners about the NDP, we have contacted over 50 statutory consultees, and any responses from these will also be included in the Consultation Statement (CS).

The CS will list all comments, whether questions, observations or suggestions for changes, whether received frommembers of the public ( withoutidentifying individuals), the Parish Council, CornwallCouncil, or the statutory consultees. Each will include the considered NDPresponse, and where appropriate any changes being made to the NDP as a result. In all of this we will be guided, as always, by the planning professionalsworking along side us.

As you will realise from the above, we aren't only giving "consideration to listing out points as they come in ... " but it is an essential part of the process.

In relation to your further email of October 7, you raise interesting points that I suspect will lead to further clarificationin the NDP both with respect to the intention behind Policy I c) ie to stop piggy-back development of the sortyou describe, and in relation to the rural exception site policies to clarify what the distinction between the affordable properties and the open market properties. Rest assured we will take these points on board and ensure ambiguityis avoided.

Thank you again foryour commentsand questions which will be fully addressed in the CS and the ensuing revised policydocument.

Best wishes

TerryDarner Chair, Mawnan NDP Steering Group

211 212 213 Further email response from Resident on 10/3/21;

Deariii

Thank you very much for your email and comprehensive reply.

With regard to the points referenced:

1 & 2) I am pleased that you have clarified the meaning of the term "cumulative site" and also expanded the explanatory wording within Policy 1, to prevent artificial or contrived subdivision of a site designed to circumvent the aims of the Policy.

3) It is disappointing that you have chosen not to tighten the existing wording of Policy 2. In particular, your retention of the word "contribute" will simply create a back door opening for open market housing within developments with an ostensibly greater social purpose. Planning applications, such as the one at Penwarne Road, which was approved by a small majority of the Parish Council, will become increasingly commonplace and will be approved.

4) In view of the significant scale of building that has already taken place, and with a future requirement of O stemming from the Cornwall Local Plan 2010-2030 NIL, I have urged that there should be a presumption of no further new.dwellings to be built. The only exception to the application of this approach would be to allow limited new building that genuinely meets the defined social housing needs of existing residents. Such an approach would most certainly be in conformance with the Cornwall Local Plan 2010-2030.

Overall as it stands the NOP, if approved by the Parish, will create a developers charter. New buildings will continue to be approved which will in no way either conserve or enhance the existing setting and will lead to this rural parish becoming semi- rural at best.

Since, as you explain, your consultation has now ended, if a forum to allow this becomes available, I will certainly make representation to the independent examiner.

Thanks again.

214 POST CONSULTATION PROCESS

• Following the Reg 14 consultation, a checklist was drawn up to ensure all comments were captured and those requiring further action were identified. The checklist is at Annex A.

• After research and further correspondence an NDP Steering Group meeting considered the recommendations for alteration of the NDP in light of the comments received. The action notes from that meeting are at Annex B.

• After further supplementary comments were taken into account, the Steering Group Recommendations to the Parish Council are at Annex C.

• The Decisions taken by the Parish Council to amend the NDP documents are at Annex D.

215 MAWNAN PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN – REGULATION 14 CONSULTATION COMMENTS CHECKLIST

DATE CONTACT FILE REF COMMENT RESPONSE PARISH COUNCIL

19 Aug 20 Resident 1 NDP Policies / Design - Provision of Home-Working TD. Agreed space especially in single bedroom units. consideration needed. 24 Aug 20 Resident 2 Support for the NDP and all its recommendations Acknowledged No further action - NFA 25 Aug 20 Resident 3 NDHA - Norways Farm Barn – site of former chapel. Clarification ongoing Resolved - NFA by WG member. 25 Aug 20 Highways 4 Proposed policies will not result in development which Acknowledged NFA England will adversely impact on the strategic road network (the A30). No comment to make. 25 Aug 20 Resident 5 Support for the NDP Acknowledged NFA 27 Aug 20 South West 6 No specific comment NFA Water 16 Sep 20 Resident 6A/6B NDHA – Budock Vean Cottage. Refused listing citing Follow up telecon and potential planning restrictions and loss of value. letter from TD. Further comment on 30/10/20. Accepts inclusion? 23 Sep 20 Resident 7 NDHA – 4 The Square. Permission to list refused. Acknowledged. Ongoing debate. 23 Sep 20 Highways 8 & 8A Local Green Space List (GSL). Site 22 has protection as Acknowledged. Not a NFA and a public right to pass and re-pass in perpetuity and is statutory consultee. Environment publicly maintainable highway. No objection to adding Info for Green Space West Memorial Cross (sic) to list for NDP purposes. listing only. 20 Sep 20 Resident 9 NDHA – Carwinion Cottage. Approves listing and Consider adding latter NFA supports NDP but adversely comments on style of to planning list at Table adjacent property (Anvower) and (Oak Tree Lodge). 1 or 2 of Policy Document. Pre 2010? Not salient Acknowledged.

216 DATE CONTACT FILE REF COMMENT RESPONSE PARISH COUNCIL

17 Sep 20 Resident 10 Green Spaces – Shute Hill nr school – ownership part Provided for info. residences No 47 to school, part Western Acknowledged. Power/Highways. Add to List? Decision? 24 Sep 20 Resident 11 NDHA – The Tower House (List 60) Request not to be Acknowledged by GM. listed. No reason given. Decision? 21 Sep 20 Natural 12 Does not have any specific comments on the NDP. Most of Annex already NFA England Included an Annex of helpful information on included in the NDP. environmental opportunities for consideration. Acknowledged. 30 Sep 20 Resident 13 NDHA - Bosanath Mill. Owner seeks assurance of nil Followed up by Clerk impact on ability to conduct home improvements. to provide excellent info. And by DMc. No further response. 29 Sep 20 National 14 NDHA – no objection to any properties in their Follow-up by DMc to NFA Trust ownership being included in the list, that include ascertain comment on Bosveal Farmhouse. That house is let by the NT. NDP itself. Add BVF 30 Sep 20 Resident 15 NDHA – Porth Sawsen House, the Pillbox, Carwinion In discussion with GM Boat House. Owner only concerned with privacy at PS House. 5 Oct 20 Resident 17 Owner of PS House – full support for NDP NFA

5 Oct 20 Resident 16 Overall support for NDP to prevent further Acknowledged. NFA inappropriate development. Concern for removal of trees before planning application. Asks whether TPOs could be placed on more trees PC to note concern for within the MS village area. tree preservation 7 Oct 20 Resumé 20 NDHA - Note Tida Apa attached to The Vyne, not Observations rather Note by WG for Penvale as published. than specific amendments. Foxglove Add Foxglove Cottage, Norways (Chapel)? (File ref 3). consultation comment. not heritage Add Pen Meneth, Bar Road? significant. PM not consulted.

217 DATE CONTACT FILE REF COMMENT RESPONSE PARISH COUNCIL

3 Oct 20 Resident 18 Please can we set out how we intend to publish the Clarification provided Consultation questions and comments raised by the public via our by TD. Comments to be statement with all contact list. published at end of comments to website. consultation. NFA 7 Oct 20 Resident 19 NDP Policy 1 – clarify term “cumulative” Clarification by TD and NDP Policy 2 – proportion of Rural Exception Site (RES) further work required. that needs to be devoted to social housing. File ref; 19a. Clarification and use of word “contribute”. 10 Oct 20 Resident 21 NDHA List No 46 – Ridifarne. Pleased to be listed but On going NFA studying implications. Awaiting further decision. 21A/21B Ridifarne – Letter of clarification on planning Provided by GM – NFA implication. listing accepted 15 Oct 20 Resident 22 NDHA List No 36 – Meudon Barn Walls; some support Undergoing but concerned at the veracity of the evidence. consideration. 22A Consultant response: Retain on list but remove Consider all Meudon inaccuracies. walls and cottage amalgamation into See also file ref 49 separate file. 22B Historic background and suggested response 26 Oct 20 22C Response – retain on list; amend historic reference. Response by GM 14 Oct 20 National 23 Has no high voltage electricity assets or high pressure Acknowledged by DMc NFA Grid gas pipelines within the NDP area.

17 Sep 20 Resident 24 NDHA List No 17 – Castelnau. Content with listing. Late response due NFA Gmail problem 02 Oct 20 Resident 25 NDHA List No 45 – The Watch House. Clarification Communication with requested. resident difficult. 17 Oct 20 Resident 26 Support for NDP and gratitude for work done. Acknowledged by DMc NFA

218 DATE CONTACT FILE REF COMMENT RESPONSE PARISH COUNCIL 21 Oct 20 Resident 27 General support for the NDP; however, provides a Response by TD detailed list of comments that require research and clarification., especially why no settlement boundaries. 22 Oct 20 Residents - 2 28 Strong support for NDP and, in particular, policies on To TD for reply. NFA infill and rounding for future development. Response at 28a. 20 Oct 20 Resident 29 NDHA – List Nos 80/81 Boskensoe Farm and Barns. Holding reply sent by Concerns over future development and planning DMc. Further planning implications. info provided. No response 21 Oct 20 Resident 30 Fully supportive of all the proposals put forward in the Acknowledged by DMc NFA Mawnan NDP. 19 Oct 20 National 31 No further comment to File Ref 14. Particular support Acknowledged by DMc NFA Trust for Policies 3 & 5. 22 Oct 20 Marine 32 No comment other than guidance should future Acknowledged by NFA Management development proceed below the Mean High-Water DMc. Consider link to Mark. Licence would be required. MMO in Design statement. 23 Oct 20 *An update follows on items found after a dump from mawnan.org. *15 Sep 20 Resident 33 NDHA – List No 71 Fern Cottage. Supports inclusion Acknowledged by DMc NFA and specific thanks to the NDP Team. *14 Sep 20 Resident 34 NDHA – List No 59 Trebah Wartha. Supports inclusion Acknowledged by TD NFA *16 Sep 20 Chair, 35 NDHA – List No 17 Mawnan Memorial Hall. Supports Acknowledged by Memorial inclusion. clerk? Hall *16 Sep 20 Resident 36 NDHA – List No 11 Roscarrick Villas. Amend spelling Acknowledged by DMc NFA *17 Sep 20 Resident 37 NDHA – List No 68 Treveryan. Supports inclusion Acknowledged by clerk NFA

219 DATE CONTACT FILE REF COMMENT RESPONSE PARISH COUNCIL

*20 Sep 20 Resident 38 NDHA – List No 33 Trerose Vean. Supports inclusion Acknowledged NFA 23 Oct 20 Devon and 39 Notes and welcomes the references for applications to Acknowledged by DMc NFA Cornwall design out crime within the Design Principles which is Police fully supported. No further comments. 26 Oct 20 Resident 40 NDHA – No 44. One resident of Coastguard cottages at Acknowledged by DMc NFA Helford Passage supports inclusion. 27 Oct 20 Historic 41 NDP – No specific issues to comment on. Acknowledged by DMc NFA England 28 Oct 20 Resident 42/42B Green Space Item 18. Objection that field adjacent to Acknowledged and Suggest remove field the woods included in designation. Owners want to follow-up telecon by from designation. develop with 3 homes in future. DMc as per file 42B. 29 Oct 20 Resident 43 Green Space Item 28 – Anna Maria Creek. Correct text Acknowledged by DMc and map to indicate private foreshores and emphasis on no public rights of way. Concerns over condition of the creek. 29 Oct 20 Resident 44 Green Space Item 28. As above. Acknowledged by DMc 29 Oct 20 Resident 45 NDP supportive. Concern for Post Office future Acknowledged by DMc NFA 30 Oct 20 Resident 46 NDP supported. Acknowledged by DMc NFA 30 Oct 20 Resident 47 General support for NDP. LGS 20 Penwarne requires Acknowledged by DMc amendment. 30 Oct 20 Resident 48/48A/48B LGS 28/29 – Anna Maria Creek. Major concerns as to Acknowledged by DMc maps, privacy, legality, and use of LGS in AONB. Links to file refs 43 & 44

LGS 28/29 – Appendix to comments that could assist Acknowledged by DMc NDP/PC decision. 30 Oct 20 Resident 49 NDHA No. 35 – Meudon Cottage. Similar concerns Acknowledged by DMc about listing to those voiced at file ref 22. 30 Oct 20 Resident 50 NDHA No. 12 – Roscarrick Villas. Supportive. Acknowledged by DMc NFA

220 221 222 223 224 225 226 That wall is stable.

The jointly owned wall was the subject of PA15/02140 that aimed to lower the wall to give light to the adjoining cottage and to help stabilise the wall. Recent photos show that this wall has been patched up with concrete block while in County ownership – • Remove the entry. it no longer merits inclusion in the ndha schedule.

6A 62 Budock Vean Cottage

• Initial objection based on extensive • The core of the property retains • Retain the entry. modernisation and concern for characteristics of Cornish building of implication of listing. the late 19th /early 20th period. • Received assurance as per CC advice. • Content to retain entry but feels there are more worthy examples .

15 29 Porth Sawsen House

• Original photo gave rise to objection on the grounds of privacy and security. • Replace photo • Retain the entry • New photo from distance (Coast Path) reduced concern. No further correspondence.

227 228 229 230 231 role of the hotel should be a primary • The issue could be left to the consideration in any designation. examiner to decide but that • We have not followed national policy approach risks further argument and guidance and established criteria. collapse of the entire NDP at an • Local interest is insubstantial – most extremely late stage. • interest stems from tourism. The gar- A “strategic withdrawal” on the grounds of potentially restricting the dens are not demonstrably special to business’s ability to maintain the the local community. gardens was discussed. Those in the • There is no free public access or visibil- SG with a law background supported ity. Accepts that the former is not es- this approach. sential in determining the designation • The Leader of the Environment & but cites recent contested cases where Heritage Working Group wished it to designations ignored the ability of ac- be placed on public record that the cess by the public and proved highly inclusion of the gardens in LGS contentious. listing should stand due to its • The designation places an undue bur- historical and botanical links. Some den on the hotel business. It does not paring of the map could dimmish complement investment in local busi- the hotel’s concern about restrictive planning effects of LGS designation. ness and the promotion of jobs. • Our plan does not positively seek op- Action: portunities to meet the development needs of our community in housing or • The SG could not arrive at a clear in addressing social, economic and en- decision. The Chair would write to vironmental priorities. the Parish Council seeking their • Additional protection of the gardens guidance as to the local importance beyond the AONB designation is not of the gardens and how the SG necessary. Has the test of additional should proceed. local benefit been applied? • The proposed designation indirectly conflicts with a positive strategy for

232 the historic environment due to the burden placed on the hotel.

42 18 Carlidnack Woodland

• The joint owners of the small field at • Any development would require • To await developments. the Western extremity of LGS 18 have planning application and meet • An LGS may include right of way indicated that they have longer term AONB constraints. footpaths. plan proposals for houses on this site. • The designation would still support They ask that the field be removed local benefit if the field were from the listing. The right of way path removed from LGS 18. would be retained. • The SG were made aware of imminent change of use for the field.

Grass area at Shute Hill adjacent to No. 47 and • SG agreed there was recreational • Add to LGS listing. Primary School. benefit and to add area to LGS

The SG Chair asked the consultant to provide a Action: Admin to send as a separate table of NDHA and LGS criteria document (Only NDHA at present)

233 Meeting attendees were:

Terry Damer – Chair, Mawnan NDP Steering Group (SG) Dennis McQuillan – NDP Administrator Peter Stokes – Treasurer Georgena Morris – Environment and History, NDHA and LGS Working Gp (WG) Jackie Whibley – Community and Business WG Richard Martin – Member Mick Hartley - Member

These notes were compiled by:

D McQuillan

234 235 236 237 238 239 That wall is stable.

The jointly owned wall was the subject of PA15/02140 that aimed to lower the wall to give light to the adjoining cottage and to help stabilise the wall. Recent photos show that this wall has been patched up with concrete block while in County ownership – • Remove the entry. it no longer merits inclusion in the ndha schedule.

6A 62 Budock Vean Cottage

• Initial objection based on extensive • The core of the property retains • Retain the entry. modernisation and concern for characteristics of Cornish building of implication of listing. the late 19th /early 20th period. • Received assurance as per CC advice. • Content to retain entry but feels there are more worthy examples .

15 29 Porth Sawsen House

• Original photo gave rise to objection on the grounds of privacy and security. • Replace photo • Retain the entry • New photo from distance (Coast Path) reduced concern. No further correspondence.

240 241 242 243 244 245 • Our plan does not positively seek op- Action: portunities to meet the development needs of our community in housing or • The SG could not arrive at a clear in addressing social, economic and en- decision. The Chair would write to vironmental priorities. the Parish Council seeking their Additional protection of the gardens be- guidance as to the local importance of the gardens and how the SG yond the AONB designation is not neces- should proceed. sary. Has the test of additional local bene- fit been applied? • The proposed designation indirectly conflicts with a positive strategy for the historic environment due to the burden placed on the hotel.

54 17 Budock Vean Golf Course and Valley Garden

• Valley Garden has very limited public • Does not meet all LGS criteria due to • Remove LGS designation access. Accepts historical significances. limited access and thus no • Expand the NDHA description of • Designated Ancient Woodland. additional benefit to the local the valley garden • Site of ancient priory not considered to community. be green space but part of gardens. • Not demonstratively special to the • Access to golf course limited to hotel local community. residents and fee-paying members of • Admin Note: PA 13/01397 approved the golf club. Not considered to be an the building of 7 holiday homes on open recreational amenity. the hotel grounds. Of these, 3 have • Does not contribute to public been built, and foundations/services landscape value as the course can only provided for a further 2 homes. be seen by hotel residents and a few Sites have been earmarked for 2 neighbouring properties. further homes. The hotel, even at

246 this late stage, could further develop the estate. An LGS designation could prevent further development of the business and be counter productive in terms of the NDP business and employment policies.

247 248 249 52 • Argues that Mawnan is being Lowenna has had impact. • No change needed, but suggest response Ongoing object which has already urbanised. Notes scale of building below?: been addressed on multiple increased 4-fold in last decade. Not sure that the 7 referred to occasions, by both Parish Council, • The CNA requirement of 0 at section (obtained from planning apps in last The 0 target is a minimum figure (there is no Consultant & S Furley (County decade) were new builds or 8.2.1 used again to state that no new maximum) and has been set by Cornwall Council via advisor) without effect. Cannot dwellings should be built. Only replacements. the Cornwall Local Plan. It does not prevent further change the opinion of objector and exception being to allow limited housing development taking place, subject to building that meets defined social Summing the intentions of policy 1? accordance with policies in the NDP, the CLP and the time spent on further attempts housing needs of existing residents. NPPF, including those conserving and enhancing the would be fruitless. • Purports that NDP policy will lead to The policy is restricting development nationally designated AONB. However, the 0 target 20% building expansion by 2030. and will be controlled by the PC and also means there is not a necessity through the NDP Letter to objector thanking for • Suggests NDP SG was misdirected by robust defence of the AONB. to specifically plan for further growth, such as comments and that they will be Parish Council through land allocations on the edge of our included in evidence base but Policy Action: Consultant to consider and settlements. will not be changed as they do not provide response reflect LPA guidance. (Post-meeting –response wording in next column)

NDP was directed by CC at a joint NDP/PC/CC meeting pre SEA version of the NDP accepted by PC before submission to CC. 27 • Provision of a settlement boundary Action: Consultant to advise • No change, but response: Extra work to decide what classes a The CLP enables NDP’s to set settlement boundaries ‘settlement’ and to reassess all concerning the application of housing policies in the areas based on this decision would CLP – such as those relating to infill or rounding off be counterproductive and against development. Some NDP groups have provided the initial decision made by the settlement boundaries and others have not. If a SG/PC. boundary is to be set, this would involve settlement edge assessments, and detailed analysis of where the built area of the settlement stops, and the open PC agreed that there be no defined countryside commences. We considered that the settlement boundaries included in definitions of what infill and rounding off the Policy – will reply on Cornwall development are, as outlined in the CLP, are clear Local Plan. already, and a settlement boundary would not add any material benefit to the NDP and the application of policies within it, the CLP and the NPPF.

250 251 22 36 Meudon Barn Walls After written assurances to both parties that there were • As the roadside wall is PC agreed to the removal of this • There are 2 walls of significance; the no planning implications for inclusion in the NDHA subject to current entry wall that can be seen from the road is schedule of assets, neither was willing to accept the planning approval and clearly a potential heritage asset. It is entry. the heritage element is PC to write letters to consultees

owned by the Meudon Barn resident. known to CC, it will be explaining decision. • The wall that is the boundary between Historical accuracy has been questioned. removed from the the Barn and Meudon Cottage is jointly schedule. owned. The roadside wall is included in PA20/05635. That wall is stable. • The joint wall no longer merits inclusion. The jointly owned wall was the subject of PA15/02140 that aimed to lower the wall to give light to the adjoining cottage and to help stabilise the wall. Recent photos show that this wall has been patched up with concrete block while in County ownership – it no longer merits inclusion in the NDHA schedule. • Remove the entry. 6A 62 Budock Vean Cottage PC agreed to retain this entry but • Initial objection based on extensive to try to sourcing of historic photo modernisation and concern for • The core of the property retains characteristics of • Retain the entry. for substitution. th th implication of listing. Cornish building of the late 19 /early 20 period. • Received assurance as per CC advice. PC to write letter to consultee • Content to retain entry but feels there explaining decision. are more worthy examples . 15 29 Porth Sawsen House PC agreed to retain this entry with • Original photo gave rise to objection on the new photo the grounds of privacy and security. • Replace photo • New photo from distance (Coast Path) • Retain the entry PC to write letter to consultee reduced concern. No further explaining decision. correspondence. 49 35 Meudon Cottage • NDP cannot provide additional assurance. PC agreed to retain this entry • Provided with the CC assurance shown • In the light of approval in principle, SG believe the entry above. should stand. • Retain the amended PC to write letter to consultee • Considers that harm & loss occurred • Action: NDHA WG to reword entry as follows: ‘Single- entry explaining decision. while the property was in CC depth dwelling of killas rubble construction, cement- ownership. rendered on the West side only, with attractive • Gave approval in principle for the entry symmetrical front elevation and large attached mid c19 but - worried that ongoing surveys will open barn to the East. Evidence of an earlier (pre-c18) reveal further weaknesses in the dwelling at the NE corner of the existing property has property; therefore, sought further written assurance that acknowledges been found but the current dwelling is an early Victorian remodelling of two earlier semi-detached late 252 and allows for the challenges of c18 dwellings. Further mid-Victorian and early restoring old buildings. Edwardian modifications added a two-storey gable to • Provided rewording of the entry. the SE corner and a sleigh roof down to first floor level • Last correspondence (4/11/20) related on the East side respectively. Adjacent to Meudon Farm to NDP wish to retain entry as Meudon (List Entry No. 1142100)’. area contained some of the oldest buildings in the Parish. No response as at 8/12/20 51 37 Meudon Hotel Retain hotel building but expand to • Black Box representation challenged • Retain Meudon Hotel general comment about gardens Local Green Spaces (LGS) entry but in NDHA Schedule stated that owners were content for PC to write letter to consultee the hotel building to remain on the • Note that the LGS issue explaining decision. NDHA schedule. is at pages 6/7 13 82 Bosanath Mill PC agreed to retain this entry • Initial reluctance as doubts raised Only impact would be knowledge of property’s • Retain the entry regarding their own and future importance in the event of a new planning application. PC to write letter to consultee improvements. explaining decision. • Response by Parish Clerk was in line with CC guidance. • Further email on 4/11/20 to close the loop – no response. 25 44 The Watch House PC agreed to retain this entry • Wanted a “chat” about impact on the • No contact could be established, by phone, email or property and how the designation letter. • Retain the entry PC to write letter to consultee could be respected. explaining decision. 11 60 The Tower House PC agreed to retain this entry • Requested that property be removed • A very substantial and visible property near Helford from the list. No reason given. Has Passage that exudes heritage value. Retain the entry? • Retain the entry PC to write letter to consultee not received the CC assurance. • Owners right to say no. JE suggests it is a planning, not explaining decision. personal decision. • (Admin – should we follow up?) 29/29A 80/81 The House and Barns at Boskensoe PC agreed to retain this entry • Doubts as to the planning implications for future development of the barns. • CC assurance sent to owner at file 29A. • Retain the entry PC to write letter to consultee • Recent significant modernisation of • No further correspondence, so assume owner is explaining decision. the house content.

253 254 essential in determining the designa- tion but cites recent contested cases where designations ignored the ability Action: of access by the public and proved highly contentious. • The SG could not arrive at a clear decision. The Chair • The designation places an undue bur- would write to the Parish Council seeking their guidance as to the local importance of the gardens and how the den on the hotel business. It does not SG should proceed. complement investment in local busi- ness and the promotion of jobs. • Our plan does not positively seek op- portunities to meet the development needs of our community in housing or in addressing social, economic and environmental priorities. • Additional protection of the gardens beyond the AONB designation is not necessary. Has the test of additional local benefit been applied? • The proposed designation indirectly conflicts with a positive strategy for the historic environment due to the burden placed on the hotel. 54 17 Budock Vean Golf Course and Valley • Does not meet all LGS criteria due to limited access and • Remove LGS Similarly to the Meudon Hotel listing it Garden thus no additional benefit to the local community. designation was agreed that rather than leave this • Valley Garden has very limited public • Not demonstratively special to the local community. • Expand the NDHA for the examiner to make a decision an access. Accepts historical • Admin Note: PA 13/01397 approved the building of 7 description of the valley expanded but less restrictive NDHA significances. holiday homes on the hotel grounds. Of these, 3 have garden listing would be a better option whilst • Designated Ancient Woodland. been built, and foundations/services provided for a not adversely affecting the business • Site of ancient priory not considered further 2 homes. Sites have been earmarked for 2 use of the site to be green space but part of gardens. further homes. The hotel, even at this late stage, could • Access to golf course limited to hotel further develop the estate. An LGS designation could Remove from LGS list but include a residents and fee-paying members of prevent further development of the business and be general comment about gardens within the golf club. Not considered to be an counter productive in terms of the NDP business and an NDHA list entry open recreational amenity. employment policies. Does not contribute to public landscape PC to write letter to consultee value as the course can only be seen by explaining decision. hotel residents and a few neighbouring properties.

255 42 18 Carlidnack Woodland • Any development would require planning application and • To await developments. Remove field from LGS listing whilst The joint owners of the small field at the meet AONB constraints. • An LGS may include true woodland area to be retained Western extremity of LGS 18 have • The designation would still support local benefit if the right of way footpaths. indicated that they have longer term field were removed from LGS 18. PC to write letter to consultee plan proposals for houses on this site. • The SG were made aware of imminent change of use for explaining decision. They ask that the field be removed from the field. the listing. The right of way path would be retained. Grass area at Shute Hill adjacent to No. • SG agreed there was recreational benefit and to add area • Add to LGS listing. Not appropriate to listing 47 and Primary School. to LGS

It was agreed that the clerk would produce the letters noted [in red text] using general comments and forward to the NDP SG for review – it could be that these are sent to the consultees via email, rather than post if this is how they made contact originally. These correspondences would then be sent out after agreement from the PC is ratified the January 21st meeting.

Any action for updating either policies or listings [in blue text] would be done by the NDP SG and a final draft of the document provided to the PC prior to submission to Cornwall Council.

TD then said that this summary would now be incorporated into the legal scrutiny document to provide evidence of public consultation being acted upon.

Thanks was given by Cllr Marsden for all of the works undertaken by the SG to this point.

Meeting ended at 8.50pm

256 APPENDIX W TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

257 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON THURSDAY 16TH JUNE 2016 IN THE MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Sadler (Chairman), Barnicoat, Bate, Faiers, Marsden & Nash

APOLOGIES: Cllr Robinson & Moyle

ALSO PRESENT: Clerk + 8 members of the public

2243 TO DISCUSS THE OPTIONS FOR NEIGHTBOURHOOD DEVELOMENT PLANS, COMMUNITY RIGHT TO BUILD ORDERS (CRTBOS) AND NEIGHBOURHOOD DEVELOPMENT ORDERS (NDOS) Cllr Marsden said he had been speaking to members of the CRCC and said that we should try to get them in for a presentation to see about restarting the project again, especially with regards to timeframe & scope.

The clerk has already communicated with Budock & Constantine parishes to see if they would like to collaborate on a group NDP. Both clerks are taking this to their respective councils to discuss. The clerk was to ask Mark James (Localism Team) if he would be able to do a short presentation at the September parish meeting. Ward Cllr Bastin restated that he had been pushing for NDPs for a while as they have weight in the planning process and give local communities a say in the future of their local planning.

The July minutes only state that a presentation by the Localism Team (Mark James) had been arranged for September

258 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON THURSDAY 15th SEPTEMBER 2016 IN THE MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Sadler(Chairman), Barnicoat, Brooksbank, Marsden, Moyle, Nash & Robinson

APOLOGIES: Cllr Bate & Faiers

ALSO PRESENT: Clerk + 5 members of the public

2289. PRESENTATION ON NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING – WHAT DOES IT REALLY MEAN, WHAT USE IS IT AND WHAT WILL IT INVOLVE? FOLLOWED BY A DISCUSSION TO CONSIDER FORMING A NDP WORKING GROUP. (approx. 15 minute presentation + questions)

NDP (Neighbourhood Development Plan) – brought in as part of the localism act 2012 and provides significant influence to local communities in the planning process. The National Planning Framework changes were brought in at the same time, with a change to focus on ‘sustainability’ in planning application acceptance. The NDP is community lead and relies on an evidence base for a defined area which is designing how you see planning policy in your area. It must be an enabling document and not a way to restrict or stop all planning. It is not a quick process and takes approximately 2 years to fully complete.

• Mawnan originally had frontrunner status – is this still in place? Was an area designated? If begun we need to start working on getting the maximum number of parishioners involved. WE need to have a roadmap of issues we would focus on and usually a parish/town writes between 2 & 6 specific policies. These must be verified as being acceptable and usually work in conjunction with other neighbouring areas.

The final NDP must have legal weight, so is reviewed by Cornwall Council and then and independent inspector and finally goes out to parish referendum. (St Ives has now gone to judicial review to see if their ‘new build’ proposal is legal).

Within our NDP we could choose to decide that parish facilities (pub, school, shop, Memorial Hall, churches) as sites of community benefit and enrol them in this scheme.

Cornwall Council currently has no planning policy and is using old district plans making planning appeals harder to defend against. This is being addressed by the new Local Plan which is currenly being finalised. This includes housing numbers per community network area and is a much more robust framework to defend against. The NDP fills the current gap between the NPPF and the Local Plan. If we have no NDP then we have to rely solely on the Cornwall Council Local Plan.

259

To start with a working group would have to review the currently planning policies (including such as AONB Management plan; Natural England policy; National Trust Strategic Plan) as they may already provide protection but there still may be gaps in coverage which the NDP could address – design standards; density of housing; % of affordables per development.

• Paul Glover – what support could we expect from Cornwall Council? MJ – we get support on project planning and there is a number of technical officer who can be called upon to work of specific question/policy areas.

• Cllr Brooksbank – is there assistance on exactly what policies we should be reviewing to start with? MJ- he would be first point of call but there are a number of other parishes who might be able to offer help.

• Cllr Moyle – what is sustainable? MJ- depends entirely on viewpoint and will never be agreed upon. Cllr Sadler – we could insist on standards of design, size & % affordable per development.

• Cllr Brooksbank asked if not creating an NDP would mean that other community network neighbours who do (Falmouth, Penryn, Perranarworthal, St Gluvias) could simply write housing numbers into their plans which would mean Mawnan would have to ‘fill the gap’. What happens about total numbers being supplied by Cornwall Council for housing needs if there is a shortfall?

• Cllr Marsden - can specific exclusion areas be put in place? MJ – yes, but they would have to be backed up. What impact will an NDP have directly on the parish long term?

• Anne Marie - can the NDP cover more than just planning- would infrastructure come into it at all? MJ is could, but we cannot be saying things have to be done (extra buses, change in highways etc)

• Cllr Moyle - Doesn’t development rely on landowners being willing to put sites on offer. Is there any point in doing an NDP if there is no likelihood of anyone freeing up land?

Cost of a NDP – between £10000 & £15000, depending on the amount of volunteer uptake and would need about 18-24 months work. It is not a job solely for the parish council – they are only one of many stakeholder groups that should be included in any working party. Cllr Sadler – Roseland had one councillor who was so committed he visited every household to get the NDP moving. The first step of the working group would be to review what policies exist already and what would have to be written.

The previous attempt at a NDP (under Cllr Gartside) was brought up as it is unsure if we defined an area, or still have any of the frontrunner funding 260 (£20000) still available. Ted Glover – the original committee never finished work on fact gathering. These working papers are now unavailable. MJ – will check on where we stand both for designation and frontrunner funding.

It was proposed by Cllr Moyle seconded by Cllr Marsden and

RESOLVED that the Parish Council use the paperless planning funding to send out to all households a flyer to gauge the level of enthusiasm to form a working party.

on a vote being taken the matter was approved (2 abstentions)

Thanks were given to Mark James for his attendance and his patience with our questions.

261

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON THURSDAY 20th OCTOBER 2016 IN THE MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Sadler(Chairman), Faiers, Marsden, Nash & Robinson

APOLOGIES: Cllr Brooksbank

ALSO PRESENT: Clerk + 7 members of the public

2313. TO REPORT MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES NOT ON THE AGENDA, FOR INFORMATION ONLY NDP follow up from Mark James; no designation of area for Mawnan was made. Frontrunner funding (£20000) was in assistance form only and has now lapsed – recommendation to apply for £9000 in NDP grant funding if we were to go ahead.

2315. TO REVIEW THE DOCUMENT TO GO OUT LOOKING FOR SUPPORT FOR THE NDP STEERING GROUP AND HEAR DISTRIBUTION OPTIONS. Two draft send out documents were produced by the clerk. It was decided to combine the two into a larger sealed flyer incorporating elements of both designs, as well as information on funding availability and that a website address be included . The clerk would bring a draft of the new design to the next meeting. 2321 - correspondence Date Description From action

19.9.16 NDP presentation – follow up info Mark james – For info localism

2335. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Resident – could the NDP information not be sent out with the Chairman’s Annual Report. The clerk said that this had not been done since she had been appointed (so last 3 years).

262 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON THURSDAY 17th NOVEMBER 2016 IN THE MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Sadler(Chairman), Barnicoat, Brooksbank, Faiers, Lloyd, Marsden, Moyle & Nash

APOLOGIES: Cllr Robinson & Ward Cllr Bastin

ALSO PRESENT: Clerk + 6 members of the public

2342. TO REVIEW THE DOCUMENT TO GO OUT LOOKING FOR SUPPORT FOR THE NDP STEERING GROUP AND HEAR DISTRIBUTION OPTIONS. A draft mockup of the sealed mailer was distributed by the clerk. It was felt that some of the colouring would not prove readable, so it was suggested to have all text in black. Cllr Brooksbank asked who had read over the text to make sure there was nothing factually incorrect – it was agreed to send it to Mark James of the Localism Team to review before committing to post out.

263

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON THURSDAY 15th DECEMBER 2016 IN THE MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Sadler(Chairman), Bate, Barnicoat, Faiers, Marsden, Moyle, Nash & Robinson

APOLOGIES: Cllrs Brooksbank, Lloyd & Ward Cllr Bastin

ALSO PRESENT: Clerk + 5 members of the public

2363. TO REPORT MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES NOT ON THE AGENDA, FOR INFORMATION ONLY NDP wording reviewed by Mark James (Localism) as requested.

2366. TO REVIEW ON THE NDP FINAL DOCUMENT FORMAT & AGREE MAILOUT DATE. Few spelling mistakes to sort out. OK for box to go into bus shelter for responses. Cllr Sadler to review wording with clerk to include additional items then arrange mailout in January.

264 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON THURSDAY 19th JANUARY 2017 IN THE MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Sadler(Chairman), Bate, Barnicoat, Brooksbank, Faiers, Marsden, Nash & Robinson

APOLOGIES: Cllrs Lloyd & Moyle

ALSO PRESENT: Clerk + 5 members of the public

2390. VOTE TO DECIDE IF THE PARISH COUNCIL ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PERSUING AN NDP. DISCUSSION ON WORDING, FORMAT & SENDING THE NDP DOCUMENT & AGREE MAILOUT DATE. Cllr Lloyd had noted that a change in format to bullet points for the first two main text sections might work better. Several additional changes to the text/ formatting were also discussed and agreed upon.

Cllr Sadler thought we should change the wording on the front of the mailer to show that the parish council was in support of the NDP.

It was proposed by Cllr Sadler, seconded by Cllr Marsden and RESOLVED that it be minuted that Mawnan Parish Council have voted to support the creation of an NDP

on a vote being taken the matter was approved unanimously

Item 2397 - Correspondence Dec 16/ Jan 17

Date Description From action

19/12/16 Local plan & NDP info Emma Ball – For info localism team

21/12/16 Neighbourhood planning newsletter – Localism team For info dec 16

265 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON THURSDAY 16th FEBRUARY 2017 IN THE MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Sadler(Chairman), Bate, Barnicoat, Brooksbank, Marsden & Nash

APOLOGIES: Cllrs Faiers, Lloyd, Moyle & Robinson

ALSO PRESENT: Clerk + 14 members of the public

2408. TO REPORT MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES NOT ON THE AGENDA, FOR INFORMATION ONLY

NDP flyer should be out – clerk to chase as seems to be delayed. Returns box up in bus shelter.

266

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON THURSDAY 16th MARCH 2017 IN THE MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Sadler(Chairman), Bate, Brooksbank, Faiers, Lloyd,Marsden & Nash & Robinson

APOLOGIES: Cllrs Barnicoat, Moyle

ALSO PRESENT: Clerk + 11 members of the public

2437. TO RECEIVE AN UPDATE ON NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING VOTING & DECIDE WHAT TO DO NEXT The clerk read out details of the returns (154 returned – 146 in favour). It was therefore decided to go ahead with starting works towards a NDP – Cllr Marsden & Lloyd would contact Mark James about first steps. The clerk would then arrange a community meeting of those offering assistance asap. A community day with a ‘sticky note plan’ was suggested to get the community ideals ball rolling. Cllr Sadler noted the need to keep community involvement and discussions to the fore along this process.

2449. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Voting on the NDP had closed, however anyone wishing to make comments/ join the group would be encouraged.

267 MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 19TH APRIL 2017 IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Sadler (Chairman), Bate, Brooksbank, Faiers, Lloyd, Marsden, Moyle, Nash & Robinson

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and 14 members of the public

2462. TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP After a recent meeting with Cllr Marsden, Mark James & Jeremy Fennel from the Localism Team Cllr Lloyd reported that Mark James had agreed to come along to the first volunteers meeting. They hoped to talk through the step by step process; setting up a steering group; instigating working groups with specific processes’ designating an area and accessing grant aid. It was also noted that a trove of information & surveys from the original NDP team had been handed into the clerk and would surely be of use in the future processes. Cllr Marsden hoped to ensure that this first meeting did not frighten off any of the 45 potential volunteers , as we would probably need all of the help we could get. Involvement of the whole community, and frequent communication of what was happening and how far along they were was extremely important. Mention of the extension of things at this years’ Fun Run and the possibility of a stand here for the NDP group to make everyone aware of progress were also noted.

2468 - Correspondence Mar/Apr 17

24/3/17 NDP followup Cllr Marsden For info

268

MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 18TH MAY 2017 IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Brooksbank, Lloyd, Marsden, Moyle, Nash & Sadler

ALSO PRESENT: Lisa Clements, Clerk, PCSO Fuller and 15 members of the public

2488. TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP (following on from public meeting on 10th May) Cllr Lloyds report back on an excellent first meeting, at which Mark James answered question and provided an excellent introductory talk. There was a disappointment that more long-time residents did not show up – there was the distinct chance that this project could fail without community commitment. The original group would be kept, hopefully forming the steering group at the next meeting on 7th June @ the Bowling Club. Red post-box in bus shelter to be used for communications pending a noticeboard. Cllr Marsden asked if it would be permissible that the parish purchase a short term (2yrs+) noticeboard specifically for NDP info & install in the bus shelter - this was agreed to pending prices. It was agreed to accept Anna Druce’s offer to manage the NDP social media.

269

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 15th JUNE 2017 IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair) Brooksbank, Lloyd, Marsden, Nash, Sadler & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and 14 members of the public

2513 TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP Cllr Lloyd read a report on the progress of the NDP. At the meeting on June 7th the initial steering group, consisting of 2 co-chairs, administrator, treasurer (+ aide) + 2 volunteers was agreed. The next meeting would be solely for the Steering Group where they would try to decide on terms of reference, designation of area and subjects for working groups before the next public meeting. The turnout this time was much better than before, with 25 member of the public in attendance.

270 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 20th JULY 2017 IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair) Bate, Bradley, Faiers, Lloyd, Marsden, Nash, Sadler & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and 14 members of the public

2535. TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP Cllr Lloyd reported on the latest NDP Steering Group meeting held on the 17th July. There is no a single chair an 9 other members. Deciding on a Designated Area was agreed at this meeting, with the official letter forwarded to the parish clerk. Term of reference, working groups & areas of interest were discussed. It was agreed that a small media group be set up to work out how to get a social media presence & publicity going prior to another Steering Group meeting 14th August) which would then see the project going into motion fully. It was hopes that the first documents / publicity would be ready for the Fun Run at the end of September.

It was proposed by Cllr Sadler, seconded by Cllr Lloyd and RESOLVED that the Designation Area letter, as read by the clerk, was accepted by the parish council and forwarded to Cornwall Council

on a vote being taken this matter was approved unanimously Item 2541 – correspondence Jun/Jul 17 Date Description From action

29/6/17 Housing needs in parish Julia Lansdown @ Cornwall For info/ NDP Council

271

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 21st SEPTEMBER 2017 IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair) Bradley, Marsden, Nash, Sadler & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and 14 members of the public

2559. TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP The clerk read out a report from Cllr Lloyd on the meeting of 14th August. Cllr Marsden followed up with a report from the 11th September public meeting at which 77 members of the public were in attendance. The key questions raised appeared to the relevance & control in the community. Next event was to be a stand at the Fun Run – the NDP itself needed the whole community involved. Terry Damer (NDP Chair) said that we had already begun getting form as back but we did need an increase in numbers to effectively cover the parish properly. Cllr Whibley reiterated the point that a larger group of delivery volunteers was needed to each “adopt” a smaller community area and to keep everyone in it up to date on progress. Cllr Nash noted that the Falmouth NDP had failed to gain full support and was being redrafted. Cllr Sadler said this proved the need for a strong leadership & team going through the process.

Item 2569 - correspondence Aug/ Sept 17

Date Description From action

8.8.17 Farmers & ndp video NFU Forward to NDP

Item 2571 – payments Accounts for Payment - AUG/ SEPTEMBER 2017

Cheque VAT Total (inc No PAYE Expense VAT) 2601 Sign Shop NDP - laminaton of maps £9.60 £57.60

272

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 19TH OCTOBER 2017 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair) Bate, Bradley, Brooksbank, Faiers, Nash, Sadler & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and 8 members of the public

2582. TO RECEIVE INFORMATION ON CURRENT COUNCIL VACANCIES & TO APPOINT AN ADDITIONAL NDP LINK COUNCILLOR The clerk reported that she had received Cllr Lloyd’s resignation due to family commitments and had applied for a casual vacancy notice. It was proposed by Cllr Sadler, seconded by Cllr Moyle and RESOLVED that Cllr Whibley be appointed as NDP liaison on a vote being taken the matter was approved unanimously

2585. TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP Cllr Whibley read out a report from the group and reminded everyone of the next NDP meeting date (15th November) with tea and biscuits to start.

2592. TO RECEIVE CORRESPONDENCE AND AGREE RESPONSES IF APPROPRIATE Cllr Whibley / Terry Damer noted that traffic & speeding were issues being brought up on the NDP and that pedestrian crossing had been requested near the shop. The clerk would try to find out what a crossing request would entail.

2594 – payments Accounts for Payment - October 2017 Cheque VAT Total (inc No PAYE Expense VAT) 2607 Sign Shop NDP - A3maps £6.00 £36.00 2611 Cornwall Council NDP - ndp design & invite prnting £82.00 £643.01

273

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 16TH NOVEMBER 2017 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair) Bate, Bradley, Brooksbank, Faiers, Marsden, Nash & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and 5 members of the public

2608. TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP Cllr Marsden presented a report on the most recent meeting, held yesterday. The NDP group now has 4 working groups with leaders (and in some cases members too) but still need 2 group leaders. The meeting had a lower turnout than the previous 77 – despite notices, the website & email contact with the 120 contacts it was felt that there were still issues of advertising to be addressed. These were going to be looked into as this is not a quick project and could be 2-3 years in the making. It is hoped that a regular presence at the Farmer Markets will help with this.

Next meeting in January with working groups providing expansion on where they have gotten to so far. It is hoped that a project plan, budget and first grant claim details will be available soon. Terry Damer thought than an initial grant application for £3000 to cover costs until March 2018 would be sent in soon and would add to the £5000 agreed from the parish council precept (clerk to check on this). Cllr Faiers asked if any alternative funding streams had been looked into – he was aware that Lottery Grants were being given in other areas.

274 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 21ST DECEMBER 2017 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair) Bradley, Brooksbank, Marsden, Nash & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and 3 members of the public

2637 – payments Dec 17 Cheque VAT Total (inc No PAYE Expense VAT) 2621 Cornwall Council NDP - school leaflet & design £7.00 £55.25

275 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 18TH JANUARY 2018 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bate, Bradley, Brooksbank, Faiers, Marsden, Nash, Sadler & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and 7 members of the public

2668. ITEMS FOR INCLUSION ON NEXT AGENDA NDP – to be on agenda every other month

276

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 15TH FEBRUARY 2018 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

(Please note minute numbering has been changed slightly – it is now suffixed with YEAR to provide clarity)

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bate, Bradley, Faiers, Nash, & Sadler

2652.18 TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP Dennis McQuillan gave a short summary report; support is building with 15 people present at the last steering group meeting, with a public meeting on Monday 19th. The extra publicity provided by the Mawnan Dairy & social media appears to be working. Great strides had been made within working groups, but the initial groups were based on other areas NDPs and we now need to focus on exactly what Mawnan needed through a questionnaire to go out to the whole parish in later April/ May, which is in the process of being designed. This would be used as evidence for later stages to show full community consultation. Unfortunately there have been issues with securing grant funding which has led to the bid being abandoned until April 2018 and the new funding round. Training sessions for Landscape work were pencilled in for March, with a draft Landscape Character Assessment hoped for in June, which forms a part of the backbone of the other areas.

277 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 15TH MARCH 2018 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bate, Bradley, Faiers, Marsden, Nash, Sadler & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and 10 members of the public

2678.18 TO REPORT MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES NOT ON THE AGENDA Terry Damer – asked anyone wishing to receive new NDP info to sign up to the newsletter.

278

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 19TH APRIL 2018 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bradley, Brooksbank, Faiers, Marsden, Nash, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and 7 members of the public

2714.18 REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND REPRESENTATIVES NDP – precis of report from the NDP group was read by the clerk. A request for £50 for a prize for return of the questionnaires was requested from the parish councils. (Proposed Cllr Marsden, Seconded Cllr Bradley) There was likely to be a 2 week lead between receipt of funding and printing the questionnaire. Congratulation to Cllr Whibley for support to the leisure group and the NDP project in general.

279 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 17TH MAY 2018 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bradley, Brooksbank, Faiers, Marsden, Nash & Sadler

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and 11 members of the public

2734.18 TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP Mr McQuillan read out a summary of the NDP activities to date: • Representatives of the NDP steering groups to attend Farmers Markets & Fun Run to raises interest & keep momentum going • Grant funding application has been successful and should cover immediate expenses. A new bid is already being prepared. • Pre-Questionnaire should be ready for delivery in early June (returns offered by freepost) covering outline areas. School to be return drop pint along with bus-shelter box & parish offices. £50 prize opportunity for those returning. • The rough timespan given for our NDP was confirmed – much of being taken up with public consultations although “brain-storming” sessions to undertake aims, objectives & policies were agreed to dates TBC) • Social media & electronic distribution of the newsletters is going ahead – with the chairman preparing a GDPR statement to be used in future mailings etc. • A training session for the Landscape Character Assessments is scheduled

280 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 21ST JUNE 2018 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bate, Bradley, Brooksbank, Faiers, Marsden, Nash & Toland

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 5 members of the public

2767.18 – payments Cheque VAT Total No PAYE Expense (inc VAT) 2686 Terry Damer NDP (ringfenced) expenses £2.51 £51.01 2687 Dennis McQuillan NDP (ringfenced) expenses £29.50 £202.00

2769.18 REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES & REPRESENTATIVES (to include a short Trust meeting report & Carwinion Field issues) Cllr Bradley drew attention to the A1 copies of the NDP questionnaire displayed – which are due to be delivered by NDP volunteers to every home in the parish during the next week to 10 days.

281

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 19TH JULY 2018 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bradley, Brooksbank, Faiers, Marsden, Nash, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 8 members of the public

2782.18 TO RECEIVE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE OFFICE & FINANCE COMMITTEE RE: BUDGET REVIEW; POLICIES & PROCEDURES Cllr Faiers read out a summary of the O&F meeting from 9th July. It was proposed by Cllr Moyle, seconded by Cllr Sadler and RESOLVED that the Parish Council adopt the policy recommendations (including the NDP statement) of the Office & Finance Committee in their entirety.

on a vote being taken the matter was approved unanimously

2785.18 TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP The Administrator (of the NDP Group) read a report. Cllr Marsden would like to thank the whole group for their continued commitment.

Item 2785.15 NDP notes for Parish Council meeting 19 July 2018

1. 1,200 copies of the questionnaire were finally available to us from Cornwall Council’s printers on the afternoon of Monday 25 June, and by the end of the following day 865 copies had been handed over to our team of volunteer distributors. 2. The majority had been delivered to individual households by the end of that week, with a few remaining finally being delivered during the following week. 3. A very small number of residents contacted us to say that they hadn’t received a copy, and these were then supplied. 4. The time leading up to the supply of the finished questionnaires was very stressful. a. Initial application for funding had been refused back last December due to us not appreciating the amount of detail required in the application b. When we did submit our revised application after considerable work by our treasurer and members of the team, it was approved but we were told we couldn’t commit to any expenditure until a due diligence process had been concluded and the grant money had been deposited in the parish bank account. c. This lead to a queue of tasks, none of which could be advanced until the one before it in the queue had been processed; this log jam was broken with the intervention of counsellor Marsden who telephoned Locality, the government appointed funding agency, and extracted from them the assurance that the money was forthcoming and would be in the account by a particular date. With this assurance we were able to jump the gun a little and press ahead with our queue of tasks. d. I should add that Cornwall Council had no idea of the hoops we had to jump through to get this funding, and have asked us to let them have a detailed account of the difficulties we faced so they can better brief other emergent NDPs in the future. 5. The deadline for return of the questionnaires is next Monday, 23rd July – the day incidentally of our next steering group meeting. As of today we have received 185 completed questionnaires, representing approximately 20% of the households in the parish, although we are aware that some households have chosen to send in separate questionnaires for different occupants who may have differing views – something we have encouraged. 6. It is worth mentioning that in future, in the spirit of engagement, all steering group meetings will be advertised and will be open to members of the public – although some will be more interesting to outsiders than others! 282

7. Your NDP steering group continues to communicate with the local population by a variety of means, notices on the parish notice board, strategically located posters, and most effectively with an irregularly regular newsletter to a growing email list and through Facebook, whilst the parish clerk keeps the NDP website up-to-date. 8. We now face the substantial task of analysing the responses (I can’t disclose any trends before the closing date), but I would say that very many of the written comments have been thoughtful and helpful, whilst many contain views and comments of direct interest to the parish council as well as to the NDP. 9. We have booked the Memorial Hall for the weekend of September 22/23 with the intention of making this a public exposition of the results of the survey (the parish council meeting is 2 days earlier at which we expect to let you have a full summary of the results); Cornwall Council will lend us as many display boards as we request, and we hope to have a revolving PowerPoint type presentation of comments received. This will be a key moment in the NDP process and we want to ensure that every resident is fully aware that it is happening and is encouraged to drop by to see the results and talk to NDP steering group members. 10. In the meantime, the various working groups continue with their studies which will soon be better focused as a result of what we learn from this questionnaire, and will start considering what questions will be asked of the parish when we produce the main, and much more substantial, questionnaire early next year. 11. Finally I would like to place on record my thanks to the design and print department of Cornwall Council for the attractive design and then production of the questionnaire and its accompanying envelopes, our little team of volunteers who distributed the questionnaires, to the steering group members and their teams for their on-going work, and in particular to Dennis McQuillan our administrator who has born a large burden of work in maintaining all the background records and information necessary to the work of the NDP and for taking on the responsibility of ensuring our compliance with the new GDPR regime.

Terry Damer, steering group chairman, 19 July 2018

2790.18 - correspondence 1 24.6.18 Overriding an NDP by planning Alan Percy (north For info committee cornwall cluster)

2795.18 – payments Accounts for Payment - July 2018 Chequ VAT Total e No PAYEE Expense (inc VAT) 2698 £16.30 Noticeboards Online NDP - noticeboard £97.80 2699 NDP - draw winner NDP questionnaire prize £50.00

283 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 20TH SEPTEMBER 2018 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bradley, Brooksbank, Faiers, Marsden, Nash, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 10 members of the public 2812.18 TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP (prize draw & info on 20/21st Sept Open Weekend) Terry Damer reported that an exhibition covering information received back from the recent questionnaire was planned for the 21st & 22nd September at the Bowling Club. 865 questionnaires were sent out with returns of about 40% which was “exceptionally good” according to Cornwall Council. 1300 comments were recorded and would be passed onto the parish council once fully collated as they are not all relevant to the NDP. Mostly they relate to speeding, traffic and parking! Next steps – is seems that due to the comprehensive nature of the 1st questionnaire it is unlikely second will be needed. Full community involvements could be fully evidenced through the process to date. It was envisioned that consultant input would be needed too to sort out and draft the NDP plan but it was hoped to liaise with other parishes to find out how they handled this process – there are limits to spend included in the grant. Cllr Marsden wished to express thanks to Terry and all of the NDP team for their work. It was a tremendous accolade that a 2nd questionnaire wasn’t needed. Cllr Sadler endorsed these thanks and said that the level of detail included in the questionnaire to keep compliant with the rules must have taken hours in itself to agree and it was a tribute to all involved.

Item 2822.18 – payments

Cheque PAYE Expense VAT Total (inc VAT) AUG 2703 Mawnan Bowling Club NDP - venue hire (jan - jul) £165.00 2706 Cornwall Council NDP - NDP questionnaire design & £122.40 £734.40 print 2707 Royal Mail Group Ltd NDP - NDP questionnaire freepost £21.07 £126.42 SEPT 2714 The Consortium Stationary/ NDP - lam pouches etc £8.24 £49.42 2715 Dennis McQuillan NDP - inks £5.82 £34.95 2716 Georgena Morris NDP - stationary £2.40 £14.40 2717 Terry Damer NDP - general expenses £22.89 £170.84

284 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 18TH OCTOBER 2018 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bate, Bradley, Brooksbank, Faiers, Marsden, Sadler, & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 9 members of the public

2835.18 TO REPORT MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES NDP – Cllr Whibley asked on behalf of the NDP how the parish would like to receive the comments relevant from the questionnaire. They are currently being collated into one large spreadsheet. The clerk said that this format would be best, as it would allow her to go through and categorise/ remove duplicates fairly quickly. It was agreed that the clerk, Cllrs Whibley & Bradley would work together to draw out information from the spreadsheet once received.

2845.18 – payments Cheque PAYE Expense VAT Total (inc VAT) 2723 Cornwall Council NDP - artworks £7.00 £42.00 2723 Cornwall Council NDP - landscape £40.00 £240.00 assessment workshop

2846.18 REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND REPRESENTATIVES Congratulation to the NDP committee on the exhibition were to be extended from the whole parish council. It was well attended (despite the weather) and well organised event. The only drawback was considered (by some) to be that it was a pity it was not held at the Memorial Hall.

285

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 15TH NOVEMBER 2018 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bradley, Marsden, Nash, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 9 members of the public

2680.18 TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE NDP GROUP Terry Damer reported back from the NDP. The information gathered through the questionnaire was exhibited at an event at the end of September and again at the Fun Run with approximately 100 visitors despite the heavy rains. Communication are hitting a wide audience with 7 emailed newsletter being sent out to 229 subscribers – with more than 70% regularly opening them and reading the contents / liking to further information. The Steering Group have had a slight hiatus digesting this information but begin the next phase of their works with a meeting on Monday evening with the AONB unit, to which everyone is invited. The CPRE have a library of documents on the protections that the AONB and other organisation provide, which the group have just started accessing. Going forward, it seems unlikely that a second questionnaire will be require given the thorough nature of the first one. The group are at the point now that they are looking into engaging the services of a planning consultant to help produce and prepare evidence for the first draft plan.

286 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 20th DECEMBER 2018 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bradley, Faiers, Marsden, Nash & Sadler

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 7 members of the public

Item 2889.18 - payments Cheque PAYE Expense VAT Total (inc VAT) No 2737 T Damer NDP grant - resources £0.07 £105.92 2738 P Stokes NDP grant - resources £7.82 £46.97 (inks) 2739 D Mcquillan NDP grant - resources £9.98 £59.90 (inks) 2740 G Morris NDP grant - resources £96.00 (wildlife map) 2741 Bowling Club NDP grant - venue hire £175.00 (Exhibition) 2741 Bowling Club NDP grant - venue hire £100.00 (sept to Dec) 2742 ICO Data registration 2019 £40.00 2743 Groundwork NDP - grant return £145.36

2890.18 REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND REPRESENTATIVES T Damer offered a quick summary on the NDP to date. A planning consultant had been engaged to take the NDP documents through to completion for a fixed fee (hopefully with this budget). A local resident (a planning consultant) had done a quick walk- through with the Steering Group leaders of the process of collating and drafting our NDP proposal which had been very helpful. There is still a lot of work to be completed before the draft NDP document can be presented – a Strategic Environmental Assessment needed to be completed by the end of March for example. The comments from the recent questionnaire, which were to be passed onto the parish council, had been discussed as it was felt that they could be seen to breach GDPR and identify the authors. The NDP team would now go through the comments themselves and categorise into major concern areas that the parish council would then be advised of to help with future plans. Cllr Marsden & Moyle thanked the NDP team for all of their works.

287

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 21ST FEBRUARY 2019 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bradley, Brooksbank, Faiers, Nash, Sadler & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 5 members of the public

2924.19 TO RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION ON NOTED TRAFFIC & FOOTPATH ISSUES Chris Kinder attended the latest public NDP meeting and brought to my attention the opportunity to register ancient footpaths if we have any that were not listed in 1949. Cllr Sadler volunteered to help me look into this.

2937.19 REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND REPRESENTATIVES (including NDP update) Terry Damer (NDP) At the December meeting confidentiality of the parish-wide questionnaire was discussed. Comments had now been collated and gone through and were almost ready to hand over to the parish council. Statistics from the quantitative elements of the survey had also been assess and were on the NDP website. The second tranche of the locality grant for £2930 had been received and would been to be spent by 31st March this year. The services of a planning consultant had been engaged and they had started working on a draft NDP plan and strategic environmental outline. He would also be meeting with the working groups to assess where they are and focus on any specific areas that still need working on from the 25th February. Unfortunately one of the group leaders had resigned, but their spot had been filled at the 28th January meeting and they had even managed to recruit extra bodies into their group! There had been a meeting with the Cornwall Land trust to see if their work could provide any links into our NDP when it comes to affordable housing projects. Next steering group meeting now 18th March.

CALC Conference & Community Governance Review – Cllr Bradley reported that the review will take effect as of 2021 and a timetable for this was given at the conference. How boundary changes would relate to the CNPs & NDPs was also discussed. It was made clear that NDPs currently being processed (those that have already gone through designated area applications) need to continue but could be reassessed as the boundary reviews continue if they have an impact – it could just mean that overlapping or additional inclusions would need additional resident questionnaires/ involvements. It was also warned that we should not be rushing to sort out boundary reviews – this process is community lead and we will be involved if necessary.

288 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 21ST MARCH 2019 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Bradley, Faiers, Marsden, Nash, Prasad, Sadler & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & members of the public

Item 2953.19 – correspondence Feb to Mar 19 2 23.2.19 SW Marine spatial plan policies Sue Scott, HMVRC To NDP team

Item 2955.19 – payments: Mar 2019 Chequ PAYE Expense VAT Total e No (inc VAT) 2764 Mawnan Bowling Club NDP Grant - venue hire £50.00

2765 T Damer NDP Grant - toners £9.48 £56.90

Item 2956.19 –Cllr Whibley’s report on Climate Change Conference 9th March I attended this conference at Tremough Campus in Penryn along with Terry Damer, Chair of our NDP steering committee, his wife Michelle and Georgina Morris of the NDP Environment and History working group. The conference had been envisioned by the declaration of a Climate Emergency by Cornwall Council on 22nd January of this year, and in recognition that we are already suffering climate change impacts in Cornwall. Our NDP steering group, having had a presence at this conference, recommends that we seek to embed policies that take the results of our NDP questionnaire and move them forward into our draft NDP report in light of the Council’s declaration. Leaflets were available to help delegates understand how to move forward into action. Cornwall Council will offer every support we need.

2960.19 COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC NDP Chair – locality funding could now roll over the end of the financial year/ did not have to be returned if more was to be requested.

289

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 18TH APRIL 2019 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Brooksbank, Bradley, Faiers, Marsden, Nash, Prasad, Toland &Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 11 members of the public 2967.19 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS ON THE AGENDA A resident representing the NDP Steering Group made a statement about Planning Application PA19/02775 in which he stated that in the 2 years since the groups instigation they have widely consulted that parish on matters relevant to the scope of and NDP – through specific events hosted by them to spots at Farmers Markets, the Fun Run and door-step deliveries to the use of social media campaigning. He felt that the outcome of the questionnaire to the building of more housing in the parish (47.7% of residents said no to any more housing other than 7 infill/rounding properties, 30.9% would accept up to 5 homes, 15.7% between 6 & 10) of 93.5% against developments of more than 10 homes should hold weight with the parish council and that this development would not meet the wishes of the parishioners. Policies working on this data have been drafted as part of the NDP to reflect parishioner’s views in which it is hoped to reference specific expressions on scale, location, affordability and residency to be included in our NDP.

2973.19 TO CONSIDER PLANNING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED FROM CORNWALL COUNCIL BY THE DATE OF THE MEETING (please check the parish website for any extra items arriving within the 7 days prior to the meeting date) Ref. No: PA19/02775 Land North Of Mannshone Penwarne Road Mawnan Smith There was significant discussion on this item, with an initial opening from Cllr Marsden (as chair of planning) on the development and its history with us. There were concerns raised about the indicative plans, the access & sight lines of the road and the NDPs comments.

It was proposed by Cllr Marsden, seconded by Cllr Faiers & RESOLVED that Mawnan Parish Council support this application - but do so only with a 5:4 decision. This application represents the first significant proposal since we began our NDP development process, in which the parish has stated it's disapproval of any development over 10 houses. Whilst we understand that this application is only for outline permissions, the indicative plan showing 11 homes has caused consternation - especially with the vote of support by the parish council. It would be hoped that further discussions with the applicant would take place prior to the reserved matters application to tailor it more to the wishes noted in our parish NDP consultations.

2980.19 REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND REPRESENTATIVES (may include reports Dennis McQuillan read out a report from the NDP Steering team: The February meeting was cancelled prior to a consultant meeting, which has allowed face-to-face time with the steering focus groups to confirm what still needs to be done to build the document. The housing policy is well established and is a key element of the document. However, work remains in the Business and Amenities, Environment, Historical and Carbon policy work areas. In addition, the consultant advised that a Design Statement (or Settlement Character Assessment) was required – the statement being a document outlining they type of properties in our area (split into 6 broad groupings) their constructions & landscape setting as it relates to the parish as a whole. The Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) in draft format is out for consultation in the parish (copies with the clerk & at the Cornish Maid). This document supports the policies being drafted as it provides planners/ end users with information on our local environment. Thanks to the band of 6 volunteers who, with a little training, undertook 290 this project. The June meeting will see a public invitation to view the draft NDP document as a whole before it gets submitted to Cornwall Council for an initial ‘go over’ to check viability. Meetings have taken place over the period with many outside agencies including the local MP, George Eustice and Cornwall Community Land Trust as well as members attending conferences on climate change, which will be fed back into the parish policies.

2983.19 COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Penwarne Road development – the comments made by the PC seemed to dismiss the NDP Steering Group as a not valid organisation. They have collected information that expresses local requirements – why was this not listened to? Why did we accept a development for 11 dwellings when it went so against parish wishes – we have broken the wishes of the parishioners? How do we know what affordable really means in terms of local wages? A member of the NDP Team said that we as a parish council were undermining the process as this was the first application of a significant size to come forward since its inception. He asked why the parish felt that they could support this application and how we would justify our actions to the parishioners. Cllr Marsden then said that he, and the parish council, fully supports the NDP and the work being done for it. In no way did he wish to trivialise of minimalize it in any of his comments and asked that the NDP members present accept his apologies if he had been seen to do so. Cllr Bradley also commented that at the site visit over 18 months ago the advice from pre-app discussions was that county would be likely to accept an application as an exception site for development if the parish council were in support. Discussions with the application had been undertaken with the parish council and it was hoped that these would continue if the application were successful to ensure the best development possible for everyone.

291 MINUTES OF THE PARISH AGM/MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 16TH MAY 2019 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (chair), Brooksbank, Bradley, Faiers, Marsden, Nash, Prasad, Sadler & Toland

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 7 members of the public

3013.19 COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC There was an issue brought up with regards to the planning decision made at the April meeting (PA19/02775) by a neighbour who questioned the fact that they were never notified of the development; that the green planning signage on the property was in a dangerous position so difficult to view; that they felt that parish council’s definition of what they viewed as ‘infill’ was wrong and finally that the parish councillors who voted to support this development should explain themselves. Cllr Bastin explained that the issuing of individual notifications had been stopped by Cornwall Council’ planning department as of 1st April as part of a cost cutting exercise, but was being fought. The siting of the green notice was at the discretion of the officer installing it. Another resident stated that things had changed since 2015 – the Local Plan had been adopted and tightened the framework for planning. All planning decisions are subjective and the close call on this application is something the parish council should be commended for as it highlights their active participation as individuals and as a whole as shown in the close vote and minutes.

A member of the NDP team then said that although we could add our comments on the planning portal, but the final decision was left up to planning, our feelings having little weight.

292 MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 16TH MAY IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Moyle (Chairman), Bradley, Brooksbank, Faiers, Marsden, Nash, Prasad, Sadler & Toland

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk and members of the public

2986.19 TO RECEIVE REPORTS FROM REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COMMUNITY The following reports were read out on the evening. Additional reports received after the parish meeting have been included within the appendix. Mawnan’s Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) is at the stage where all the past consultation with parishioners over the past year and a half is being assessed and used as the basis for the preparation of a draft version of an outline Plan which will be submitted to Cornwall Council to establish if it is required to be supported by Strategic Environment Assessment. This will determine whether our proposals will require a further, and more detailed, screening of any issues related to the natural environment. At this point it is not a formal consultation version of the Plan, but a legislative process we are required to go through.

We expect to have this draft ready by mid-June, for submission to Cornwall Council by the end of June. It is not anticipated that we will be required to undergo further screening, but we will have to wait for about six weeks for this to be determined. In the meantime we will be using that time to share the content of this draft Plan with the parish council and with the wider population within the parish, as a consultation phase to ensure that there is agreement with any proposals contained within the draft Plan, and to accept any further comments or suggestions.

The summer months will be a time when, taking all the feedback into account, we work on preparing the draft of what is called the Pre-Submission version of the Plan, with a statement of the objectives, intentions and policies contained therein. At this point the Parish Council will be formally consulted on the contents of the Plan. We expect this phase to take place in the autumn and may produce some issues that we wish to take account of within the Plan.

Following the Pre-Submission stage, and with approval from the Parish Council, this will be the Plan we submit to Cornwall Council for their formal assessment, and they (Cornwall Council) will arrange for their own consultation process (whilst this is a little repetitive, this is what the legislation requires to be undertaken).

The finalised Plan is then sent for independent review by an inspector jointly agreed between Cornwall Council and the Parish Council and NDP team. The time this takes is unpredictable as it depends on factors outside our control, but our hope is that it will be concluded successfully (maybe taking account and time to address any minor issues raised) by early in the new year, then allowing for a referendum of the resident population to take place hopefully in spring 2020.

293 MINUTES OF THE PARISH AGM/MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, Thursday, 20th June 2019 at 7.30pm, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Faiers (chair), Brooksbank, Bradley, Marsden, Moyle, Nash, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 7 members of the public

3034.19 TO RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM THE NDP TEAM ON THE DRAFT DOCUMENT AND TO DISCUSS THE PARISH COUNCIL’S REVIEW PRIOR TO SUBMISSION The lead of the NDP Steering group reported that the draft NDP document has been produced and it was now time to work more closely with the whole parish council to finalise, despite the involvement off several parish councillors already. He said that he had already met with Cllr Faiers to discuss, then had a subsequent meeting including Cllr Marsden, the clerk and the NDP Administrator to ‘walk through’ the initial document. To date they have had 3 meetings with the NDP /Localism Team at County who seem to feel that the content is very good, if rather long. The NDP meeting on the 18th had 20 members of the public and was the first showing to the community of the draft NDP. Comments were now being collected in and will be factored into future iterations. It was hoped that a joint Parish & NDP meeting would take place next to discuss comments from the councillors and how to incorporate them, before this document was sent to County for formal content assessment. The next stage over the summer would be the formal consultation process – this would include and exhibition for the community where they could view the final documents, but this could not take place until after the meeting with the parish council.

Cllr Bradley asked that many thanks be given not only to the members of the NDP team here tonight and those working on the Steering Group but to all involved who had given up time and no small effort to get this plan to this stage.

Item 3031.19 – Correspondence May-Jun 2019 Rec’d Description From actions agenda

16 12.6.19 Questions on NDP progress S Furley – CC For reference 17

294 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, Thursday, 18th July 2019 at 7.30pm, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Faiers (chair), Bradley, Marsden, Moyle, Nash, Prasad, Sadler & Whibley ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 7 members of the public

Item 3031.19 – correspondence Jun to Jul 19 Rec’d Description From actions agenda

6 26.6.19 Meeting with NDP Steering NDP team Full council 17 + group 17 8.7.19 NDP questions & info T Damer/ S Furley pending 17 18 8.7.19 When to start applying the S Wilsher – illogan Clerk dealing 17 draft NDP 19 8.7.19 Dealing with our own planning CC customer Clerk dealing app services

3034.19 TO DISCUSS THE PARISH COUNCIL’S REVIEW OF THE DRAFT NDP PRIOR Cllr Faiers said that the meeting to discuss our initial comments on the draft NDP appeared to work and that the Steering Group had been sent copies of our notes/suggestions to review before our joint meeting next week (23rd). James Evans the planning consultant would be attendance, along with Sarah Furley from the Localism Team.

Cllr Marsden said that we were in no doubt about the NDP as a valid parish plan but the biggest problem we are now encountering is not having a planning background to base our comments on, to know if we are asking too much. Hopefully this would be resolved next week.

All councillors in attendance expressed their thanks for the work to date by not only the NDP Steering Team but everyone involved in creating, collecting and disseminating materials throughout the project.

3035.19 TO SUBMISSION MEETING WITH THE NDP STEERING TEAM (to include discussion on the date which the parish council will begin applying in its decisions) T Damer (Steering Group) explained that the draft document presented would go to County as a screening document only (for general environmental assessment only) as soon as possible then would have a formal submission including a formal public consultation period.

It was proposed by Cllr Faiers seconded by Cllr Nash & RESOLVED that Mawnan Parish Council supports in principle the draft NDP (draft SEA Version (June 2019) 1st draft of the Mawnan Parish NDP) as presented, pending discussion on points already noted next week

on a vote being taken the matter was approved unanimously

3036.19 REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND REPRESENTATIVES (may include reports from recent training/conferences). Will include report from Trusts meeting on 27.6.19) Cllr Sadler suggested getting Brewery or the Budock Vean Hotel to become corporate sponsors (the Budock Vean are already attendees at meetings); Cllr Marsden gave congratulations to Cllr Whibley for pushing all the groups/ companies locally she could towards the group. She said her work and that of other members of the NDP 295 Steering Group had been vital to being able to do this.

296 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 19TH SEPTEMBER 2019 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Faiers (chair), Bradley, Marsden, Moyle, Nash, Prasad, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 7 members of the public

3054.19 Ref. No: PA19/07973 Trestennor Budock Vean Lane Mawnan Smith TR11 5LQ It was proposed by Cllr Marsden seconded by Cllr Sadler & RESOLVED that Mawnan Parish Council support this application however we would rather see native species, not Sitka spruce, used to replace the sycamore since this is more in line with the developing parish NDP & County Climate Action Plan.

on a vote being taken the matter was approved unanimously

3064.19 REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND REPRESENTATIVES (may include reports from recent training/conferences). A representative from the NDP Steering Group read a report, outlining the great progress made since July on all aspects of the work. The draft (SEA) Policy document had gone to County for review and their comments had come back favourably, with very few requirements for extra works needed. This had also been passed onto the Environment Agency, Historic England and Natural England to make initial comments on. The draft NDP as it stands was due to start its round of public consultation with an exhibition at the Methodist Chapel over Friday 27th & Saturday 28th September – it was hoped for a large turnout given the publicity that has had over the last couple of weeks. There will then be a period of collation, where all of the appendix and additional information is drawn together prior to a hopeful submission of the final document to the parish Council in November. We were mentioned at a recent CNP meeting as having completed one of the fastest NDPs in the County – we were lucky that the AONB status of the larger part of the parish helped in this as it had significant impact on what we could propose. We are now being held up as an exemplar not only of speed but of how to communicate to parishes (and to record this communication).

Item 3058.19 – payments: Aug & Sept 2019 Cheque VAT No PAYE Expense Total (inc VAT) AUG 2808 Cornwall Wildlife Trust NDP Grant - ERCCIS works £45.50 £273.00 2810 Mawnan Bolwing Club NDP Grant - venue hire £100.00 2813 James Evans NDP consultant fees £2,100.00 2816 T Damer NDP - supplies £1.64 £9.86 2820 Groundworks NDP - grant reimbursement £228.51 sub total £421.76 £7,991.81

297 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 17TH OCTOBER 2019 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Faiers (chair), Bradley, Marsden, Moyle, Nash, Prasad, Sadler (late) & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 10 members of the public

This has mention of the NDP made in closed [confidential] session which cannot be recorded here.

298

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 21ST NOVEMBER 2019 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Marsden (chair), Bradley, Gladstone, Moyle (late), Nash, Prasad, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 6 members of the public 3084.19 REPORT FROM THE NDP STEERING COMMITTEE ON THE CURRENT POSITION Terry Damer reported back on the last meetings before Christmas. 60+ people attended the September exhibition with lots of comments (all but 1 positive) received and now amalgamated into the final plan. There is still lots to do to finalise the documents - 5 supporting and 1 main. Comments from the SEA draft have now been adopted and have changed the structure if not the format of the draft NDP policy document itself. The design statement is still being worked on and is 99% done (although there are some issues still to be discussed with the parish council). The non- designated heritage assets lists itself and how to advise homeowners of their inclusion on this list also need to be discussed. This listing given an additional layer of protection to buildings within the NDP area but cannot really be policed. Green space designations are still incomplete – these are areas that do not already have protections but are recognised as being of value to the community. The Consultation Statement is being worked on as well, which now appears to have to be a single electronic document and is taking much more work than originally thought. Hopefully all the documents should with the Parish Council by December 12th to allow them to be agreed to on the 19th, after which they can go to the 6 week public consultation phase early in the New Year. And congratulations to our Media content editor, Melissa on her new baby. This has meant that there has been a gap in newsletters etc. but hopefully there should be something new as a quick roundup before Christmas.

Cllrs Sadler & Marsden both asked that our wholehearted thanks be given to everyone that has been involved in the NDP process for all of the effort and hard work that they have put into the project

Item 3078.19 – accounts for payment Cheque VAT No PAYE Expense Total (inc VAT) 2838 Cornwall Council NDP - exhibition timeline boards £22.00 £132.00 2845 T Damer NDP - exhibition expenses £5.50 £247.80 TOTAL FOR PAYMENT £626.66 £7,140.45

299 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 19TH DECEMBER 2019 AT 7.30PM, IN MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Faiers (chair), Gladstone, Marsden, Nash, Prasad, Sadler & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & 6 members of the public

Before the meeting began Cllr Faiers asked that recognition be given to the recent and unexpected death of Jon Holt, a stalwart of the NDP steering team. Mr Holt was a solicitor by trade and became a tremendous source of advice and support to the NDP team Ð especially the housing group. Cllr Faiers had attended his funeral today, on behalf of the council, which was a true celebration of Jon’s life and an upbeat affair. Our thoughts and condolences go out to Jon’s wife Jilly and his daughters Jess and Sarah. A 1 minute silence was observed.

Item 3101.19 Ð payments: Dec 2019 Cheque VAT No Total PAYEE Expense (inc VAT) NDP Grant - £4.80 2851 Georgena Morris printing/refreshments £36.95 Mawnan Methodist 2852 Church NDP venue hire £80.00 TOTAL FOR PAYMENT £123.40 £4,643.82

300

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 20th February 2020 AT 7.30PM, IN

Present: Cllrs Faiers (Chair), Bradley, Nash, Sadler, Gladstone, Marsden, Moyle, Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk & a large number (40+) of members of the public

3149.20 REPORT FROM THE NDP STEERING COMMITTEE ON THE CURRENT POSITION Mr Damer reported that there has been a perceived period of quite from the NDP team since the September Public Consultation but this was actually being used to review and revise the documents presented ready for submission. 4 large submission documents (the Design Statement; LLCA, Non-designated Heritage Asset list & Green Space Designations) were hopefully coming out to the parish councillors next week for a discussion meeting in early March, prior to a formal request for approval at the March meeting. After this they would go to the statutory 6 week public consultation prior to formal submission to Cornwall Council. The Bowling Club had been booked for 23rd March for a regular Steering Group meeting which would include a presentation from the AONB Team on the Cornish Hedge Project. Mr Damer once again thanked everyone involved with the project and the community at large for their continued support in these final stages.

Item 31457.20 Ð payments Feb 2020 Chequ PAYE Expense VAT Total (inc e No VAT) OL- 13 James Evans NDP - planning consultant £1,050.00 TOTAL FOR PAYMENT £714.43 £8,054.72

301

VIRTUAL MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING INTENDED TO BE HELD ON HELD ON THURSDAY, 19TH MARCH 2020

Given that Mawnan Parish Council decided, due to the Coronavirus outbreak, not to undertake a physical meeting a virtual agenda was produced to cover those items deemed necessary for the ongoing and continued functioning of the Parish Council. Consideration of these items were undertaken via email and phone conversations between councillors and the parish clerk, with comments from involved parties passed around if received.

These “virtual minutes” are to cover the decisions made and will look to be entered into the public record at such time as they Parish Council can meet again to explain decision taken during the restriction period. Please read in conjunction with the extended notes included with the Virtual Agenda.

3162.20VM Approval of the list of payments for March 2020 (£5641.94 inc VAT)

Mar-20 Value VAT OL- 22 Bowling Club venue hire / NDP misc £55.00 OL- 24 T Damer NDP - various expenses £375.16 £5641.94 £94.59 Proposed: Cllr Marsden Seconded: Cllr Faiers Yes= 7 No = 0 7 councillors notified the clerk of their votes Ð 2 did not respond.

An extra request for this necessary payment was made after the meeting date:

OL-27 Groundworks UK NDP Grant - grant 3 return £1,693.43

30.3.20 Proposed: Cllr Nash Seconded: Cllr Bradley Yes= No = 0 councillors notified the clerk of their votes Ð did not respond.

302

VIRTUAL MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING INTENDED TO BE HELD ON HELD ON THURSDAY, 21st MAY 2020

Given that Mawnan Parish Council decided, due to the Coronavirus outbreak, not to undertake a physical meeting a virtual agenda was produced to cover those items deemed necessary for the ongoing and continued functioning of the Parish Council. Consideration of these items were undertaken via email and phone conversations between councillors and the parish clerk, with comments from involved parties passed around if received. * Where voting has taken place the proposer listed is the first to respond to the clerk, seconder the next.

These “virtual minutes” are to cover the decisions made and will look to be entered into the public record at such time as they Parish Council can meet again to explain decision taken during the restriction period. Please read in conjunction with the extended notes included with the Virtual Agenda. Usually in May we undertake the Annual Parish Meeting, with reports from parish groups on their activities. In lieu of this where I have received them I will do a separate set of “virtual Minutes” recording reports from community groups.

3177.20VM Reports from other groups / individuals Terry Damer asked that the following be included as a NDP report for this month. Because of social distancing rules currently in force, it is not yet possible to undertake the public consultation process we were hoping to instigate this summer. We are waiting for guidance from Cornwall Council as to when and in what way such consultations can take place, but we think it unlikely we will be able to undertake public consultation until the autumn at the earliest, but will inform the PC when we receive information on this.

The UK govt. has issued guidance that no referenda (including on NDPs) can take place until 6 May next year, which is some time later than the timing we were hoping for (which was before the end of this year).

The document presented to the PC has continued to be revised to either reflect comments received, or to improve the clarity and presentation of a lengthy and complex document.

303 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING INTENDED TO BE HELD ON HELD ON THURSDAY 18TH JUNE 2020 (now held online via ZOOM)

Present: Cllrs Faiers (Chair), Bradley, Gladstone, Marsden, Moyle, Nash, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk + 4 members of the public

The Chair started the meeting by making a short introduction and explained the format of the meeting, along with information on how the public will be able to participate and how to indicate you wish to make comments. All voting was to be done with a show of hands, unless clarification was requested by the clerk when each councillor would repeat aloud their votes.

3185.20 AN UPDATE ON THE PARISH NDP & CONSIDERATION PARISH COUNCIL AGREEMENT/ RECOMMENDATION Terry Damer explained the delay on the public consultation from the spring due to COVID-19 restrictions and how new Government advice would now allow this to take place in a modified, online form. There is still some minor works to be finished up, but the NDP should be available in July, with the consultation period expended to 8 weeks to allow the public a chance to get their comments in and be responded to online. He expressed his thanks to the Chairman and councillors for their ongoing support and participation in progressing this Neighbourhood Plan through.

Cllr Marsden asked if the joint meeting summary notes (questions) raised by the parish would be included in this stage of the public consultation. Mr Damer said they would form part of the Consultation Statement, which did not go to the general public but would form part of the Consultation Statement which goes to Cornwall Council for stakeholder review.

It was proposed by Cllr Sadler, seconded by Cllr Bradley and RESOLVED that Mawnan Parish Council support the Neighbourhood Development Plans (based on the documents seen to date) as a true statement and supports it’s progression to Public Consultation

on a vote being taken the matter was approved unanimously

Item 3187.20 Ð Payments Jun 2020

PAYMENTS LIST - JUNE 2020 Voucher Code Supplier VAT Total 47 Postages debit card 0.00 2.40 48 Land Registry Searches debit card 0.00 3.00 49 NDP - Grant Funding 1&1 Ionos 1.60 9.58 total 327.70 3,706.21

304

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING INTENDED TO BE HELD ON HELD ON THURSDAY 20TH AUGUST 2020 (now held online via ZOOM)

Present: Cllrs Marsden (Chair), Bradley, Gladstone, , Moyle (joined at 7.30), Nash (intermittent problems with internet connection), Sadler & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk +6 members of the public

3225.20 REPORTS FROM OTHER GROUPS / INDIVIDUALS Terry Damer (NDP Steering Group lead) reported back on the progress of the NDP. Monday would see printing of letter to every household in the parish (along with a few extra for local businesses etc.) outline the online Public Consultation which was to take place until 30th October on the draft of the parish’s plan. Pre COVID this would have been a 6 week public long physical session with the plans available for the public to see and talk through at a public venue. The NDP emailed newsletter and newsflash would also go out to the mailing list next week, as would a special email to the subscribers of the Mawnan Diary. 46 statutory bodies will also have to be contacted for their comments on our NDP. The following week 101 owners of non-designated heritage assets will be contacted explain what this means, as well as 37 Open/Green space designation owners who will received letters containing a copy of their designation description and what it means going into the future. This is one of the next big steps forward Ð comments received will be collated then (hopefully) our plan will go to for legal scrutiny in the Autumn, where it undergoes another round of consultation, and them we hope to go to independent inspection early next year, with the final referendum in the Summer of 2021. Once our public consultation has taken place our plan now has official legal weight, although it has been noticed that the draft plan has been mentioned already in planning decisions at differing levels, which is good to see. Mr Damer than gave thanks to everyone that had been involved in the process over the last 3 years at whatever level Ð there have been an awful lot of parishioners that have helped out both at a practical level, treading the parish making deliveries, undertaking surveys, manning publicity booths & displays and drafting, reading and writing policies and these should all be very impressed with the final documents that have been created from their hard work. Cllr Marsden also added his thanks to everyone for this undertaking, and especially Mr Damer for this unstinting dedication and hard work. It was in itself and amazing feat and a legacy to the wishes of those living in our parish for the future.

Cllr Whibley asked if there were any comments about the Climate DPD document that the council wished to make. She also asked if this could be advertised on the website & noticeboard for the public.

Item 3221.20 Ð payments for Aug & July bank rec. PAYMENTS LIST – August 2020 Voucher Code Supplier VAT Total NDP Consultation James Evans 700.00 TOTAL 215.97 3,519.64

305

306

MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING INTENDED TO BE HELD ON HELD ON THURSDAY 17th September 2020 (now held online via ZOOM)

Present: Cllrs Marsden (Chair), Bradley, Gladstone, Moyle, Nash, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk +0 members of the public

3242.20 REPORTS FROM OTHER GROUPS / INDIVIDUALS The clerk explained that the NDP had begun its public consultation with letters going out to all homes in the parish, along with businesses trading in the parish. Letters specific to the Open Spaces and Non Designated Heritage assets had also been sent out to about 170 individuals for comment. Cllr Bradley noted the summary he had produced for the last CNP meeting and that minutes were likely to follow shortly.

Item 3238.20 Ð payments for Sept & bank Rec Voucher Code Supplier VAT Total 130 NDP - Grant Funding 1&1 Ionos 5.19 31.12 140 NDP - Grant Funding Cornwall Council 114.41 686.47 TOTAL 620.50 8,097.80

307 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING INTENDED TO BE HELD ON HELD ON THURSDAY 15TH OCTOBER 2020 (now held online via ZOOM)

Present: Cllrs Faiers (Chair), Bradley, Gladstone, Marsden, Nash, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk +5 members of the public

3252.20 TO CONSIDER PLANNING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED AND RECEIVE A LIST OF PLANNING DECISIONS MADE TO DATE BY CORNWAL COUNCIL Ref. No: PA20/07796 St Johns Carlidnack Road Mawnan Smith TR11 5HD It was proposed by Cllr Marsden seconded by Cllr Sadler & RESOLVED that Mawnan Parish Council support this application, however as we have a NDP in the pubic consultation phase we would appreciate any efforts the developer could make towards mitigating environmental impact and making the build process as carbon neutral as possible.

on a vote being taken the matter was approved unanimously

3260.20 REPORTS FROM OTHER GROUPS / INDIVIDUALS • Mr Damer of the NDP Steering Group gave a quick summary of the current position; the NDP Draft public consultation was due to end on 30th October and to date 25-30 comment have been received back from the public ranging from a general ‘ok’ to more in depth questions, most of which have been responded to by the team. Of the 50 Statutory Consultees very few have yet to respond and DM will chase these up next week. There has been nothing back yet from Cornwall Council. Most of the issues noted are in relation to the Non-Designated Heritage Asset (NDHA) list that went out to specific homeowners Ð 10 people have responded with comments, others with additions or amendments with some saying that they would like their properties removed completely. As discussed with the clerk the full list will need consultation between the NDP team and the Parish Council as soon as is practicable Ð what criteria would we make for removal from the list, are we going to decide on a case by case basis, what might our legal position be if we don’t remove them and to formulate joint responses where necessary.

308 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING INTENDED TO BE HELD ON HELD ON THURSDAY 19th NOVEMBER 2020 (now held online via ZOOM)

Present: Cllrs Faiers (Chair), Bradley, Marsden, Moyle, Nash, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk + 5 members of the public

3270.20 TO CONSIDER PLANNING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED AND RECEIVE A LIST OF PLANNING DECISIONS MADE TO DATE BY CORNWAL COUNCIL Ref. No: PA20/08531 Land Adj To Westwood Grove Hill Mawnan Smith TR11 5ER It was proposed by Cllr Sadler seconded by Cllr Moyle & RESOLVED that Mawnan Parish Council support this application. We feel that this carefully considered approach to allowing the existing residents to remain in long-term accommodations within the parish should be supported We are, however, in the process of Public Consultation on the parish’s draft NDP document and ask that any development takes these policies proposals into account. Mawnan Parish is a climate conscious parish and would appreciate any efforts the developer could make towards mitigating environmental impact and making the build process as carbon neutral as possible.

on a vote being taken the matter was approved unanimously

3276.20 REPORTS FROM OTHER GROUPS / INDIVIDUALS (may include decision on a date for a NDP joint meeting to discuss the public consultation outcomes & responses) T Damer (NDP) reported back that all members should have been sent a large file listing all of the 53 comments received through the public consultation Ð all of which have been acknowledged - along with the NDP Teams’ initial responses. With some comments being quite complex they are collating a set of considered responses to these issues to bring before the PC for discussion to allow us to make informed next steps. Hopefully this should be with us by the end of the month for review, and possibly get tabled for a vote at the December meeting (remembering we need a group meeting beforehand). 5 full hardcopies of the document sets were printed out, the NDP team now retain 2, Cllr Whibley had 1 working from and the other 2 should be coming to the parish council when possible for use. All statutory consultees that have replied have been supportive or have sent constructive comments with the exception of Cornwall Council or their various officers who have made no reply as yet. There are however some complaints circulating about inclusion on the Non-designated Heritage Asset list or Local Green Spaces. This has probably been a miscommunication on what this listing meant Ð it has no formal protective or regulatory status, like English Heritage Listings, but is simply a record of noteworthy properties that add to the parish nature. It is simply there so the PC have a point of reference when making any planning decision that may affect them.

The Green Spaces list is a number of site that deserve extra

309 protections, some private establishments are objecting to their inclusion on this as it is feared it could have negative effects on their business activities.

Cllr Marsden complimented the clerk on the amount of work that she did for Remembrance Day and the online services, given that people could not gather in celebration for a public event. He thought that a lot more people had attended since it was online; Cllr Bradley adding that he had also circulated this with the members of Constantine Church & parish clerk, where he lived, so that they could also participate in a Remembrance Day event. This thanks was echoed by Cllr Faiers and the rest of the council members.

3279.20 MATTERS OF COMMUNITY CONCERN One of the NDP team was concerned that there seems to be a lot of mature tree felling taking place that was unnecessary or goes against the Climate Change considerations. The Parish Council made decisions based on replacement of native trees being included as conditions and worked with the Tree Officer’s recommendations, looking favourably on those areas with obvious progressive management plans in place. We were looking at TPO renewals.

310 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING INTENDED TO BE HELD ON HELD ON THURSDAY 17th DECEMBER 2020 (now held online via ZOOM)

Present: Cllrs Faiers (Chair), Bradley, Gladstone, Marsden, Moyle, Nash, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk + 7 members of the public

3297.20 REPORTS FROM OTHER GROUPS / INDIVIDUALS Mr Damer of the NDP Steering Group summarised recent actions: 3 files for consideration have been sent to the PC containing the recommendation for action following the recent public consultation. A joint meeting between the PC & Steering groups was to be arranged for early January to discuss how to respond/ follow up with the recommendations presented prior to ratification of the documents at the January meeting. This would then allow the final document to go to Cornwall Council at the end of February for formal consultation. It was agreed that the joint NDP/PC meeting take place on Monday 11th January at 7pm to anyone able to attend. The clerk would circulate a Zoom invitation.

Item 3293 Ð payments for Dec & Nov bank rec. Voucher Code Supplier VAT Total 209 NDP - Grant Funding 1&1 Ionos 2.00 11.99 TOTAL 828.57 14279.65

311 MINUTES OF THE PARISH MEETING INTENDED TO BE HELD ON HELD ON THURSDAY 21ST JANUARY 2021 (now held online via ZOOM)

Present: Cllrs Marsden (Chair), Bradley, Faiers, Nash, Sadler, Toland & Whibley

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, Clerk + members of the public

3314.21 REPORT FROM THE NDP STEERING GROUP FOLLOWING ON FROM 11TH JANUARY MEETING AND DISCUSSION ON RESPONSES/ NEXT STEPS TO BE MADE T Damer reported on the successful meeting between the NDP Steering Group and the Parish Council to discuss the responses to be made to the comments from the Public Consultations. The NDP website it to be updated with the new draft papers and that letters from the PC to those submitting comments would go out next week. It would then look like a submission of the final draft NDP would be going to Cornwall Council for the next phase of consultation early in February. He thanked all members of the NDP working groups and the parish for the support to the whole process that had been received and confirmed the next steps.

It was proposed by Cllr Sadler seconded by Cllr Faiers and RESOLVED that the recommendations noted at the 11th January 2021 meeting be ratified as those of the Parish Council for inclusion within the wider NDP Draft Policy

on a vote being taken this matter was approved unanimously

Cllr Sadler said that coming from a humble beginning of 12 people in the Memorial Hall to the current position was a tribute to the dedication and commitment of the NDP group and they should be congratulated; especially D McQuillan for keeping track of the administration.

312

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE OFFICE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE OF MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON MONDAY 9th JULY 2018 IN THE RENDLEHSHAM ROOMS, MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL

PRESENT: Cllrs Faiers (chair), Brooksbank, Marsden, Moyle, Nash & co-opted member Mr Prasad

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, clerk

230.18F NDP STATEMENT – delegation of powers etc. It was proposed by Cllr Brooksbank seconded by Cllr Faiers and RESOLVED that the NDP Statement delegating powers (in relation to the groups standing as an arms’ length committee of the parish council) be approved

on a vote being taken the matter was approved unanimously

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE OFFICE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE OF MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON WEDNESDAY 5th DECEMBER 2018 IN THE RENDLESHAM ROOM, MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL.

PRESENT: Cllrs Faiers (chair), Brooksbank, Marsden, Moyle, Nash & co-opted member Mr Prasad

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, clerk

251.18F TO DISCUSS CURRENT/ FUTURE RESERVES The current earmarked grants and the levels of general reserves were discussed. It was also raised that the NDP group had been asked about village parking and the purchasing of land behind the Memorial Hall (highly unlikely) as well as using our reserves as a platform for match funding applications.

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE OFFICE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE OF MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL HELD ON TUESDAY 22nd JANUARY 2019 IN THE RENDLESHAM ROOM, MAWNAN MEMORIAL HALL.

PRESENT: Cllrs Faiers (chair), Brooksbank, Marsden, Moyle, Nash & Prasad

ALSO PRESENT: Mrs L Clements, clerk

260.19F REVIEW OF CURRENT BUDGET POSITION 2018/19 (3rd quarter) AND DISCUSSION OF ANY AMENDMENTS FORESEEN Cllr Prasad asked for a revision of the budget to include the NDP grant funding, taking the current spend position to £46619.98.

313 Summary notes from parish meeting on the draft NDP 10.7.19

Present: Cllr Faiers, Marsden, Nash (l), Prasad & Toland, Whibley + clerk

Policy Amendment/ comment Question Policy 1 ! maps of “the settlements of Mawnan ! Smith” are missing. ! Definition of duration of “cumulative” (in living memory, ever, length of plan??)

Policy 2 • Can we say who/how local need is • Self build – how can we ensure defined? that this is not a mechanism to get • Specify single bed dwellings to fulfil local development land … where self need build get priced out once permission received and the landowner use the non-uptake to evidence a change to Market Sale?

Summary notes from Parish & NDP Steering Group meeting on the draft NDP 23.7.19

Present: Parish Council (PC): Cllrs Faiers, Marsden (L), Nash (l), Prasad, Toland & Whibley + clerk; NDP Steering Group: T Damer (chairing), D McQuillan, P Stokes, J Holt, R Martin, D Thompson & S Sheldrake Additionally: Esther Richmond & Sarah Furley (Localism Team); James Evans (NDP Planning Consultant)

Intro & Welcome- T Damer (TD) explained that this meeting had been called to get the two groups (parish council & NDP team) together to meet as individuals and discuss the first draft of the NDP policy proposals, as from this point on the parish council needs to be fully on-board with the Steering Groups’ thinking and processes to enable the quick and easy transition of the plan to referendum. Mind needed to be given that this will be submitted by the Parish Council as a Parish Council initiative, so everyone needs to be on the same page.

314 APPENDIX X TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

315 316 317 NDP second meeting 7th June2017

Present: Cllr Lloyd & Marsden (Leads for Mawnan Parish Council) 2 members of Mawnan PC and 23 members of the public.

Cllr Marsden introduced the meeting, explaining the format for the evening.

Initial returns of skills forms was limited (8), but had enabled a discussion on the potential lead(s) for the steering group.

The benefits of a NDP for Mawnan are becoming more obvious with each planning application or potential development site in the parish. Meudon Farm currently has a significant number of homes (1826) logged against the SHLAA (strategic housing land area assessment 2012) documents for building by 2030. An NDP could affect style, size and infrastructure needs on this site, so could be pivotal.

Q: how was this meeting advertised – some people only here through word of mouth. Clerk gave info on location of posters, to check the parish website & Mawnan diary, social media contact and apologised for any issues with the invite email possibly not getting through to everyone who volunteered. Cllr Marsden explained Mawnan Parish Council is committed to this process and as such will be supporting the NDP group. Initially the parish clerk will attend steering group meetings to take minutes; Cllrs Lloyd & Marsden will act as liaisons between the NDP group & Parish council; Cllr Sadler will be an advisor drawing on his local background and history both within Mawnan PC and as Leader of District Council. 2004 & 2012 version of the NDP drafts have now been located and will be used as source materials. A steering group of about 8 members , plus Cllrs Marsden, Lloyds, Sadler & the parish clerk was hoped to be formed to start the process. Once formed, they will then begin to sort out the structure for the working groups and progress the NDP. So far all steering groups seem to be similar in nature, but all slightly different. It is the job of the steering group to work out what is important to Mawnan Parish. Tonight’s meeting was looking to fill the first seats on the Steering group – Treasurer; Administrator & 2 co- chairs. All group positions are not fixed so anyone taking up a post could feel free to step down at any point along the process. Q: what level of commitment will be expected if it takes 2 years to complete the NDP? The level of individual commitment was flexible and should not be more than a couple of hours a week depending on project/ working group. Community involvement along the whole process needed to be clearly evidenced. Questions such as ‘what & why an NDP?’ prove that we are getting this information out into the community Q: how much clout would an NDP hold? The first document that developers in future would be referring to would be any existing NDP; then the Cornwall Local Plan, so it does hold significant weight. Falmouth has recently had a student development halted at planning since it goes against their draft NDP, whereas The Roseland seem to have a delegated decision allowed that went against both their NDP & parish council recommendation. A recent development at Mt Hawke has been influenced by their NDP and has influenced dwelling design, access, open space provision & pollution mitigation – all thanks to their NDP. For the Steering Group, 2 co-chairs names were put forward – one with a civil service background and one with a commercial lien. Mike Redfern has lived at Bareppa for a little over a year and had come from the Fire Service. Terry Damer worked for newspapers (here and in Asia) working on their PR & development issues before retiring to Mawnan 3 years ago. Peter Stokes was nominated to work as the Treasurer, with Cathy Tregear providing professional assistance. This should not be too onerous as initially there would be very little funds available. A grant of £7000 would be called upon once an areas designation was made, whilst the Parish Council would initially fund the day

318 to day running costs as part of it’s commitment to the plan. Dennis Mcquillan volunteered to be NDP administrator – he has a history in the military and would be working to make sure that everything runs smoothly. This would involve making sure everyone was aware of meetings and evidencing community interactions and keeping all of the groups on the same track. Whilst the clerk was starting this off it was hoped she would be able to step back and hand much of it over to Dennis as soon as possible. Jackie Whibly & Mick Hartley also both volunteered to join the steering committee – it seemed silly not to make use of the legal knowledge that was on offer! It was agreed to reissue the skills forms in the hope the few obvious skills gaps would be filled. Anyone who hadn’t completed a form was able to collect one on the night or they would be added to the parish website. You did not have to pick what area you would like to work on and were quite welcome to begin the journey to an NDP with us and leave at any time. Likewise, anyone who hadn’t been to a meeting yet would also be welcomed at any point. A meeting of the steering group as soon as possible was to be arranged to allow them to get to know each other and begin the process of considering what working groups needed to be formed. This would then be presented to the next full group meeting. They would also consider the range of policies that either exist already or would need to be created and try to people up some of the working groups based on the skills forms. This of course relies on an appropriate number of volunteers! Q: how would people outside the main village find out about the meetings? Posting something in the West Briton, or getting something read out on Radio Cornwall was an option but this relied on people having access to these two. Other than the notices in the board & the emails it was hoped the more people involved spoke up the more the word would get out. Cllr Marsden & the Co-chairs thanked everyone for their attendance tonight. The meeting finished at 8.20pm.

319 NDP meeting 17th July 2017

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Jon Holt, Richard Martin, Nigel Gilmore, Liz Lloyd, Dennis McQuillan, Jackie Whibley, Peter Stokes, Mick Hartley, Dan Cox

Apologies: Elaine Mountford, Georgena Morris, Graham Marsden

1.Introductions

2.Summary of progress Since the last meeting, Mike Redfern (a co-Chair) had resigned on personal grounds. In the absence of other volunteers, Terry Damer (the other original co-Chair) was content to act as Chair for the foreseeable future. Two other roles within the Steering Group had been filled – administrator, Dennis McQuillan, and treasure, Peter Stokes. Commitment continued from Parish Council with 2 councillors actively involved & Rex Sadler (Jackie Whibley on NDP as a community member only).

Funding would come from both the parish council and eventually grant funding from local government.

It was noted that this was not the first attempt at an NDP in Mawnan – originally started in 2005/6 but due to lack of full communication through parish council & community this was withdrawn. Full copies of the plan are available in hardcopy from the clerk along with other documents from this process. It seemed that the original NDP stalled because of the Goldmartin Field development; this took the focus off the plan and more onto stopping a single development. Feedback to the parish council became sporadic and unfocussed.

The Chair reminded everyone that it was essential that communication between the NDP group, parish council & community was at the forefront of every stage of this process

3.Designated area – Approval & forward to Parish Council It was agreed that the designation area should cover the whole of Mawnan Parish, even though it was a diverse and large area compared to some. Budock had already begun their own plan, with Constantine as yet undecided. Specific boundary areas, such as Maenporth, should be addressed with joint communications with adjoining parishes.

All land owned by County Farms (part of Cornwall Council) had been added to the SHLAA even if there was no intention of future development to ensure that the 5% buildable land for the Local Plan was secure. NDP looks at infrastructure, density of development etc. and helps to focus on what kind of developments we would like to take place.

A4 & A3 copies of the parish/ designated area plan were to be obtained (and laminated).

Questions were raised about the limited number of responses to the community-wide postal survey and how this might affect future questionnaires/ send outs. Jackie Whibley said that in her previous home a group of members took the questionnaires out and hand delivered, allowing time to be able to help people complete them – this might be a viable option here.

Terry Damer – the designation letter needed to be ready to present to the parish Council for their next meeting on Thursday, and would then have to allow for a 6 week consultation period once received by Cornwall Council.

4.Formation of Steering Group and approval of key posts It was agreed that everyone in attendance be on the Steering Group, with the exception of Nigel Gilmore who wished to help in a more focussed manner, given his experience as a planning officer/consultant. Once again concerns were noted about the possible perception of the number of “new” residents that were forming the steering group. It was felt that this could be at the detriment to the historical knowledge of the NDP,

320 but balance could be achieved by the inclusion of Rex Sadler as an advisor.

Feock was on draft 33 of their NDP, and had employed both a consultant to write the plan and a data analyst to develop & instigate community questionnaires; their plan should be looked at by Mawnan as it did reference back to specific Local Plan policies. On a cautionary note - the usefulness of the St Ives 2nd homes inclusion was under discussion as it did not really affect the current proportion of 2nd homes – only future ones.

5.Steering Group Terms of Reference Draft copies of the generic Cornwall Council terms of reference had been handed out. Everyone was asked to read them and send any comments or questions to Dennis for review.

Should we put a length on the plan process, rather than the vague 2-3 years? It was felt that trying to address the timespan was a bit redundant at present as we had only a rough idea what working groups, policies or direction the plan was likely to take.

It was however agreed that the Steering Group membership should remain at roughly 12 members and that there would be a rough plan for monthly meetings with the public. There would need to be another steering group meeting sometime in mid-August to review info up to date.

6.Develop working groups and appoint leaders A rough list of common policy areas from various local plans was handed out to start the discussion on Mawnan groups. It was suggested that steering group members try to begin the process of recruiting local (to themselves) community members to help with handing out information / questionnaires and being the face to face contact for relaying NDP information.

Items to add to the questionnaire from each of the working group would need to be collated to make sure there was no overlap and to get everything into one document, making it easier to get delivered. An adult & younger person questionnaire was discussed. The clerk offered to scan & distribute the previous questionnaires to see if they were still useful.

Postcode map of parish to be sourced & distributed. 7.Communications & public strategy/ area representation After much discussion it was clear that the Steering Group’s first priority now was communication with the people of the Parish. A Communications working group would be formed immediately (Dan Cox, Jackie Whibley, Anna Druce & Terry Damer)which would also look into the setting up of Twitter & Facebook accounts and consider drafting in younger parishioners to see if they would run the social media presence for the NDP process.

A public prioritisation event was discussed –it was agreed that the first NDP presence at a public event should be the Fun Run on September 24th to give us a fixed date to work to.

To engage the local community in the whole NDP process – we needed to try to get something out to every local event over the summer... even if it was a generic banner just saying the NDP process at Mawnan had started and give contact details.

We need to remember to talk to the local landowners to see how they feel about the plan and its implications on them.

8.Date of next meeting Next public meeting 11th September, but a steering group meeting was needed in mid-August allowing everyone to take a look at random NDPs online to get an idea of how other areas were undertaking the process and what might be useful to add to ours.

It was agreed to try to book the Rendlesham room for the 14th August.

321 9. Any other business

Dennis quoted from an e-bulletin issued by Cornwall CC that parishes would be informed by late July of the number of houses that the Local Plan expects each parish to build in the next 10-15 years and what had already been approved/built. The Steering Group would need to determine the housing need.

Planning surgery @ Cornwall Council – keep an eye out for future events but book space on the 12th September sessions at Truro. List of questions by everyone on what makes an effective NDP, what questions an NDP needed to cover etc. were requested. Jon Holt & Nigel Gilmore possible attendees.

Meeting finished at 8.50pm

Approved by T Damer

26 July 2017

322 Mawnan NDP Steering Group meeting 14th August 2017

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Jon Holt, Richard Martin, Liz Lloyd, Dennis McQuillan, Jackie Whibley, Peter Stokes, Mick Hartley, Nigel Gilmore, Elaine Mountford & Rex Sadler, Lisa Clements (Parish Clerk)

Apologies:

1 Minutes of last meeting Designation Letter reply received from Cornwall Council very quickly. Consultation now open. A4 laminated maps distributed to all members by Dennis. 6 x A3 maps produced for Working Group reference materials. 3 x A1 maps requested from Cornwall County.

2 Finance Peter Stokes – lots of finance work to do before being able to submit a grant application, including a rough starting budget & project plan. Some questions on the paperwork are optional, and it looks like a total of 4 applications per ring-fenced grant of £6000 are possible so it is looking like 2 applications this year and maybe one next. In agreement with the parish clerk, petty cash requests will be processed through the normal parish finances and would need to follow their guidelines. A decision on who will be required to sign off on NDP spending would need to be agreed ( either of Terry, Dennis & Peter for up to £100 – and two of them for greater amounts), with claims collected at the regular monthly NDP meeting (usually a week or so before the parish council meeting) and passed on to Lisa. Mick Hartley asked if this is the only funding stream for NDPs? The Parish Council could be asked to raise the precept, or at one point the National Lottery were funding some grants towards NDPs. Jon Holt asked if there was any info on what other NDP areas had been spending or had provided project budgets that we could look at. Peter Stokes thought that much of the first budget would have to be based on educated guesswork, with a large proportion of money being allocated to publicity and probable consultant fees.

3 Communication & Publicity Jackie Whibley- There was a separate Communications Committee meeting, at which unfortunately Dan Cox felt he had to resign. Anna Druce will be providing what assistance she can with our online presence without compromising her ‘day job’ working for the localism team. Fortunately she is linked to the PTA at the primary school and will be working to bring the new Headteacher into the fold when she arrives. Costs for a dedicated NDP website were discussed, ranging from £1000+ to £300 for a mirror of the Parish Council site. Using a specific NDP logo was also discussed. Jackie Whibley had been going to talk to Kevin Bate about approaching Jamie Siebert (of 20/20 Design in Falmouth) to see if he could do something / donate expertise, but it was decided that others on the steering group who already know Jamie should speak to him direct.

323 • Events It was agreed to go all out to target the Fun Run at the end of September with flyers, maps & info sheets. The A1 maps would be available with pins/post-its to add comments on areas for building, areas to protect, heritage sites etc. We needed to collect from the community an idea of what they love most about Mawnan to use as baseline data. Terry agreed to contact Libby about borrowing a gazebo if possible. Dennis has a fall back large tent option.

It was agreed that a clearer idea on the first questionnaire for this event was needed but that people should also be encouraged to comment on what they thought had been missed to engage them more.

Jackie handed out the list of Mawnan addresses by postcode and everyone was asked if they could show what areas they would be available to cover in a door to door maildrop. The Fun Run already cover part of the village affected in early September so if we want to join their delivery arrangements we need to get the flyer info asap. Anna to provide draft information on “Why a NDP” for the flyer. Clerk to contact as many community groups as possible by email asking them to get the word round about the NDP meeting as soon possible.

Community Network Meeting to be held at the Bowling Club on 5th September – Mark James agreed to arrive at 6.30pm prepared to answer generic NDP questions from the whole CNA. Dennis & Jackie agreed to act as collation point for us and attend this session.

1st Public NDP Meeting scheduled for 11th September @ the Bowling Club. As much advertising as possible was to go into this – inclusion in the Mawnan Diary was left to the clerk – posters on the noticeboard, doctors, café, shop, pub etc. to be arranged. This will be included in the flyer with the Fun Run, Anna’s “Why a NDP”, and a map of the parish.

Need to remember to target businesses, landowners, local groups, schools, those on housing register, stakeholders groups & tourists (resident /business/ tourist to have separate coloured post-its)

4 Working Groups Ideally these should each be chaired by a member of the Steering Committee – now is the time where extra bodies need to be roused. Terry agreed to write a short email to go to everyone who originally offered to help out saying “now was the time” and to “bring a friend”. Initial thoughts on the working groups were: Housing; quality and design; traffic & transport; business & employment; Leisure & tourism; the environment; amenities. It was agreed Dennis would try to provide a ‘bubble map’ of these to go up at the meeting on the 11th still leaving space for other options to be added if needed.

• Area representations (see above)

324 • Local Landscape Character Assessment (LLCA) This should be considered as a precursor to everything else in the plan. The more detailed this is at a local level the better it will inform the NDP. Dennis had pulled out the 2007 area data as a starting point and had agreed to chair the working party on this initially. It would need lots of ‘feet on the ground’ to complete properly.

Rex Sadler asked if we thought we would need a professional to overview/develop our LLCA information as well as the strategic review later on. Nigel Gilmore was to sound out contacts to see if he could get any help, but agreed a professional eye would not go amiss. It could be something brought up at the public meeting – we don’t know what kind of skills the parish actually holds. We needed to go out looking for those with expertise – this could include asking help from the University or offering credit/ guaranteed publicity to local businesses.

5 Date of next meeting (open to public) Meeting 11th September at 7pm at the Bowling Club. Flyers, posters, maps etc. should be available. Please tell everyone you know about it – be repetitive & boring! Next Public meeting pencilled in for 13th November – steering group meeting may be more regular.

6 Any Other Business Jon - Are the working groups going to be allocated before the fun run? Are we going to put up headings for people to add comments to rather than just blank sheets?

Historic info & perspective – see Sylvia King/ Historic Society as they have a wealth of resources to hand.

Meeting finished at 9.00pm

T Damer Chair Mawnan NDP Steering Group

23 August 2017

325 326 Jackie Whibley & Terry Darner attended a session additional to the recent Community Network Meeting dedicated to NDPs and warned everyone not to take the spend figures from Penryn to heart as they are a town and had employed consultants to analyse and create their document. We will be unlikely to be spending anywhere near as much!

• Communications and Publicity Jackie Whibley explained the difficulties the group were facing on the communications front and asked for anyone with some free time and experience in this field (from designing questionnaires & webdesign/facebook, to door knocking) to make themselves known by filling in the contact forms provided.

As shown by attendance numbers the word about the NOP is getting out to the community and more people are looking to be involved, but we still need more bodies on the ground to aid in explaining what an NOP is about. Dan Cox & Anna Druce had helped greatly in sorting ideas for a web presence (Facebook) as well as putting us in touch with Clare Philpott @ Cornwall Council's design team. The NOP group now have their own website (www.maw_!1an._ QI9.) being built along with a new email: [email protected] and are looking for a volunteer with experience to manage the site by adding content regularly.

The next public event will be at the Fun Run on September 24 th where we will have a stand full of information to continue the process of canvassing for ideas of what is important to add to the questionnaire building. This in itself is a big project and our community survey is unlikely to hit doormats until the summer of 2018.

Terry Darner then added that we now need to focus on engagement and face-to­ face discussions with groups outside of residents - such as tourist; businesses; commuters & young people. He did point out that only residents of the parish listed on the electoral roll will be eligible for a vote at the NOP referendum.

Graham Marsden reiterated that the only real threat to this project is a failure to engage with the whole community. The community needs to understand fully what and why we are undertaking an NOP - he also asked if everyone at this meeting could please try to take this information away and spread it around.

• Future Events Fun Run on 24th September + something to be up (however small) at every village event from now on wherever possible. Next public meeting scheduled for 15th November (TBC).

• Potential Study Areas A Venn Diagram of potential Study Areas was pinned up, collated from a number of other NDPs since they all seem to refer to a broadly similar base. This would be the starting point for the 8 main groups - more to be added if needed. Forms expressing interest in assisting in specific Study Groups were available for people to sign up on and would be on the website shortly.

Mawnan NDP Group, The Parish Office, MS Electrical, The Square, Mawnan Smith, Cornwall TR11 SEP www.mawnan.org email: [email protected]

327 2 of2 11/10/201710:36 328 329 Mawnan NDP Steering Group Progress Meeting at 7 pm on 11th October 2017 at 5 Chapel Town Close, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Richard Martin, Jackie Whibley, Peter Stokes, Georgena Morris, Carrie Gilmore & Rex Sadler.

Apologies: Jon Holt, Graham Marsden and Mick Hartley.

1. Introductions and Changes

Terry Damer (TD) welcomed those present. Liz Lloyd had resigned from Mawnan Parish Council and, by default, was no longer a member of the Steering Group (SG). TD had written to Liz to thank her for her contribution and support. Elaine Mountford had stood down from the SG due to pressure of work. Nigel Gilmore had previously voiced his disquiet at membership of the SG based on possible conflict of interest as a property development consultant. However, his wife, Carrie, who had relevant experience in heading business organisations was willing to become involved. TD welcomed her addition to the SG. He noted that there was a shortage of one or 2 places on the SG and asked members to consider whether they knew of anyone who could be approached. Although David Morgan had produced a Draft Business Database for use by the NDP, he had no desire to be on the SG. He would offer assistance in the business arena.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting (See Mawnan Parish Council website – NDP)

Minutes of all previous meeting minutes are on the parish council website. The minutes of the Public Meeting held on 11 September 2017 had been circulated to the SG. There were no changes required and, so, were accepted and signed off by the Chair as a true record.

3. Matters Arising

• Open Meeting

TD stated that the last meeting, while a success in engaging the public, had been more a presentation on NDP activity to date and had not moved forward the SG agenda. While accepting that all NDP meetings should be “open”, progress meetings were necessary to drive the plan. The next 2 meetings were scheduled to take place in the Memorial Hall and would be “open”.

330 • Finance

The current application for an NDP Grant had stalled due to the need for a Project Plan. Moreover, the budget set originally needed to be re-examined as any funds obtained now would have to be spent by 31 March 2018. The Sec had a template for the Project Plan and would provide the Treasurer with the Mawnan version forthwith. The latter confirmed that Mawnan Council funding would meet the SG’s small financial demands in the near term.

• Communications and Publicity

The public meeting on 11 September and the Fun Run presence had been considered a success in terms of public engagement. Fifteen offers of assistance had been received of which one, Carol Hurst, had expressed specific interest in helping the Tourism & Leisure Working Group. Jackie Whibley (JW) would contact Carol to determine her potential level of support. The remainder had offered support as area ambassadors for their immediate locality. The Sec would acknowledge their input and would update the database for leaflet distribution/contact. Any revision was to be agreed by the SG before wider circulation.

Ten replies to questionnaires distributed at both events had been received. While this was disappointing in relation to the numbers attending the events, they indicated broad consensus in each of the query areas. TD had circulated an initial analysis which would be considered when the Sec completed a full inspection. The results would be circulated to the SG. A copy of the questionnaire is attached at Annex a to these minutes. (Could you attach please Terry)

An immediate request had been made for an NDP presence at the Farmers’ Market in Mawnan Smith on Saturday 14 October from 9 a.m. until 12 noon. Rex Sadler and Georgina Morris would erect and staff the display easel with questionnaires and leaflets. TD would supply necessary materials etc.

Actions:

1. Sec to produce Project Plan as soon as possible and no later than 21 Oct 17. 2. Chair and Tres to review Budget to end March 2018. 3. Sec to acknowledge support returns and to update distributor/contact database by 31 Oct 17. 4. Sec to analyse and report questionnaire returns by 31 Oct 17.

331 4. Formation of Working Groups

The amount of information now flowing into the Chair made it essential that Working Groups (WG) be formed so that information and queries relating to each work area could be directed to these knowledge groups. After much discussion the following leadership was agreed:

Housing – Jon Holt (Nigel Gilmore would assist on planning issues) Business and Employment - Carrie Gilmore. The Sec would provide the Business database. Carrie would consult with David Morgan on how best he could assist and the form of approach to businesses. Traffic and Transport – Peter Stokes Leisure and Tourism – Jackie Whibley would discuss possible leadership of this group with Carol Hurst. Amenities – Jackie Whibley Environment and History – Georgena Morris, who would contact Sylvia King who had offered to help with the history aspect Landscape Character Assessment – Dennis McQuillan Quality and Design – Remained to be filled

Sarah Furley, a senior planning officer with the Cornwall Council Localism Team, had sent a study area table which links to the main national and local policy framework and sets out very briefly what an NDP could add to this. It also provides sources and guidance. The Sec would send a copy to each WG leader to help them get started.

Each WG should attempt to develop the questions that they would wish to put to people within their area of influence (i.e. what do we need answers about). These questions could be amalgamated later to develop the main public questionnaire.

The role of Anna Druce was discussed. Although Anna lived outside the parish, her role as Chair of the primary school’s PTA and her knowledge of the NDP process made her an asset to the group. She would continue her promising work with the primary school to obtain a young person’s view of Mawnan. She is in contact with the County NDP Support team to obtain play orientated leaflets and questionnaires.

Action: Sec to circulate Study Table to SG.

5. Production of Project Plan

This had been discussed under item 3 – Finance.

6. Production of Pre- Questionnaire

The purpose of the pre-questionnaire was to ensure that the NDP catered for all the possible topic areas that the residents would wish to see investigated and that could affect future development. Examples of pre-questionnaires from other NDP groups were

332 circulated and discussed. Some were too detailed and could be considered to be asking leading questions. We had managed to trawl good information from our public events via a wider type of query. TD would consider further the questions to be asked and would liaise with the County design team on an eye-catching questionnaire to go to all residences and businesses. Distribution would be determined at the next meeting.

7. Any Other Business

• Communication. There were numerous opportunities to hold dialogue with the many community groups within the area. For example, at the Tuesday Luncheon Club where displays could be posted and representation provided to answer questions; a speaking slot with the WI or the History group might be possible. The SG should consider how this could be done and whether a presentation on the NDP should be initiated. Georgena Morris (GM) was asked to re-establish links with a young lady who was willing to develop our Facebook presence.

• Traffic & Transport. It was agreed after discussion that traffic issues were an NDP issue rather than a matter for the Parish Council. They had a strong influence on future development. The need for a traffic survey was raised; whether this be conducted as an official County Council audit at a cost, or whether a self-help approach should be adopted requires further investigation.

• Next Meeting. The Chair asked that the next meeting, scheduled for 15th November, be used to sustain momentum. It was essential that Working Group leadership be established and that the meeting be used to bring new people to the NDP process. As personal contact was the best means of recruitment, SG members were asked to consider friends and neighbours who may be able to assist. They should keep SG colleagues informed about any potential new helpers. An appeal to the population in pre- meeting literature was considered but it was felt that this could have a negative impact on attendance. Rather, an enticement of tea and biscuits before the meeting to promote contact and discussion with SG members was agreed. Carrie Gilmore would run the kitchen; the Sec would confirm its availability with the hall manager. In addition, WG leaders should provide a short presentation (5 mins) on their study area and suggest what help would be required. In this way we could promote the idea that involvement could be done in “bite-size” chunks and thus attract support. To avoid duplication of ideas, WG leaders were requested to circulate their presentation to other SG members by 10 November.

Actions:

a. GM to contact Facebook entry designer. b. Sec to confirm Memorial Hall kitchen available. c. TD to place an entry advertising the next meeting in the November issue of the Mawnan Diary, and would ask the parish clerk to put a notice in the Parish noticeboard and on the website.

333 8. Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting would be an open event held on Wednesday 15th November in the Memorial Hall, Sampys Hill. Tea would be served at 7 p.m. and the meeting commence at 7.15.

Further open SG meetings would be held on 13th December 2017, 17th January, 21st February, and 14th March 2018. The Sec was to confirm availability of venues for the 2018 events.

Meeting ended at 9.25 pm

T Damer

Chair

Mawnan NDP Steering Group

Annex: A. Scan of Initial Questionnaire

334 335 Minutes of a Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 15 November 2017 in the Memorial Hall

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Jackie Whibley, Peter Stokes, Georgena Morris, Carrie Gilmore, Graham Marsden, Mick Hartley, Rex Sadler. Plus 15 members of the Community.

Apologies: Jon Holt, Richard Martin. Plus 6 members of the community who had been emailed using our 110 contacts list.

After offering tea, coffee and biscuits to members of the public from 7.00 p.m. the meeting opened at 7.15 p.m.

1. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the Public Meeting held on 11 September 2017 and the progress meeting held on 11 October 2017 had been circulated to the Steering Group (SG), posted on the website, and emailed to the NDP contacts who had supplied us with their details. There were no changes required to the 11 October minutes and, so, were accepted and signed off by the Chair as a true record.

2. Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

3. Working Group Statements

The Chair explained how the NDP would focus initially on eight topics which had been identified in earlier consultation with the community. Each topic would be investigated by a Working Group (WG) consisting of a small team of 3 – 6 volunteers led by a member of the SG. The main purpose of this meeting was for the leaders of the WGs to outline the first stages of their deliberations. Statements were made in person as follows:

a. Dennis McQuillan – Local Landscape Character Assessment (LLCA) b. Carrie Gilmore – Business and Employment c. Peter Stokes – Traffic and Transport d. Georgena Morris – Environment and History e. Jackie Whibley – Leisure and Tourism

A statement by Jon Holt (Housing) was read out by the Chair. The above statements are attached as Annexes A to F to these minutes.

336 The Chair commented that 2 WGs had no members. Amenities would study the provision and need for such things as schools, medical facilities, community locations, shops and post office. Quality & Design would determine the type, appearance and landscape setting of any developments that might be required within the Plan. Ideally, leaders of these groups should be members of the SG and he invited those present to consider joining the group.

Richard Martin had confirmed that he would be our liaison with other local NDP groups and would oversee the compliance of our Plan with central and local government policies.

The Chair also confirmed that he would continue to lead on Social Media with the assistance of Anna Druce and Melissa Warren. Future consultation with parish residents would be undertaken via Farmers’ Market presence and work that Anna Druce as Chair of the primary school PTA would be doing with the children.

As a result of the above statements, 4 members of the public came forward to offer their support as area representatives and as members of Working Groups:

Ruth Walker – LLCA

Niall Murphy – Housing or Leisure & Tourism

Simon Sheldrake – Selected 4 groups but notably, Quality& Design

Jilly Frank – Leisure & Tourism

4. Open Forum

a. David Morgan expressed concern at a low 10% return on questionnaires from the SG’s September activities. A full leaflet that explained the NDP, asked broad questions about life in the area to determine whether any policy areas needed attention, and sought assistance, had been delivered by hand to all 936 addresses in the parish. While the Chair shared disappointment with the outcome, the figure was the norm for most Council response activities and would be accepted as a reasonable return on any consultation. The Chair also confirmed that, when the Plan eventually went to Referendum, only a majority of those in favour regardless of turnout would see the Plan passed into Cornwall Council (CC) policy.

Efforts to engage the community would continue via presence at Farmers Markets and possibly at the Christmas Lights switch-on. The SG would also consider methods that would see a better return on the forthcoming Pre-Questionnaire and for the Main Questionnaire due out next Autumn.

b. Rod Allday sought clarification about the number of houses required to be built in the Parish. The Chair explained that because the Parish lay within the Cornwall AONB, the CC Local Plan Target for Mawnan (April 2017-April 2030) was zero. However, the Social Housing register would need to be considered, and further requirements could

337 arise because of the NDP’s Housing Needs Survey. An example of required development could be affordable homes to cater for our aging population. Therefore, the target was not an absolute figure and the NDP would have to cater for some house building at a scale and design that would satisfy the community and the planning authorities.

5. Any Other Business

a. Carrie Gilmore commented on the status of voluntary organisations and charities and their impact on the parish. They were, in essence, businesses that provided employment and paid rents. Their continued presence and growth should be welcomed and considered.

b. Jilly Frank was concerned that the Mawnan NDP when accepted by CC in 2020 would only have a 10-year life span. The Chair explained that the Plan could be reviewed and updated as and when the CC Local Plan moved forward. It should be a relatively easy task provided that the current Plan was well considered and met with good community approval. Large portions of the Plan would stand for a considerable period.

6. Date of Next Meeting: To be advised via email – Action Sec

The meeting closed at 8.15 p.m.

T Damer

Chair

Mawnan NDP

338 Annex A to

Minutes 15 Nov 17

MAWNAN NEIGHBOURHOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN

LOCAL LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT

• Landscape is about the relationship between people and place, and is the setting for our lives. The Cornish landscape is unique, stunning and diverse which provides Economic, Social and Environmental value.

• We must understand what makes up the character of the landscape and the value placed on it to enable us to positively plan for future change and the pressures associated with new development. It is a fundamental assessment which will inform policies and plans determined by all the Working Group areas.

• Cornwall Council have developed a methodology for community volunteers to use to assess the landscape character of their NDP area. This has been successfully piloted with the Roseland NDP.

• The methodology uses a series of simple steps to create a landscape evidence base which can be used to inform the policies within our NDP. The approach allows community volunteers to get out and about with pre prepared fieldwork assessment sheets, upon which they can record the elements and features which make up the local character. To broaden the community engagement, younger volunteers not yet able to vote can also get involved.

• A settlement’s edge assessment has also been developed to look at the landscape character around the edge of a settlement, the area often where there is most development pressure. This process is of great benefit to understanding the sensitivity and capacity of a settlement’s edge in our NDP, as well as providing the initial foundation stage for site selection and allocation where this proves necessary.

• Both these assessments will require a team of volunteers, ideally 4 minimum, to act as researchers and observers. It should be interesting work based on our local environment and made easier by guidance sheets. Training will be given:

o An initial 2 hour workshop on an LLCA and use of the fieldwork assessment sheet. Hope to arrange for January 2018. o A one day workshop to provide Settlement Edge Assessment training

339 • Timeframe

o Training complete by end March 2018 o Assessments thru’ April and May 2018 o Draft LLCA by end June 2018

To summarise the many documents and links that I have and can share with anyone willing to help us:

The Landscape Character Assessment will:

• be a record of the character of the area prepared by the local community • create a detailed bespoke evidence base describing the character and value of the local landscape, its historic, ecological, and cultural qualities • describe the character of settlements and how they have developed over time • identify features and landscape issues of key importance to the local community • highlight designated and protected landscape, natural and built features • provide detail of the historic expansion of settlements to inform future decisions, regarding massing scale and density • inform Neighbourhood Plan policies as an integral evidence base • objectively inform opinions on the environmental implications of development proposals • provide an evidence base to assess the impact of development and inform future land management decisions.

If you can help, please come and speak to me afterwards

Dennis McQuillan 15 Nov 2017

340 Annex B to

Minutes 15 Nov 17

Good Evening. My name is Carrie Gilmore and I have taken on the role of leading the Business and Employment Study-group

• To date we have identified over 70 businesses in the Mawnan parish. We know that we haven’t got a full definitive list yet and getting this accurate is an early priority o Some are small businesses employing one or two people, others are much larger businesses with many more employees, but all bring economic prosperity to the parish and create employment. o We have a wide diversity of professions and sectors, including small and local, or with an international reputation. o Those of us who have lived here for some years will remember we used to have a butcher, hardware shop, bank and petrol station, and more farms – we still have many more shops than other villages our size, and a garage that lots of us rely on, so in our NDP we want to ensure we can retain what we have, and provide more opportunities for current and future businesses. o We’ve got hotels, pubs and restaurants, café’s, shops, gardeners, very large gardens, electricians, artists, plumbers, farmers, a garage, a blacksmith, B&B’s, Fish Cookery school, professional cake bakers, book keepers, boat builder, garden designer, computer repairs, therapists, builders, cleaners, mini-diggers, photographers, self catering holiday accommodation…..and many more • Our challenge within the Business and Employment SG is to make sure we work with these diverse businesses and self employed to ensure our NDP: o Considers how current conditions could be improved to enhance business sustainability and development o Looks ahead, to try to incorporate anything that might be in the business community’s short-term or future plans, to ensure that the NDP reflects this and provides opportunity for business to flourish • Cornwall Local Plan (2016) identified that o 97% of businesses were small/micro level with less than 10 employees in 2015 o 23% of population are self employed – versus 14% nationally • We don’t know yet whether here in Mawnan we’re representative of Cornwall, but do know that for our NDP we need to find out how many business/services, self employed we really have in Mawnan. o So we will be creative about ways in which we gather information + get people involved-because this will only be a good as the input it gets! In this Study group I know we already need ✓ busy business people/professionals, who are likely to have limited time to commit to this initiative ✓ people who can research how many of these small businesses we have, and their contact details ▪ so if someone is interested in doing some Google research, in the comfort of their own home, and adding to the database we’ve started, I’d really like to hear from you. If we can have help to build a comprehensive list of businesses/services it would be a great start.

341 This SGroup will need to be pretty flexible around contributors availability, and will probably rely more on ‘virtual’ meeting using technology rather than larger face to face meetings. Already had a couple of responses from business leaders who aren’t saying ‘No’ to getting involved, but don’t want to overcommit…so next time I should hopefully have a more accurate idea of the number of businesses and a group, which may be working ‘virtually’, who will be taking this forward

342 Annex C to

Minutes 15 Nov 17

Traffic and Transport

Getting into and out of and around the Parish

We have found through our feedback from the Fun run and Farmers Markets and comments already made that traffic issues are often raised.

This subject has some elements that will need consideration within other groups,

Thinking specifically about Future Housing needs, Leisure and tourism, Business and employment, and the other existing issues that can create traffic problems:

Like

Commuting

The School pick up/drop off

Parking or lack of

The need for Traffic management and Signage

From this, the question of Public Transport arises and local bus services

The neighbourhood plan has to give consideration to the transport plan for Cornwall over the next 20 years, - as detailed in the document “Connecting Cornwall 2030”. This identifies less car use and more sustainable travel options.

This brings into discussion

Cars and car ownership

Cycling

And Footpaths

343 Some questions have already been raised through our liaison officer at the Council with The Strategic Transport Officer.

The Parish Council is already well aware of traffic issues and at a recent Parish Council meeting it was decided to investigate the possibility of getting official support to conduct a traffic & speed survey.

Again, will require some volunteers and some training, so if you may be able to help please let me know later.

Roads:

Maenporth road

Carlidnack road

Penwarne road

Mawnan Smith

Helford Passage

Port Navas

344 Annex D to

Minutes 15 Nov17

Environment and History

Introduction:

My name is Georgena Morris and I have volunteered to co-ordinate the Working Group which will consider the topics of Environment and History within our Parish, and how we want these areas to be protected.

The working party will need to research existing information concerning what we have in the Parish, it’s local, national and international importance.

Activities:

As well as accessing achieves; doing local fieldwork to investigate local geography, geology, flora, fauna, buildings and sites of historical significance will be part of our research.

Our community has many well-informed residents and societies. For example, there are the Mawman History and the Helford Marine Conservation Group.

One of our roles will be to talk to both individuals and societies to find out what research based knowledge is available. This will provide insights into understanding the cultural and heritage background that creates the character of the Parish and its People.

We will need to think about:

Geology/Geography

Plants

Wildlife

People

Buildings and other structures

We will start from a basis of many questions:

How do we protect and enhance what we have for residents and visitors?

345 What is important to us?

What protections are already in place? (For example - we live in an area of outstanding natural beauty).

How can we guide future development to do the least harm?

Should new and existing buildings design in features to enhance local bio-diversity?

What is special about Mawnan Parish?

What do you know about it’s history, its flora and fauna?

Background:

Some answers seem obvious – we have a fabulous coastline, a beautiful river valley, an iron age hill fort, churches, historic houses, ancient footpaths, internationally important valley gardens and so much more…...

The World War Two embarkations and the story of Fine and Brave Lane are well known locally. There are also stories which are less often told:

Did you know that the young King Hussein of Jordan came to Meudon on holiday and played with local children?

Did you know that the round the World yachtsman Sir Francis Chichester also holidayed at Meudon?

He stayed in the old Tower Folly which has since been demolished. A local plan may have identified and protected it so that it could still be seen today.

Message:

I do hope that some of you are inspired to join this small working party to help to explore our heritage and our environment in order to afford it the protection it deserves.

I think it will be interesting and rewarding to be a small part of a Neighbourhood Development Plan which will reflect the wishes of our community.

Help me to uncover the stories that are less often told and to the heritage that needs our protection.

Volunteers will be very welcome.

346 Annex E to

Minutes 15 Nov 17

MAWNAN NEIGHBOURHOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Leisure and Tourism Working Group

• Good evening! I’m Jackie Whibley and I am leading the Leisure and Tourism Working Group. (I am also a Parish Councillor.) Let me talk about what we hope to accomplish through this Working Group.

• The parish of Mawnan is situated in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and bounded on three sides by the sea and the Helford. It is a wonderful parish to live in, with lots going on, and it attracts a considerable amount of tourism, on which many jobs depend.

• The task of this Working Group is to focus on two streams of enquiry for the development of the NDP:

• The first is Leisure, both for those who live in the parish and also those who visit it for leisure. • A useful definition here is “The time or opportunity for relaxation or hobbies”. • We’ll be starting by researching and quantifying the many and diverse leisure activities which currently take place within our parish, however large or small, wherever they take place, and with whatever frequency they take place. • And we’ll set out to establish what our public see as important and want to protect going forward, and what is needed to enable those activities to thrive and grow in Mawnan. • And we’ll find out if the people consider there is anything missing, that they would like to see being included within the Parish in future, and what is needed to support that. It’s important that we endeavour to meet the needs of as many of our people as possible, going forward.

• The second stream is Tourism. • A useful definition here is “Tourist travel, especially when regarded as an industry.” And a tourist is “A person who travels for pleasure, usually sightseeing and staying in hotels”. • We have many tourist attractions here in the parish of Mawnan, and we’ll start by researching and quantifying each of these. • We’ll try to identify their impact on the parish, and what they each need in order to thrive and grow in future.

I’d like to thank two ladies who have already stepped forward to join this Working Group: Carol Hurst and Ginny Smeed. Thank you both very much indeed, and I look forward to working with you.

And we still need further volunteers, so if this subject appeals to you and you would like to support us, please speak to me afterwards.

Thank you very much. Jackie Whibley 15th November 2017

347 Annex F to

Minutes 15 Nov 17

Mawnan NDP Housing Working Group

Statement for the meeting on 15 November 2017

Introduction

At the Fun Run and recent Farmer’s Market, the subject of housing generated the greatest number of comments and by far the widest divergence of opinions. These comments and opinions reflect the diversity of residents in the parish; their age, whether they are working or not, whether they have children, and the fact that the whole parish is in an Area Of Outstanding Beauty. The job of the Housing Working Group (HWG) will be to take into account all opinions, and deliver a bespoke housing policy for Mawnan, which aligns with the Cornwall Local Plan (which is effective for the next 12 years until 2030) and is supported by other appropriate evidence.

Beginning with the end in mind

When the HWG has finished its work, it will have prepared a report which will be an important part of the Evidence Based Summary that supports the submission for Mawnan’s NDP as a whole.

In order to be credible the report will need to have addressed and provided evidence for its conclusions in each of the following areas: -

• Number of households

• Type of tenure (owned or rented)

• Type of accommodation

• House prices

• Affordability

• Housing needs and supply

• Type of dwellings required

• Parishioner comments on all the above

348 Data gathering

The first part of the task is data gathering. Some of the information we need is readily available from public databases, other information is far harder to come by and may well involve walking the parish “clip board in hand”. It is only when the hard data is available that the Group can analyse and interpret.

Help!

What I am looking for therefore is anyone who is passionate about the way housing will be dealt with in the next 12 years and is prepared to join the HWG, I am keen to involve a range of age groups and representation from the next generation in very important.

I appreciate that many people have full time jobs and very busy lives and therefore the amount of time they can commit is limited but please don’t let that stop you - I would rather have a small amount of your time than none!

It is clear that the HWG has a big job to do which will need to be delivered in a structured and logical way; my intention is that at the same time working on the HWG will be informative, stimulating and fun!

Jon Holt

15 November 2017

349 Minutes of a Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 13 December 2017 in the Memorial Hall, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Jackie Whibley, Richard Martin, Peter Stokes, Carrie Gilmore, Graham Marsden, Mick Hartley,

Apologies: Jon Holt, Georgena Morris, Rex Sadler

Also Present: Rodney Greenhalgh – Prospective SG member for Quality & Design Melissa Warren - Social Media Dave Thomson - Representing Georgena Morris

The meeting opened at 7.05 p.m.

1. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the Public Meeting held on 15 November2017 had been circulated to the Steering Group (SG), posted on the website, and emailed to the NDP contacts who had supplied us with their details. There were no changes required; they were accepted and signed off by the Chair as a true record.

2. Matters Arising

a. Finance. Although finance had not been a topic at the last meeting, Peter Stokes had submitted our plan and budget requirements to the funding provider (Locality). The bid covered the period 1 Jan to 31 Mar 18 and was for £5,000 to provide for LLCA training, and the design, production and distribution of the Pre – Questionnaire. It was noted that the purchase of capital equipment was not permitted (an A3 Printer). Alternative, possibly commercial, arrangements for multiple and large-scale printing would be needed. The Group were assured that no specific sum for NDP use had been made by the Parish Council. However, the average cost of conducting an NDP for parishes of similar size was £13,000. Locality could provide £9,000. To fund the gap, Mawnan Parish Council would include a precept for NDP work in their 2018/19 budget. Councillor Graham Marsden assured the meeting that the NDP would not fail through lack of funds.

b. Identity Badges. Recent public face to face events had reinforced the need to display clearly who the NDP members were and what they represented.

Action - Jackie Whibley agreed to progress the matter.

c. Working Gp Member. Simon Sheldrake had expressed interest in joining any of 4 working groups. It was agreed that his background best suited the Business Group. Action - The Sec was to inform Simon accordingly.

350 3. Working Group Progress

a. Landscape Character. Contact had been made with Kath Statham, the County landscape architect responsible for LLCA. After discussion with her it was agreed that an LLCA was a fundamental to under pinning the NDP. She felt that the current group membership of 3 was too small to undertake the observation work which should ideally be conducted in warmer weather i.e. Spring 2018. She provided options for training periods and the Sec would discuss these within his WG. He would also seek additional personnel (+3). The training would still be conducted within the current budget period.

b. Business. Work had been undertaken to cross reference the database of businesses held by Carrie Gilmore with that provided earlier by David Morgan. She was in the process of developing a questionnaire to be sent to businesses to determine their plans for future opportunities. The need for photography to support many aspects of the NDP was discussed; a photo competition would be considered.

c. Transport. Peter Stokes was in discussion with County officials to determine the need for a traffic survey and the methodology to be adapted.

d. Environment and History. Dave Thomson reported that the group consisted of himself, Georgena Morris, Sylvia King, and Ellie and Derek Stacey. They had met on 4 Dec to determine objectives and to implement research (Feock in particular). They had contacted Cornwall Wildlife Trust who could provide a habitat/species map at a cost of £95 inclusive of VAT. The cost was in the current budget proposal. The group were asked to cross check the Cornwall County interactive map to see if the information they required was available. Jackie Whibley reported that a presentation on tree preservation and other aspects had been given at the recent Community Network Meeting. She also agreed to be the NDP’s point of contact with the National Trust at Glendurgan. The group asked about the depth of their study. This was difficult to determine but should be sufficient to support development policies which would become clear following the pre-questionnaire.

Action. Sec to forward Tree Presentation to Georgena.

e. Leisure and Tourism. The WG had held one meeting in Dec 17 and had scheduled their next meeting for 15 Jan 18. There were 4 members and they were working on databases to describe separately leisure (relaxation, sports, hobbies) undertaken by the local populace, and tourism (visitor) activities. The spreadsheets would be sent to the Sec. There was a clear need to cross refer to the business WG.

f. Housing. There was no input on this occasion as Jon Holt would be attending an NDP Planning Surgery on 15 Dec at which housing would be the primary topic. Rodney Greenhalgh would report back to Jon.

g. Amenities. The Chair commented that this WG did not yet have a leader.

351 4. Media Update

a. A draft copy of an NDP Newsletter composed by Melissa Warren and the Chair had been circulated to the Steering Gp and had drawn favourable comment. It would be updated to include the UK Government’s declaration in the Autumn Budget Statement that 300,000 new houses would be built in 2018 and the impact of NDPs on that scale of development. Other items could include a Photographic Competition and inserts/updates from WG Leaders. Dates for public meetings and interaction would also be provided.

b. Distribution of the Newsletter would be via the NDP website, Facebook, the NDP Contact List which the Sec would send to Melissa for use with MailChimp, and hardcopy via local retailers. The Chair would obtain costing for the latter from the Parish Clerk. It was intended to publish Edition One prior to Christmas. The Sec urged caution about acquiring email details of non-NDP groups and over exposure of current contacts to emails from the NDP group. It was confirmed that an “unsubscribe” facility would be provided with the Newsletter.

Action: Sec to send NDP Contact List to MW (Secs Note: this has been done)

c. Melissa offered the free use of her own website for various ideas designed to attract public involvement. For example, a map to which could be pinned current photos of a favourite place.

5. Pre-Questionnaire Design and Distribution

Copies of other NDP Group’s Pre-Questionnaires were circulated for debate. They varied from over complex to too simple and, in particular, asked leading questions or questions that would be difficult to analyse. To ensure that the NDP studied policies that the local population wanted us to cover, our questionnaire would have to be unique. To that end the Chair asked that WG Leaders let him have their top 3-5 most important issues as soon as possible. It was intended that the questionnaire would be distributed by March 2018.

6. Data Protection 2018

The Parish Clerk had alerted the Sec to the new Data protection regulations that apply from 2018. The regulations and “Steps to be Taken” are complex and require further study. Fundamentally, the Sec will retain and control the Contacts List which will only be distributed on an NDP need to know basis. All printed material will require a disclaimer about 3rd party data use and data collected i.e. questionnaires need to state why the data is needed and the length of time it will be held. We need to determine the action to be taken should a data breach occur. The SG terms of reference already has a paragraph devoted to data protection and this needs to be

352 updated. In the meantime, the Parish Clerk has suggested that we formally minute that we will work to current council policies on data protection, Safeguarding, Health & Safety, and Freedom of Information. The Sec would come forward with a policy and plan at the next meeting.

7. Any Other Business

There was no other business to report.

8. Date of Next Meeting

The next NDP Steering Group Progress Meeting is scheduled for Monday, 22nd January 2018 in the Bowling Club at 7.00 p.m.

T Damer

Chair

Mawnan NDP Steering Group

4 January 2018

353 Minutes of a Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 22 January 2018 in the Bowling Club, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Jackie Whibley, Richard Martin, Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Carrie Gilmore, Jon Holt, Georgena Morris, Rodney Greenhalgh

Apologies: Graham Marsden, Mick Hartley, Rex Sadler (received later), Melissa Mercer (Social Media)

Also Present: Cllr Peter Bradley

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m.

1. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the Progress Meeting held on 13 December 2017 had been circulated to the Steering Group (SG), and posted on the Parish and NDP websites. There were no changes required; they were accepted and signed off by the Chair as a true record.

2. Matters Arising

a. Finance. The Treasurer reported that Locality, the funding body, had placed a deadline for submission of funding claims at 25 January 2018 to ensure expenditure by 31 March. Although a quote for LCA training was available, a quote from CC Support Services could not be finalised for the Pre-Questionnaire as the questions to be asked had still to be agreed. It was agreed that we should seek funding for the LCA training (£385) which was scheduled for early March. The terms of the follow-on funding from April 2018 are not yet known. Provision may be required for a Housing Needs Survey at £970 for a postal one – considered essential to ensure complete coverage of the Parish. An email or web-based survey would not be complete. Item 4 of the agenda – Funding was subsumed by the above.

(Sec’s note: After this meeting, Locality had reminded us that the minimum grant application should be for £1,000. Therefore, a new funding application would be made in late March to cover costs from 1 April 2018 onwards.)

Richard Martin agreed to liaise with other NDP groups to determine whether they had similar funding issues.

Action – Treasurer to draw up a new funding bid for mid-March 2018.

b. Identity Badges. Jackie Whibley had sought a professional approach to name tags. However, scale and cost mitigated against this. Self-help would be adopted.

Action - Jackie Whibley agreed to continue to progress the matter.

c. Working Gp Member. Simon Sheldrake had joined the Business Group.

354 All other actions had been completed.

3. Pre-Questionnaire Design and Distribution

The Chair had asked SG members to formulate 3-5 questions that might be put to the residents in the pre-questionnaire (PQ). He had put together his own thoughts on what should be covered in the PQ and these are at Annex A. In a discussion period other comments were collected and these are replicated at Annex B.

4. Working Group Progress

a. Landscape Character. As reported above training would ideally take place in March with a view to submit a draft by June 2018. A request for additional field assessors had been forwarded to Melissa for the February Newsletter.

b. Business. Carrie welcomed the addition of Simon Sheldrake to her WG. Work continued to refine the business database. Of note there was potential duplication of effort with the Leisure & Tourism WG. However, this had been identified and co- operation between the relevant groups could resolve the action to follow.

d. Environment and History. Georgina had held a meeting with her group to determine questions for the pre-questionnaire. These drafts would be forwarded to the Chair for consideration.

e. Leisure and Tourism. The WG had held a further meeting on 15 Jan 18. Regrettably, Jilly Frank had stood down. The groups databases had been almost finalised. The Sec held the most recent copy. There was a clear need to cross refer to the business WG. The overlap with Carrie's sector is Trebah, FBI, and Red Lion, in terms of her initial communication. We see the hotels as being more Carrie's sector when it comes to any matter of contacting them. We need to agree as an NPD team how we collate our enquiries, preceding the March survey to the public. A potential contact list is at Annex C. Initial conclusions for the Leisure and Tourism group would seem to be that Mawnan is blessed with a very wide range of leisure activities and tourist attractions that suit a wide demographic spread, and abilities. These make the parish a desirable and wonderful place to live and to visit. If the NDP can help these to thrive and remain accessible to as many as possible in the future then we will be serving the parish well. The group do not see it as their role to point out any potential gaps or omissions in what the parish offers: these would be evident from the results of our continued engagement with the community and the survey results.

f. Housing. Jon Holt provide a very comprehensive briefing on housing matters that could influence the NDP process. His speaking notes are at Annex D to these minutes. To determine whether a Housing Needs Survey was necessary he asked that the question “Do you consider that you have a housing need for dependents in the period up to 2030?” be put to residents in the pre-questionnaire. He stressed the need for everyone in the Steering Group to have access to the Cornwall Local Plan. The Chair asked the Treasurer to purchase 10 copies. It was also reported that Penryn NDP had held a public meeting on housing at which they had shown land which had been designated as SHLAA and had considered the impact of development in those areas.

355 Only 3 members of the public attended; it is hoped that we could achieve better at our next public meeting. Jon commented that Traveller sites were an aspect of the Local Plan and that Constantine had recent experience of uncontrolled activity in this sphere. A question on the topic should be framed for inclusion in our questionnaire. Finally, he confirmed that a Settlement Boundary survey would not be required.

g. Design. Rodney Greenhalgh had been working closely with JH to familiarise himself with the role.

h. Amenities. The Chair commented that this WG did not yet have a leader. We may need to absorb consideration of amenities into our other WG activity. This may become clearer after the results of the pre-questionnaire were known.

5. Media Update

In her absence Melissa had asked for her notes to be brought before the meeting. They were not discussed but are reproduced here for information.

• Seek content for next newsletter. • If we want to introduce the working groups, their leaders and what they do etc it would be nice to have a photo for each group- whether it be the person leading it (I think this may be best) or something relevant to the group. • I still haven’t put a sign up box on the website- for the newsletter or for our social pages so I still need to look into that. • The sign up (to emails) form for Anna to email to the school is the same as it was in my email prior to Xmas: http://eepurl.com/deWZAX so that can be actioned. • I will update the database as per the lists Dennis sent.

• When you have your survey questions let me have a copy and I’ll get the online survey set up. • If you have any polling questions you would like me to put out on the FB page then I can do that. • I will also add an email sign up to the FB page.

6. Data Protection 2018

The new data protection regulations are termed the GDPR as promulgated by the EU. These are still under review by the UK Government who will, in time, pass a Bill to bring them into law. We should await further direction by the Parish Council who will have to draw up their own protocols. In the meantime, the Sec will act as a sub data controller, develop a log of personal data held, how it was obtained and why we hold it, and whether we have passed data to a third party and for what use. As long as we are careful with the acquisition and transfer of personal data under current guidelines we should not have a problem.

356 7. Any Other Business

a. Liaison. Richard Martin asked whether the scope of his liaison with other NDP groups should be on a local or county-wide basis. It was agreed that local liaison would suffice.

b. Next Meeting. The Chair expressed his hope that we could attract a large number of residents to the next meeting by providing, in addition to working group progress reports, interesting presentations. The Sec advised that he had confirmed with the CC Landscape Architect a 15 minute presentation on the LCA and its place within the NDP. Jon Holt confirmed that he could provide a presentation on Housing. The Chair hoped for the widest possible publicity. It was agreed that “road boards” should be deployed.

8. Date of Next Meeting

The next NDP Steering Group Meeting is scheduled for Monday, 19th February 2018 in the Bowling Club at 7.00 p.m.

T Damer

Chair

Mawnan NDP Steering Group

25 January 2018

357 Annex A to

NDP Minutes 22 Jan 18

THOUGHTS FOR INITIAL SCOPING SURVEY

Pre-launch of questionnaire:

1. Allow at least 4 weeks notice of its launch 2. Promote through parish and NDP website, notice boards, Farmers’ Market, newsletter, leaflets handed out at village events, emailing by other village interest groups 3. We need to consider whether questions are answered by one respondent, or make provision for answers by more than one person.

Post results

1. As the NDP concerns the community the results of the survey should be made available as soon as possible on the website and in the newsletter 2. Announce winner of prize draw (assuming permission is given) 3. Make the results the subject of an open meeting

Introduction

Re-introducing the NDP, and explaining the purpose of the following questionnaire. This should make clear:

Structure of NDP – independent of, but conducted on behalf of, the Parish Council

Objectives of the NDP, e.g.

-To ensure that the parish of Mawnan retains its character and attractiveness as a place to live, and for visitors to enjoy

-To engage the whole community in decisions that affect the future of the parish

-To ensure that the housing needs of the resident population are met through the provision of affordable homes for the younger generation, and suitable retirement homes for the elderly

- Suggested slogan similar to:

If you love your parish, you love the people in it and want to provide homes for them to live in at every stage of their lives

Why the information is being collected and what we will be doing with it

Who will have access to it for the purposes of analysis

358 Who should complete the questionnaire

Who to contact with any queries or concerns

What to do with the questionnaire when it is completed

Date to return it by

Incentive draw for completed questionnaires (e.g. dinner for two with a bottle of house wine at Casa Juan)

Explain why a high response rate is essential

Reference to data protection – to be detailed at end of questionnaire

Thank them for taking part

Suggested question subjects:

In your own words tell us:

What makes Mawnan special?

What is missing from Mawnan?

What would you want to change in Mawnan?

Your fears for the future of Mawnan

Identity

• How would you describe Mawnan’s identity?

Landscape

• Is the designation of the parish as a national Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) important o To you as a resident Y/N/DK o For visitors and tourists Y/N/DK • Do you agree that the designation as an AONB carries a strong duty to preserve the landscape? Y/N/DK • Should new residential and commercial development be allowed on sites that o Are situated on the skyline Y/N/DK o Are visible from the coastal path Y/N/DK o Are visible from Falmouth Bay or the Helford Y/N/DK • Do you think any future development in the parish should be in keeping with the existing landscape and character setting? Y/N/DK

359 Heritage

• Which heritage and cultural sites in Mawnan are important for you? • Should such sites be celebrated with appropriate signage and markers Y/N/DK

Housing

• What do you think Mawnan’s housing needs are? • Is there a need for large-scale housing development of 10 or more dwellings? Y/N/DK • Should your NDP allocate sites for affordable housing to meet local needs? Y/N/DK • Should your NDP allocate sites for housing for sale on the open market? Y/N/DK • Should new open market housing be restricted for sale only as main residences? Y/N/DK • Should your NDP allocate sites for sheltered housing for the elderly, or residential care homes? Y/N/DK

Building design

• Do you think your NDP should aim to protect and enhance the quality of the built environment by promoting the following: o Design that respects the scale of the existing surrounds o Minimum standards for living space in dwellings o Use of traditional local building materials o High levels of energy conservation in new buildings o Green spaces within settlement areas o

Economy

• How could Mawnan’s local economy be promoted and encouraged? • Should your NDP make provisions and allocate sites for commercial development and employment? • Should the following be encouraged around the parish to promote jobs and economic development? o Agriculture/horticulture o Small businesses in workshops and studios o People working from home o High-tech companies o Retail and service businesses o Tourism development and attractions • Should your NDP encourage tourism? o If so, what is required ▪ More holiday lets ▪ More B&B accommodation ▪ Hotel/Inn accommodation ▪ More water-side facilities

Green space

• What kind of green and outdoor space would you like to see in Mawnan?

Leisure

360 • Could you list the community leisure activities you participate in, such as clubs, social events, sporting activities, talks and lectures etc. • Is there a leisure activity that is missing or could be improved? • Would you be in favour of allocating a site, or developing an existing site, to provide new or better facilities? Please suggest where.

Traffic and transport

• Do you think the provisions for transport (private and public, parking and speed control) are currently adequate within the parish? • Will they be adequate for the traffic they may carry over the next 20 years o Are they currently safe to use? Y/N/DK o If not safe, specify where. • If not, do you think this lack of long-term capacity should limit the expansion of development in the parish? Y/N/DK • If you consider that traffic in the parish is a problem, what would you suggest your NDP should do to improve the situation?

Community services and facilities

• Do you think the mobile phone and internet services are adequate to meet the needs of the o Domestic, or o Business community within the parish? • How often do you go into Mawnan Smith village to use the key facilities o Shop o Post office o Café o Hairdresser o Surgery and pharmacy o Garage o Restaurant o Pub o Charity shop o Electrical shop ▪ For the above allow respondents to choose a range of pre-set occasions • Could you suggest additional services or facilities that your NDP should encourage to set up in the parish, or improvements to existing services and facilities

Sustainability

• Do you think we should make provision for more renewable energy sites within the parish? • If so, would you support: o Commercial wind turbines Y/N/DK o Domestic wind turbines for individual homes Y/N/DK o Solar panels on designated fields over agricultural land Y/N/DK

Questions designed to elicit opinion on what are the most important issues the NDP should address

361 • From the following list(s) please tick the THREE most important issues you believe your NDP should address: o

Questions designed to demonstrate answers are representative of the population

1. What is your postcode? 2. How many people, including children, normally live in your household? 3. Please enter the number of people in your household in each age group a. 0-18 b. 19-25 c. 26-49 d. 50-69 e. 70-84 f. 85+ 4. Which of these age groups do you belong to? 5. Are you answering on behalf of yourself only, or the whole household?

Data Protection

• Explain what will be done with the answers, and how the returned questionnaires will be protected • That no personal data will be retained without the approval of the respondent • No answers given to the questions will be associated with an individual respondent • How to unsubscribe if you have given us your email address

Appeal for more people to join the NDP process

• To deliver leaflets etc. door to door • To join working groups – give examples • To attend meetings and encourage others to do so as well Provide your contact details if you are willing to take part, even in a small way, with the NDP

• Name • Phone number • Email address

362 Annex B to

NDP Minutes 22 Jan 18

STEERING GROUP PROGRESS MEETING

22 JANUARY 2018

Comments on “Thoughts for the Scoping Survey”

• At end of survey, appeal for assistance? • Return alternatives, Freepost but also local post boxes • Deadline v incentive • On-line survey, would prefer to add it to engagement if issues can be resolved • Business group o Seek current employment data o Get data on travel to work or college • Amenities o Consider the ‘active elderly’ o Also the ‘fit young’ o Call it ‘community services’ rather than ‘facilities’ • Leisure and tourism o Does over exposure create too much traffic o Or congestion? o Footpaths, are they sufficient and well maintained? o Promote safer paths • Design and quality o Can we influence living space? o Or exterior appearance? o Does it apply to building conversions, barns etc • Housing o <5, 5-10 but not more than 10 o Use of word “allocate” to be avoided o Impact of section 106 or CIL levy for parish infrastructure o Current rate of property development • Environment o Identify wildlife special sites o Do we refer to climate change? • Heritage o Importance of heritage sites

363 Annex C to

NDP Minutes 22 Jan 18

The Leisure & Tourism WG agreed that the range of organisations/ attractions they would want to contact were:

WI: number of members and trend, member concerns, any issues arising (e.g. parking), improvements they would want to see

Glendurgan and Trebah gardens: Visitor numbers with trend and forecast, coach numbers and how are these managed? In both cases, how will any increases be managed? Any concerns, what's needed to help the attractions thrive? Numbers employed and on what basis, and how might this trend forward? For NT, any plans to open other attractions in the parish e.g. Carwinnion house and/or garden?

Red Lion/ FBI/ Cornish Maid: any concerns? What'd needed to help these businesses thrive?

Bowling Club/ Football Club: member numbers and trend, demographic profile, any concerns, what's needed to help the club thrive?

Helford River Boats: how is the business doing, any concerns, what's needed to help the business thrive?

St. Michael's Church: trend, demographic profile, any concerns?

364 Annex D to

NDP Minutes 22 Jan 18

Mawnan NDP Housing Working Group

Update 22/01/18

Introduction

I have been trying to establish where we are at the moment, by understanding the issues and policies and working towards some definitive base data that we can rely on when formulating our policy towards housing in the NDP.

There is a vast amount of information to be digested, I have tried to cover as much as I can but I am not an expert in the field and therefore E&OE (Errors and Omissions Excepted)

1. Meetings

1.1 23/11/17 Tim Brooksbank.

1.2 29/11/17 Rodney Greenhalgh.

1.3 15/12/17 Sarah Furley, Group Leader Neighbourhood Plans Cornwall Council with Tim Brooksbank.

1.4 10/01/18 Sarah Roberts, Senior Development Officer Affordable Housing Team Cornwall Council.

1.5 23/01/18 Working Group meeting with two more members added.

2. Principal documents relevant to Mawnan NDP housing

2.1 Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies 2010- 2030.

2.2 Housing Statement Guidance (part 1) Determining Your NDP’s Housing Target.

2.3 Commitment and completions of housing in Mawnan from 2010 to date. JH commentary.

2.4 Map showing where 2.3 above are located.

2.5 Guidance on NDP development Boundaries.

2.6 Principal Residence Policies in NDPs.

2.7 Mawnan NDP Response Affordable Housing.

2.8 Population data from 2011 census – circulated to Steering Group on 11/01/18

365 3. Analysis

3.1 The effect of the Local Plan Strategic Policies

• Strategic Housing Market Needs Assessment resulted in 52,000 houses being required for the whole of Cornwall by 2030 • Because of number already built, Mawnan’s target as determined by 2.2 above and as part of the 52,000 is ZERO • This does not mean ZERO houses to be built before 2030 as it is a baseline not a limit • “But it does suggest that Mawnan could satisfy housing need without allocations, through infill and rounding off and exception sites if there is further affordable housing need”. Sarah Furley. I agree. • No need to allocate sites, potentially very contentious and not a requirement

3.2 Other relevant consideration to Mawnan (2.1 Policy 2a)

• AONB whole of our parish. However, 30% of Cornwall is in AONB. • Rural – this matters in planning terms • Existing sites • Infill • Small scale rounding off • Development of previously developed land • Rural exception sites

3.3 House built since 2010 – see 2.3 and 2.4

• 73 completions • 15 under construction • 25 with planning permission but not started (2 affordable) • Of 73 completions 31 affordable (16 rented and 15 sold) • NB these are CC figures and I would say 95% accurate there are issues with data lag.

3.4 Affordable Housing – see 2.7

• Current need is 19; 10 x 1 bed, 6 x 2 bed, 1 x4 bed and 2 x 5 bed • Even after Lowenna Fields has been occupied per Sarah Roberts • Policy is 70% rented 30% sold • New Motorway effect • Housing need v housing demand • Housing Needs Survey – do we believe there is latent demand not registered with CC? Cost £982.00 benefit?

4. Population – see 2.8

• 877 household on the electoral roll (estimated 2017) • 1,517 people (estimated 2016)

366 5. Issues to discuss at the Steering Group and potential questions

• Size of developments – numbers of houses in total • Up to 5 – no S.106 equivalent • Supported living? Downsizing? • Second homes policy – unnecessary? • Development boundary – very political and not a requirement • Holiday letting – is this an issue? • The role of the Working Group – present facts or give input? Many NDPs have framed questions – should we?

6. Other interesting stuff

• Everyone should read the Local Plan • Gypsy sites • Wind turbines • Minerals • Meudon farm – contrary to Policy 3

Jon Holt

22/01/18

367 Minutes of a Meeting of the Public Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Group held on 19th February 2018 in the Bowling Club

Present: Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes, Jon Holt, Georgena Morris, Carrie Gilmore, plus 28 members of the Community. The meeting was chaired by Dennis McQuillan.

1. Apologies: Terry Damer, Graham Marsden, Mick Hartley, Jackie Whibley, Rex Sadler, Carrie Gilmore.

2. Minutes Minutes from the last meeting were distributed by the NDP website. They were also e-mailed out to everyone on the electronic mail list. No alterations were requested and the minutes were accepted for signature by the Chair.

3. Matters arising There was a problem accessing grant funding at present with the application made by Peter Stokes for funding remaining in this cycle (up to 1st April) being rejected as it was considered not specific enough. A new bid was being prepared for the next cycle from April.

A Pre-questionnaire is being drafted – although the NDP group had pretty much skipped this by working off general topic areas from lots of other NDP groups across the county it was important that community involvement was shown to the true direction the NDP was taking. This would be a chance to pick up on any priorities as seen by the community and work done already by the working groups would still be valuable. It was really hoped that getting this pre- questionnaire (of about 4 pages) out to every household, as well as having hardcopy spares available for visitors and getting a decent number back would provide a solid evidence base for future works. Hopefully the pre-questionnaire would be out by the end of April / early May. Thanks were due to Sarah Furley, the Cornwall Council link person, for her assistance in drafting the questions and format. It was noted however that direct action on traffic control and congestion could not be included in the NDP but could be written into the policy structure documents.

4. Social media Melissa Mercer was thanked for all her help in getting the social media profile of the NDP group up and running. In conjunction with regular mentions in the Mawnan Diary it was good to see the number of people attending this meeting was up on last time – obviously the word was getting out! 130+ people were getting emailed the newsletter and agenda/minutes with an 80% open rate. We were still using the @mawnan smith, cornwall facebook page and links to sign up for the newsletter were on there. Links to sign up were posted on the NDP website – it was hoped to get as many people as possible

368 signed up. Some people present said although they had provided email addresses they still weren’t getting anything – Melissa was going to check on addresses as she was getting a few automatic returns. The Administrator noted that the NDP Population database needed to be updated.

5. Landscape Character Assessment Presentation from Cath Statham, Cornwall Council Cath introduced herself – she was a landscape architect who had been teaching LCAs and working on large scale development applications. The LCA provided evidence to support NDPs in their conservations, preservation and development plans and policies. She had worked closely with The Roseland NDP who produced a strong policy which included respect for area character, density of developments, impact on trees/hedges, vernacular building style and the importance of landscape areas to the community at large.

LCA need to consider not only geology and settlement but topography, soils, cultural impact, faming (now and historically), impact of people. Try to cover the whole parish – but look into micro-ecologies Traditional hedge styles and forms What makes this area individual Needs to include factual descriptions High level classification and descriptions were done by Natural England, but only split England into 8 areas. This was extended to 40 areas in 2007. Cornwall Council took this further, but it still covers large areas. We would probably include the following information: AONB, AGLV (area outside the AONB), Special Protection Area, Site of Special Scientific Interest, Special Conservation Area, County Wildlife site, scheduled monuments, Ancient woodland / TPO, grade II + III agricultural land, SWCP. As such we need to consider how our NDP can affect policies on quality of design, climate & renewables, highway development, management of the AONB and inform land allocation planning. The LCA would help us assess what the community values about the landscape of our parish and what importance they put on specific areas.

Undertaking the LCA – it is intended to group together defined areas of landscape, such as rolling farmland, deep valleys, shorelines which could be shown on a map. Cathy had a set of master sheets which she could provide, which could back up a public event where the community maps those areas important to them. The first phase of the LCA would then be a desktop enterprise to roughly map what areas were important or recognised. Cathy was also open to providing a 2 hour training session on how to review and assess these areas, with practical experience and was available to provide as little or as much help from then on as we felt was required (but this would cost).

369 Q: the Helford Ria already had lots written about it, could we just “copy” this or should we use it as reference material? A:It would be better to reference other documents rather than just insert info.

Q: how to show the consultation map information if randomly placed by members of the public – how could we say that there was a wide enough demographic involved? How would you know what the spots were referencing? A: an expansion sheet/ notes relating to numbers on specific spots could be done. It could be a specific route or footpath was noted or provided specific community value and needed consideration.

Cathy left a set of papers from her presentation which it was hoped that Dennis and the LCA group would make use of.

Dennis said that he had already had a number of new volunteers for the LCA working group and asked if they were present, or if anyone else wanted to volunteer, that they make themselves known to him at the end of the meeting so a training date could be looked at.

6. Housing Jon Holt gave a presentation based on the information his group (especially Cathryn & Sam Thornhill and Tim Brooksbank) had already found.

He explained that getting facts was proving to be a little difficult. Much of the housing policy would need to be led by the Cornwall Local Plan document (2010- 2030) and align with their policies. They are two interesting documents and well worth a scan through.

They state that 52,500 homes needed to be built by 2030 in Cornwall, but that currently the minimum build numbers for Mawnan is 0 – this is not to say we have to agree to a no build policy. We would still need to consider infill, exception sites and rounding off so needed a flexible policy within our own NDP.

Affordable homes – it was considered that building affordable homes were not profitable to developers who currently had to give over 50% of any development of over 10 dwellings. Since 2010 there have been 113 dwellings built or with planning granted in the parish, of that total 31 are affordable. Lowenna Fields has 23 (16 rented 7 sold) and Elgin Close 6 (all sold), these are the 29 built to date. Of note, 19 families remain on the County’s Housing Needs Register.

370 Current population figures shows 877 households (2016) or 1517 individuals (2017) with no growth forecast.

Q: could we include a policy similar to the Portscatho 10/16 where you had to have lived in the parish for at least 10 years before the age of 16 before being considered as having a local connection for affordable housing? A: it was an option that could be looked at- our NDP has the authority to change the rules our parish applies for affordable housing rules... but it would still have to rely on the Cornwall Housing register to administer and how they allocated homes was still unclear.

Q: why weren’t Cornwall Council building more homes themselves? A: clerk said that Cornwall Council was actively looking for suitable sites for building eco homes which would reflect affordability at a local, and not national, level. She would try to find the relevant newsletter and post on the website.

7. Interactive plan Dennis was going to do a quick overview of the Cornwall Interactive Map, but the wi-fi was sporadic at the venue. He suggested that anyone interested went onto the website themselves and took a look – there were multiple data layers that provided wealth of information.

8. Next meeting Steering group progress meeting – 26th March at 7pm in the Bowling Club

9. AOB None noted…

Meeting finished at 8.20pm

D McQuillan

Acting Chair

371 Slides from Jon Holt Housing - Jon Holt 19/02/18

Cornwall Local Plan

• Strategic Policies 2010-2030 • National • Local • Neighbourhood • 52,500 homes for whole of Cornwall • Timeframe is important

Planning issues relevant to Mawnan

• AONB • Rural • Existing sites • Infill & rounding off • Exception sites

Completion & commitments

• From 2010 • 73 completions • 15 under construction • 25 waiting with permission not started • Total 113

372 Housing Statement Guidance

• Mawnan’s share of 52,200 – Nil • Does not mean no building • But does mean demand could be satisfied by infill, rounding off and exception sites • Affordable Housing

• Of 113 total 31 affordable • 16 rented • 15 sold • Current need 19

Further considerations

• Population • Demographics • Supported Living

373 Update – Business and Employment Working Group 19 February – Carrie Gilmore

1. The various work group leads have identified areas of overlap between the different work streams and as a result I, together with the lead for History and Environment, joined the February meeting of the Leisure and Tourism group to determine how we assign contact for particular businesses that are also key to Tourism and Leisure within the NDP. Now that this work has been completed more focused contact with Businesses and Employers will be progressed. 2. Work has continued to develop the data on the businesses and employers in Mawnan Parish and it is very clear that we have a large number of small self employed businesses. The challenge will be how to make the NDP questionnaire relevant to these as well as the larger business/employers. 3. In addition to those businesses within the parish there are also a number of businesses/employers who are important to Mawnan parish,but located outside the parish. These businesses, such as The Cove, and Maenporth Estate, provide employment and impact on tourism and leisure and transport within the parish. It is therefore likely that we will make contact with the Business and Employment groups that have been established for NDPs in neighbouring parishes to see if there are common issues/interests. 4. A new member has volunteered to join the Business and Employment group and we will meet within the next couple of weeks

374 Minutes of a Progress Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Group held on 26th March 2018 in the Bowling Club

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes, Jon Holt, Georgena Morris, Jackie Whibley, Graham Marsden, Rodney Greenhalgh, Mick Hartley.

Also present: Cllr Peter Bradley

Apologies: Rex Sadler, Carrie Gilmore, Melissa Mercer (Media)

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m.

1. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the last meeting on 19 February 2018 had been distributed to the Steering Gp and via the NDP website. They were also e-mailed out to everyone on the electronic mail list. Jon Holt requested an alteration to the Lowenna Field housing allocations at para 6 (3). He would pass them to the Sec. No other alterations were requested, and the minutes were accepted for signature by the Sec.

(Sec’s note: Numbers had been amended)

2. Matters arising

There were no matters arising.

3. Working Group Updates

The Chair asked that future updates be graded on a scale of 0 to 10 as a measure of progress. Problems should be identified with an indication of the volume of work undertaken. JW asked that expectations on the Working Gps be established. Clarification of the pre – Questionnaire status would determine future effort as much of the current work was more relevant to the main questionnaire to be delivered later in the process. This dilemma would be resolved later in the meeting.

a. Landscape. The LCA group had a progress rating of 1. Having been advised by Kath Statham to wait for better weather, she now found herself committed to writing 2 LCAs for other NDP groups and had been called into a public inquiry. Training would be organised for the week beginning 23 April. The potential for damage due to weather impacts such as flooding should be considered. GM asked that the group liaise with the parish clerk who had information on these matters.

b. Leisure and Tourism. Work had continued to develop their spreadsheets and to define the split of responsibilities with the Business group. A transcript of JW’s speaking notes are at Annex A. Discussion followed on the questions that might be asked of businesses and those operating in the leisure arena. Clearly, commercial confidentiality would be an issue. GM reminded the meeting that we were subject to Freedom of Information requests. We should only seek broad indication of

375 future plans that effect development, their concerns and the possible impact of Brexit. c. Traffic and Transport. No specific progress had been made in this sphere apart from the knowledge that traffic issues were a matter for the Parish Council. However, congestion and provision of parking at developments were factors that could inform the NDP. Peter Bradley informed the meeting that the Parish Council were considering the placement of new traffic screens on the approach to Mawnan Smith to control speed. The system was digital and would collect data which could inform the Parish and County Councils. That data could also be cited in the NDP where relevant. d. Environment and History. The group had met to redraft their questions for inclusion in a questionnaire from an open reply format to the closed (tick box) format. Georgina asked about the young people’s questionnaire that had accompanied the 2007 Village Plan survey. This was considered too detailed at this stage and would form part of the final effort. Meanwhile, Anna Druce was continuing to develop her ideas to work with the schools. She also asked whether development of renewable energy should form part of her WG remit. The Chair affirmed that sustainability should be a policy in the final document and should be considered by all groups. e. Housing. JH was congratulated on the work he had done to determine the need for future housing development. He explained how of the 21 affordable houses in the Lowenna Fields development, only one had been rented by someone with a close parish link; 3 had gone to those with a slight connection. The remainder had no links. Yet the Council Housing Register still showed needs for 19 families – and this could continue to be used by developers as the evidence to support future large-scale building. The Council’s 5-tier housing allocation system also made it unlikely that any inroad would be made into the Register. There was concern that developers could change aspects of the original plan by fielding numerous alterations to the plan which were not addressed in detail by the planning authorities. These usually affected environmental, quality and design issues. JH urged faster production of the NDP; the Sec advised that room had been made in the current project plan for considerable research periods. A great deal of study had already been undertaken. Therefore, there should be the potential to reduce the overall timescale. However, the need for a Scoping Questionnaire had to be addressed. He was also concerned at the lack of weight given to legal argument when trying to rebut the claims of developers. Current protection against inappropriate development is given in the broad Cornwall Local Plan. The NDP would reinforce protection at the community level. Though not a matter for the NDP, JH felt that a community group should be formed to fight the developers with legal argument and thus force them to turn away from major builds. f. Quality and Design. Rodney Greenhalgh had undertaken considerable effort to build a database of almost all properties in the parish to describe current housing

376 styles. These would prove useful in developing policy on design which should include preferred housing and commercial styles, how they blend with the environment, and green space allocation. The Chair referred him to the Cornwall Design Guide which should help him develop policy.

g. Finance. A new application would be made now that a renewed NDP allocation of £9k had been confirmed for the 4 years commencing April 2018. Each bid had to be for not less than £1,000; small items (e.g. stationery) do not need quotes, but quotes were required when using any outside agency such as Council Support Services. The major bid items were LCA Training and the production of the Pre (or Scoping) Questionnaire. It was agreed that a meeting would be arranged by the Chair to develop the bid.

4. Pre-Questionnaire (Scoping)

The need for a pre-questionnaire was raised during discussion on Housing. Many WGs had moved so far forward with their policy areas that it was considered unnecessary and a potential waste of time and funds. However, the legal basis of the NDP could be put at risk if the public had not been consulted on the issues that should be covered. The Chair would seek clarification from Sarah Furley on this matter. If needed, the approach could be made simpler by asking for affirmation of the current policy areas and by seeking inclusion of any development factors that had been omitted.

5. Social Media

Work continued to expand and refine our contacts with the public to include how we could acquire data from community groups. The GDPR rules made this difficult but Melissa was working to seek voluntary contact from individuals who have an interest in the NDP.

6. Any Other Business a. The Chair stated that he would wish to attend Working Group meetings on occasion. WG leaders were asked to inform him of upcoming events. He asked that renewable energies be address by all policy areas for any impact they could have. Sustainability had become a key element of many NDP drafts and they could be used to facilitate wording. b. The provision of identity tags would be pursued by JW. c. The NDP group was not represented at the March Farmers’ Market but intends to be present on Saturday 28th April. The focus will be on gathering new email addresses from residents who would like to kept informed of NDP progress.

(After the meeting the Chair found that he was away that weekend; he appeals for help from the Steering Group to represent us on that day) d. Any handout leaflets or documents asking for personal information will need a GDPR statement.

Action: Sec to ensure this was done.

377 7. Date of Next Meeting

The next progress meeting would be held at 7.00 pm in the Bowling Club on Monday, 16 April 2018. The venues for meetings in Mawnan were extremely busy and it was necessary to book well in advance to ensure adequate accommodation. The Bowling Club had been booked for 21 May, 18 June, 16 July, and 20 August for future NDP meetings.

T Damer

Chairman

April 2018

378 Annex A to

Minutes 26 March 2018

Speaking Notes by Jackie Whibley

In February 2018 the Leisure & Tourism Working Group met with the leaders of the Environment & History working group and the Business working group to understand where there is opportunity to work together, and to agree which working group would take the lead for contacting those organisations and visitor attractions which we all thought would be useful to make contact with, to further the development of our NDP, as far as our content sections are concerned.

We agreed that the Leisure & Tourism Working Group will take the lead in being the primary NDP contact for the following, at least for our initial questions to them:

• Glendurgan Garden/ The National Trust • Trebah Garden Trust • The Red Lion • Cornish Maid • Helford River Boats • Mawnan WI • Mawnan Bowls Club • Mawnan Football Club • Mawnan Cricket Club

The Business working Group would likewise take the lead with:

• Ferryboat Inn • The Cove • the Kayaking businesses based or operating in Mawnan

The Environment & History working Group would take the lead with St. Michael's Church

We have extended our spreadsheets on Leisure and on Tourism within the parish to include Diving, Coasteering, Cookery courses, Farmers' Markets, Craft Fairs/ markets, Talks by HVMCA, and Penwarne Cafe and Campsite. We are now recording some 81 leisure activities and 50 tourism attractions across the parish.

We agreed a list of 14 questions which could commonly be asked of each organisation/ visitor attraction, and these will be extended or adapted as relevant to each one.

We intend to schedule appointments with the relevant person in each, and to attend in pairs. We aim to conduct this work over the next few weeks and to share feedback with the Business, Environment & History and Traffic & Transport Working Groups to avoid duplication by the NDP team.

379 Meanwhile we'll prepare a draft of the "Leisure & Tourism "panorama" in Mawnan, which would be suitable background for inclusion in the final NDP report perhaps.

For a list of the 14 proposed questions please refer to the minuted copy of my summary email of 13th February 2018.

The next step for the L&T working group is to meet shortly to map out the who/what/when for the forthcoming interviews.

380 Minutes of a Progress Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 16th April 2018 in the Bowling Club

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes, Carrie Gilmore, Georgena Morris, Jackie Whibley, Graham Marsden, Rodney Greenhalgh, Mick Hartley.

Also present: Cllr Peter Bradley, Melissa Mercer (Media)

1. Apologies: Jon Holt

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the last meeting on 26th March 2018 had been distributed to the Steering Gp and via the NDP website. They were also e-mailed out to everyone on the electronic mail list. No alterations were requested, and the minutes were accepted for signature by the Chair.

3. Matters Arising a. The Chair was unable to attend the Parish Council meeting on 19 April. It was agreed that he would write a progress briefing for the event. Councillors within the NDP group could field any questions arising. Cllr Bradley suggested that the recently published Newsletter could form the basis of the briefing. b. To maintain a presence with the public, the Chair had hoped to attend the Farmers Market on 28 April 2018. Unfortunately, he could not do so and asked for volunteers to attend the NDP stand. Georgina, Mick and Graham offered their services from 0830 (set- up) until 1300. The Chair had the necessary display material. The point of contact for the Market was Caroline Tolland. The Sec was asked to publish the dates of future Farmers Markets and the Mawnan Fun Run. These are attached at Annex A. He was also to provide a meeting record for new contacts to provide their details. A GDPR statement was to be included.

Sec: Action

4. Pre-Questionnaire a. Progress. Following debate at the last meeting, the Chair had consulted the Cornwall CC NDP planning staff. They were of the clear opinion that a pre-questionnaire was needed. He had also consulted them on the questions to be asked and had used their advice and input from the SG to draft the document. This had been circulated to the Steering Gp; with some changes it was now ready for the design work to be done by the CC Support Services. Formats to enable post-box friendly hand delivery and pre-paid return had been agreed. The Chair remained concerned that the lack of funding would hamper efforts to have the questionnaire distributed by mid-May. He would authorise the design work but would hold off printing until funds had been received.

381 (Subsequent to the meeting, the Chair had received the awaited quote at £508 for 1,000 copies of the questionnaire. He would pursue a quote for packages of 100 copies to ensure spares were available.)

Chair: Action b. Online Version. Although we would wish to see a high level of returns of the document, it was of note that although the Feock referendum return was low, there was overwhelming support for the plan and it therefore gained approval to go before Cornwall CC to be adopted. There was considerable discussion on whether to provide an online version of the questionnaire to further garner support. The analysis of returns made online could prove difficult and the use of commercial software was considered. (The Chair had subsequently followed up these matters with CC and, because of GDPR, the use of Survey Monkey was not advised; there were many issues to be resolved.) Cost and legalities could limit the use of online surveys. d. Distribution. Hand distribution of the questionnaire would be the primary method. The Sec was to update the volunteer allocation of addresses used in the initial promotion of the NDP. He would package the documents for collection by the delivery volunteers. The involvement of the Primary School as a returns drop point was welcomed. However, there were potential issues with security of the returns if business premises were used. It was agreed to limit drop points to the school, the NDP box in the bus shelter and to the Parish Council office. We should produce a small poster to be displayed at local businesses to remind the public to return their questionnaires by freepost or to the specified proposed points.

Sec: Action e. Incentive. An incentive of £50 should be offered by way of a draw. (The Chair had submitted a note to the Parish Council for their support.) f. Analysis. Analysis of the returns would have to be performed by the SG; however, we should consider the use of an expert in data entry to save time and effort. CC may be able to help.

5. Funding Application

Funding of NDP groups until 2022 had been agreed by government. Up to £9,000 was available. Four bids could be placed with Locality so the first bid should not be overstated. A new bid to exceed £1,000 was awaiting costs for the pre-questionnaire. Included also would be the LCA quote, the Meeting Room costs, an element for stationery and the provision of identity tags. Other possible costs to include map printing and banner flags would be investigated by the Sec.

Treasurer: Action

6. Revise NDP Plan

382 The Sec had distributed a Gantt chart showing the current plan. Despite legibility issues, it showed that there was little scope to reduce the overall timespan to allow for public consultation, redrafting and submission to examination. We had entered the period for research, evidence gathering and drafting. To accelerate the process, it was agreed that we should conduct brain-storming sessions to identify aims, objectives and policies. An NDP template had been sent to the Sec. He would circulate this to the SG and would liaise with Jon Holt to determine suitable dates for these sessions.

Sec: Action

7. Social Media

A newsletter had recently been circulated by various means. The click rate had been lower than the first issue, but it may be too early to judge success on that basis. We should continue to develop links with community groups but GDPR issues would prevent the acquisition of their mailing lists. Instead, we should ask members of these groups to contact us if they are interested. A note should be sent to their point of contact. The Parish clerk has a contact list for the community groups. The GDPR problem was discussed; Melissa indicated that a positive contact approach was not required in the first 2 years by small groups. The unsubscribe invitation on websites was sufficient. (This was confirmed in the Chair’s discussion with CC on online surveys). Nevertheless, the Sec was to prepare a GDPR statement to be used in all mailings and websites.

Sec: Action

8. Any Other Business a. Two places had been booked to attend a briefing by the Cornwall Community Land Trust (CCLT) in Truro on 20 April. Only GM was available to attend. b. The Chair commented on interesting developments in housing for the future. Pre- fabricated modern houses could reduce building timescales and costs (be more affordable). Linked to land acquisition by local groups using the auspices of CCLT, these could meet the needs of local people and could be an NDP issue. A RIBA document argued that minimum living space provisions in new developments were not being met; they argue that space allocation should become part of building regulations. The Chair would forward the report to the SG.

7. Date of Next Meeting

The next progress meeting would be held at 7.00 pm in the Bowling Club on Monday, 21 May 2018.

T Damer

Chairman

20 April 2018

383 Annex A to

Minutes 16 April 2018

Farmers’ Market Schedule

Saturday 26 May 2018: All from 9 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.

Saturday 23 June

Saturday 21 July

Saturday 25 August

Saturday 29 September

Sunday 28 October

Sunday 25 November

Saturday 15 December

Mawnan Fun Run – Sunday 30 September 2018

384 Meeting

16 APRIL 2018

PLAN REVIEW

385 386 Minutes of a Progress Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 21 May 2018 in the Bowling Club

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes, Rodney Greenhalgh, Mick Hartley.

Also present: Cllr Peter Bradley

1. Apologies: Jon Holt, Carrie Gilmore, Georgena Morris, Graham Marsden, Jackie Whibley, Rex Sadler, Melissa Mercer

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the last meeting on 16th April 2018 had been distributed to the Steering Gp and via the NDP website. They were also e-mailed out to everyone on the electronic mail list. No alterations were requested, and the minutes were accepted for signature by the Chair.

3. Matters Arising a. The Administrator attended the Parish Council meeting on 17 May; his speaking notes are attached at Annex A. b. Presence at the Farmers Markets continued with good contact made, especially from the Lowenna Fields residents.

4. Funding and Budget

The bid to Locality for NDP Funding of £2187 had been accepted. The bid breakdown was as follows:

LCA Training £400

Pre- Questionnaire Design & Print £568

Freepost Costs (incl Licence) £223

Hall Bookings £200

CWT Wildlife Map £96

Stationery, Printer Inks £600

Cornwall Local Plan (Books) £100

However, before the funds were released to the Parish account, the Treasurer had received other documents concerning offer acceptance and due diligence. He would process these as quickly as possible. He expected the process to take about 2 weeks.

387 The Chair was reluctant to initiate any work until funds were within the Parish accounts. Already there were costs not cited in the bid. A PO Box system would be used for Questionnaire freepost returns; the cost would be about £35 and would be met by the Stationery budget. An approval process should be established; the Administrator asked for £25 to cover the cost of a “GDPR for Communities” course. This was agreed; the cost had been met via private BACs and DMcQ would bill the NDP as an expense.

5. Pre-Questionnaire a. Progress. The document was at Proof 3 level with the printers; It had been suggested that under Housing some explanation be given to the terms “rounding” and “infill”. There was insufficient room in the current scoping document to cater for this. It could possibly be included in the Main Questionnaire. Apart from a minor rewording of the first paragraph under Housing, the document was agreed as ready to go to print when funds were cleared. It was hoped to distribute the Pre-Q in the week commencing 11 June with a target return date of 16 July.

Chair: Action b. Distribution. Hand distribution of the questionnaire would be the primary method. The Sec was to update the volunteer allocation of addresses used in the initial promotion of the NDP. He would package the documents for collection by the delivery volunteers.

Sec: Action c. Publicity. Notices to pre-warn parish residents of the questionnaire would be placed in the Parish Diary and, via the Newsletter, in the website. Nearer the distribution date, notices to encourage response would be displayed in the PC display board and in local shops and businesses.

Chair: Action d. Analysis of Results. As this questionnaire was relatively simple, analysis would be undertaken by the SG members. A good 30% return rate would mean each member having to assimilate about 30 documents. All returns must be numbered and accounted for before distribution to the SG. e. Presentation of Results. Display boards would be needed. The Chair would contact Richard Martin to see whether other local NDP groups already had some. The Sec would look into the cost of hiring boards.

Chair: Action

Sec: Action

388 7. Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting would be open to the public and be held at 7.00 pm in the Bowling Club on Monday, 18 June 2018.

T Damer

Chairman

30 May 2018

389 Annex A to

Minutes 21 May 2018

NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING

NOTES FOR THE MAWNAN PARISH COUNCIL MEETING ON 17 MAY 2018

FUNDING

At last we have received funding to the tune of £2187 for NDP work to include our Scoping Questionnaire, Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) training, hire of meeting rooms, stationery and printer consumables, maps and copies of the Cornwall Local Plan. The funds should be transferred by Groundworks into the parish accounts for ring fencing. Unfortunately, we were unable to claim retrospectively for the monies already spent from parish funds. A lesson learnt - we will need to manage our money carefully and start the next round of bidding in good time to prevent undue use of your funds.

QUESTIONNAIRE

Having consulted with Cornwall Council’s NDP team, it was agreed that a scoping questionnaire was essential to ensure that the policy areas we had started to pursue were indeed those required by the whole community. After considerable work by the Chair and the CC support graphics people, we are now at the stage to authorise printing once we have seen funding arrive in the parish accounts – we need to be informed when this occurs as a matter of urgency! We are very grateful to the Parish Council for their kind support of the £50 prize draw which we hope will increase responses.

We hope to distribute by hand in the first week of June, allow 4 weeks for their return, then analyse the results and present them at a public meeting in late July.

LANDSCAPE (LCA)

Training is scheduled for next Thursday and we have potentially 8 volunteers to help us do the groundwork. We hope to produce the assessment in 2-3 months. This assessment will act as the backdrop against which any new development should blend with.

COMMUNICATION

We attended the last Farmers Market on 28 April. Notably, there was high interest in the NDP from the Lowenna Fields development. A total of 17 new contacts were generated which brings our total email contact list to 150 residents. We plan to have a presence at future markets and at the Fun Run.

GDPR has been exercising our minds. We are very mindful of privacy and the purpose to which we keep personal data; we have included a privacy statement in the questionnaire and this will be expanded to a full

390 version to be included in our website. We are advised by our media expert that we do not need to rush as small group activity such as ours can hold data for 2 years before falling into the full arena. We continue to use MailChimp as our bulk email sender – although a US company, it has been ratified by the EU as GDPR compliant. Both MailChimp and the website offer the ability to unsubscribe.

PLAN TIMESCALE

On current plans the NDP process is not scheduled to complete until mid 2020. Concerns about new developments that would not be subject to NDP policies suggested that we accelerate the process. From our experience to date – the funding issues, scripting and production of the initial questionnaire, research, meetings and consultations required, not to mention the scrutiny and referendum processes indicate that our timescale is reasonable. We remain mindful of the need to make real progress.

D McQuillan

NDP Administrator

391 Minutes of a Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 18 June 2018 in the Bowling Club

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Richard Martin, Georgena Morris, Cllr Graham Marsden

Also present: Cllr Peter Bradley and 15 members of the public

1. Apologies: Jon Holt, Carrie Gilmore, Jackie Whibley, Rex Sadler, Mick Hartley, Melissa Mercer

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m. The Chair gave a welcome to members of the public and stated that, because the Steering Group (SG) had a better feel for the NDP process and had more experience, future SG meetings would always be open public meetings. This meeting would be dominated by arrangements for the distribution of the questionnaire.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the last meeting on 21 May 2018 had been distributed to the SG and via the NDP website. They were also e-mailed out to everyone on the electronic mail list. No alterations were requested, and the minutes were accepted for signature by the Chair.

3. Matters Arising

Any matters arising would be covered by later items.

4. Funding and Budget a. Peter Stokes gave a resumé of the protracted efforts to obtain funding for the NDP project. Starting with the first application in December 2017 funds had finally arrived in the Parish Council for disbursement after a drawn out due diligence period. This had set back the SG’s efforts on many fronts, but notably the production of the Questionnaire by almost 2 months. Staff at the County Council’s NDP Planning Office were not aware of the difficulties that we faced; the Chair would provide them with a written brief to help other groups.

Action: Chair b. We were already running a little ahead of budget; the PO Box registration (£177) was not covered in the original £2187. However, there was scope in the stationery allowance to make good the deficit. Armed with experience, the next bid would allow for more flexibility.

392 5. Working Group Updates a. Georgena Morris’s Environment group had a 6-strong membership. They had held study meetings and were developing their findings which would be supported by a Wildlife Map of known habitats drawn up by the Cornwall Wildlife Trust (CWT). Now that funding was available, the next step was to meet with CWT to produce the map. The Chair commented that he would like to attend that meeting. b. The LCA group had 7 volunteer members and had completed 2 landscape type assessments. The next step was to invite the County Landscape Architect to review their work. They would then start the preparation of a draft report with a view to present this to the public at an exhibition in mid-September. DMcQ wished to publicly thank Mike and Carol Hurst for their work on the landscape type map and for their compilation of assessments from the observers. c. Richard Martin (RM) would continue to develop liaison with neighbouring NDP groups. The Chair commented that the Roseland NDP had been 5 years in the making; that Mylor had achieved a 60% response rate to their main questionnaire whereas the normal was 30%. This probably reflected the nature of their parish which is fairly like Mawnan. He was also concerned about the quantitive and qualitative analysis of questionnaires. Carlyon Bay had produced a good example of analysis and asked RM to investigate. Professional help may be required but could prove prohibitively expensive. He had been advised that it was better to own your own plan than duplicate other professional templates.

6. The First Questionnaire (Scoping) a. The hand distribution lists had been prepared. There were 26 volunteers for deliveries. The questionnaire had been printed; the containing envelope had been awaiting the response deadline date – this had been set as 23 July 2018. The response envelope was awaiting PO Box and Freepost details. Once these had been obtained, it was hoped to have the final package available for delivery by 21 June. There were enlarged copies of the questionnaire available at the meeting for public scrutiny and comment. The one comment was that the spelling of Lowenna was incorrect; unfortunately, despite a number of editing inspections, it was too late to alter it. b. A public display of the questionnaire and resulting analysis was planned for 22/23 September 2018 in the Memorial Hall. A source of display boards had been identified (Sarah Furley – our mentor at Cornwall Council).

393 c. To secure a high response rate, A4 or A3 posters would be needed on posts in the ground and distributed to shops etc. A3 prints would have to be out-sourced. The Chair would seek quotes. Covered posters on telegraph poles would also be useful. Other reminder methods could include car window displays or emailing the flyer to local social groups via the Parish office.

Action: Chair

7. Volunteer Assistance to NDP

The Chair called for volunteers to assist with delivery of questionnaires and support for Working Groups. He asked that Parish Councillors display blow-up versions of the questionnaire at the forthcoming council meeting. Peter Bradley agreed to do it. He also asked for support for an NDP presence at the Farmers Market on 23rd June which he was unable to attend. Graham Marsden and Mick Hartley agreed to fulfil the task.

The Newsletter was available on the website, sent to 160 of c860 residences and on Facebook courtesy of Melissa Mercer. The Chair asked for publicity of the NDP cause by word of mouth via our many distributers/area representatives.

8. Any Other Business a. Data Privacy. The administrator had attended a training session on GDPR provided by Cornwall Rural Communities Charity. The emphasis was on adopting the principles set out by the GDPR guidance. To this end an NDP Privacy Notice had been published via the Newsletter with a link to the website. A copy is attached at Annex A to these minutes for the record. In response to a query from the floor, the administrator confirmed that anyone obtaining personal data (e.g. email address) on behalf of the NDP group was not acting as a third party provided that the information was freely given. b. Next Steps. With the questionnaire delivered, we were now in the period when considerable research, communication with stakeholders, and the formulation of development ideas should begin to populate a draft plan. To assist with this the administrator was to circulate to the SG a template for a plan document that had been obtained from a neighbour NDP group. Of note, the preparation of a vision statement, plan objectives and subsequent policies would provide clarity for the way ahead.

Action: Admin to circulate Plan Template. c. Consultant Use. The Chair wondered whether there was benefit from consultants being hired to advise WGs. Cost would be prohibitive but there may be those in the community who could lend their support. We need to appeal for such help. d. Timescale Pressure. Current build rates in Falmouth and Penryn were of concern, especially as Government Inspectors and County planners had supported development against the wishes of the respective communities citing that their Draft NDP Plans were insufficiently developed. Experience with funding and the questionnaire suggests that it is unlikely that we could foreshorten the current timescale – 3 years until April 2020; however, we need to maintain momentum.

394 9. Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting would be open to the public and be held at 7.00 pm in the Bowling Club on Monday, 16 July 2018.

T Damer

Chairman

9 July 2018

395 Annex A to

Minutes 18 June 2018

General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) DATA PRIVACY NOTICE

Mawnan Parish Neighbourhood Development Planning (NDP) Group

1. Your personal data – what is it? Personal data relates to a living individual who can be identified from that data. Identification can be by the information alone or in conjunction with any other information in the data controller’s possession or likely to come into such possession. The processing of personal data is governed by the General Data Protection Regulation (the “GDPR”). In most cases the data is email addresses and phone numbers. 2. Who are we? Mawnan NDP Group is the data controller (contact details below). This means it decides how your personal data is processed and for what purposes. 3. How do we process your personal data? Mawnan NDP Group complies with its obligations under the “GDPR” by keeping personal data up to date; by storing and destroying it securely; by not collecting or retaining excessive amounts of data; by protecting personal data from loss, misuse, unauthorised access and disclosure and by ensuring that appropriate technical measures are in place to protect personal data. We use your personal data for the following purposes:

• To administer contact records obtained at public events; • To organize and promote the business of the group; • To maintain our own accounts and records; • To inform you of news, events, activities and items of interest that affect our business; • To share your contact details with a bulk email processor such as MailChimp so they can keep you informed about items of planning interest, events, and activities that will be occurring in your area and in which you may be interested. 4. What is the legal basis for processing your personal data?

The lawful basis for our data holding is the task placed on the Mawnan NDP Group by Mawnan Parish Council to consult widely with the resident population on matters of interest. In this respect we act in the public interest. We will achieve consent of the data subject so that we can keep you informed about news, events, activities and services and keep you informed about Mawnan NDP events.

396 5. Sharing your personal data Your personal data will be treated as strictly confidential and will only be shared with other members of the organisation in order to carry out a service to other members or for purposes connected with Mawnan NDP Group business. We will only share your data with third parties outside of the organisation with your consent. 6. How long do we keep your personal data1? We will only keep data for the duration of the NDP process.

7. Your rights and your personal data

Unless subject to an exemption under the GDPR, you have the following rights with respect to your personal data: - • The right to request a copy of your personal data which Mawnan NDP Group holds about you; • The right to request that Mawnan NDP corrects any personal data if it is found to be inaccurate or out of date; • The right to request your personal data is erased where it is no longer necessary to retain such data; • The right to withdraw your consent to the processing at any time; • The right, where there is a dispute in relation to the accuracy or processing of your personal data, to request a restriction is placed on further processing; • The right to object to the processing of personal data; • The right to lodge a complaint with the Information Commissioners Office.

8. Further processing

If we wish to use your personal data for a new purpose, not covered by this Data Protection Notice, then we will provide you with a new notice explaining this new use prior to commencing the processing and setting out the relevant purposes and processing conditions. Where and whenever necessary, we will seek your prior consent to the new processing.

9. Contact Details

To exercise all relevant rights, queries of complaints please in the first instance contact Dennis McQuillan at Mawnan NDP Group tel: 01326 250640

You can contact the Information Commissioners Office on 0303 123 1113 or via email https://ico.org.uk/global/contact-us/email/ or at the Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire. SK9 5AF.

397 Minutes of a Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 23 July 2018 in the Bowling Club

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Richard Martin, Cllr Jackie Whibley, Cllr Graham Marsden, Jon Holt, Rodney Greenhalgh, Cllr Rex Sadler

Also present: Melissa Mercer and 12 members of the public

1. Apologies: Carrie Gilmore, Georgena Morris and Mick Hartley

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m. The Chair gave a welcome to members of the public; he thanked the 26 distributors who had managed to provide a copy to the 866 residences in a very short timeframe.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the last meeting on 18 June 2018 had been distributed to the SG and via the NDP website. They were also e-mailed out to everyone on the electronic mail list. Some alterations were requested and made; the amended minutes were accepted for signature by the Chair.

3. Matters Arising

Item 4 a to appraise staff at the County Council NDP office of the difficulties faced to obtain funding was continuing,

Action: Chair

4. Questionnaire Response

The deadline for returns had been set at 23 July. Until Friday 20 July, 215 had been logged in and a further 60 had been received today. The information and communication plans were working and had resulted in a 30% response rate to date. This was considered a reasonable outcome in parish electoral terms and compared favourably with other NDP responses. To allow for postage delays and responses placed in the shelter post box, the entry date for those wishing to participate in the prize draw would be extended to 26 July.

(Administrator Note: As at 20 August 2018 the total responses was 344 bringing the return rate to exactly 40%)

5. Analysis of the Questionnaire

Simple analysis of the numerical or Yes/No/Don’t Know answers was being undertaken by the Chair and would provide early and clear results. However, analysis of the written responses would prove more difficult. After discussion as to how this could be achieved, Jackie Whibley agreed to look into a spreadsheet option to extract written comment. It was considered that 4 weeks should be allowed for the analysis work and a further 4

398 weeks to convert the data for a public information display. (Note: this work has now been taken on by the Gilmore family – a database of some 250 responses has been established and is available to Steering Gp members.)

The public asked whether difference of opinion within a household had been considered in the design of the questionnaire. As this was a relatively simple document, multi person responses were not designed in; the fact that further questionnaires could be obtained was clearly stated on the form and this route was followed by some respondents. It was agreed that the main questionnaire should allow for multi person responses within a residence. Moreover, the next survey should be placed on-line to attract differing responses within a family and from young people.

6. Public Exposition of Q Results

It was agreed that a public display of the results would take place in late September 2018. The Administrator was to research potential locations and dates.

(Note: After discussion with the Chair, the Bowling Club was considered to be the best location as the Memorial Hall was not available. The event will take place on Friday and Saturday 21st/22nd September.)

7. Working Group Reports a. Media. Melissa reported that there were now some 260 contacts on the mailing list for Newsletters and other emails. The “opening rate” was 55%. Simon Sheldrake asked why he had not received any. The anomaly would be resolved. b. Leisure and Tourism. No progress beyond refining the database and resolving overlaps with the Business Group. The next step would be to consult with facilities based on results from the survey. The emphasis would be on discovering what an NDP could do for their activity by determining their development plans and employment opportunities. c. Housing. Jon Holt was awaiting the outcome of the questionnaire to determine the size and shape of future development to meet the needs and opinion of parish residents. A member of the public suggested that there should be a policy on second home ownership. After a discussion on what constituted affordable homes, it was clear that the NDP should identify local housing need in the main survey. Concern was expressed at the burgeoning rate of house building in the Falmouth area and whether the NDP process needed to be expeditated to counter such occurrence in the Mawnan Parish. It would be helpful to shorten the timescale for the production of the plan. However, current progress was slow and showed that the average of 3 years per plan was not unreasonable. d. Design. The Chair had attended a meeting at which the facilitator from CWT was also a member of the St Agnes NDP team. She had stressed the need for a Village Character Statement to be included in our documents. This should form a design guide that would ensure that the scale and appearance sat comfortably with current buildings. He would obtain contact information for the person who helped St Agnes NDP prepare their Village Character Statement.

399 e. Landscape. Assessments of the landscape types were over 50% complete and our reports had been sent to the LCA mentor at CC for her observations. The group will have a display available for the exposition.

8. Strategy – The Way Ahead

The administrator was to email an NDP template to the SG to ensure that we had a vision and objectives to guide future work. Work in the near term would concentrate on preparations for the Exposition in September.

(Note: Template sent out)

9. Any Other Business

The Chair’s Notes for the Parish Council Meeting on 19 July 2018 are attached for the record.

10. Arrangements for Next Meeting

As of today, a progress meeting would be held at 5 Chapel Town Close on 20 August to plan for the exposition. Another meeting would be called to check on preparations for the event. A booking at the Bowling Club had been made for 17 September at 7.00 pm.

T Damer

Chair

Mawnan NDP

20 August 2018

400 NDP notes for Parish Council meeting 19 July 2018

1. 1,200 copies of the questionnaire were finally available to us from Cornwall Council’s printers on the afternoon of Monday 25 June, and by the end of the following day 865 copies had been handed over to our team of volunteer distributors. 2. The majority had been delivered to individual households by the end of that week, with a few remaining finally being delivered during the following week. 3. A very small number of residents contacted us to say that they hadn’t received a copy, and these were then supplied. 4. The time leading up to the supply of the finished questionnaires was very stressful. a. Initial application for funding had been refused back last December due to us not appreciating the amount of detail required in the application b. When we did submit our revised application after considerable work by our treasurer and members of the team, it was approved but we were told we couldn’t commit to any expenditure until a due diligence process had been concluded and the grant money had been deposited in the parish bank account. c. This lead to a queue of tasks, none of which could be advanced until the one before it in the queue had been processed; this log jam was broken with the intervention of counsellor Marsden who telephoned Locality, the government appointed funding agency, and extracted from them the assurance that the money was forthcoming and would be in the account by a particular date. With this assurance we were able to jump the gun a little and press ahead with our queue of tasks.

401 d. I should add that Cornwall Council had no idea of the hoops we had to jump through to get this funding, and have asked us to let them have a detailed account of the difficulties we faced so they can better brief other emergent NDPs in the future. 5. The deadline for return of the questionnaires is next Monday, 23rd July – the day incidentally of our next steering group meeting. As of today we have received some 205 completed questionnaires, representing just under one-quarter of the households in the parish, although we are aware that some households have chosen to send in separate questionnaires for different occupants who may have differing views – something we have encouraged. 6. It is worth mentioning that in future, in the spirit of engagement, all steering group meetings will be advertised and will be open to members of the public – although some will be more interesting to outsiders than others! 7. Your NDP steering group continues to communicate with the local population by a variety of means, notices on the parish notice board, strategically located posters, and most effectively with an irregularly regular newsletter to a growing email list and through Facebook, whilst the parish clerk keeps the NDP website up-to-date. 8. We now face the substantial task of analysing the responses (I can’t disclose any trends before the closing date), but I would say that very many of the written comments have been thoughtful and helpful, whilst many contain views and comments of direct interest to the parish council as well as to the NDP. 9. We have booked the Memorial Hall for the weekend of September 22/23 with the intention of making this a public exposition of the results of the survey (the parish council meeting is 2 days earlier at which we expect to let you have a full summary of the results); Cornwall Council will lend us as many display boards as we request, and we hope to have a revolving PowerPoint type presentation of

402 comments received. This will be a key moment in the NDP process and we want to ensure that every resident is fully aware that it is happening and is encouraged to drop by to see the results and talk to NDP steering group members. 10. In the meantime, the various working groups continue with their studies which will soon be better focused as a result of what we learn from this questionnaire, and will start considering what questions will be asked of the parish when we produce the main, and much more substantial, questionnaire early next year. 11. Finally I would like to place on record my thanks to the design and print department of Cornwall Council for the attractive design and then production of the questionnaire and its accompanying envelopes, our little team of volunteers who distributed the questionnaires, to the steering group members and their teams for their on-going work, and in particular to Dennis McQuillan our administrator who has born a large burden of work in maintaining all the background records and information necessary to the work of the NDP and for taking on the responsibility of ensuring our compliance with the new GDPR regime. Terry Damer, steering group chairman, 19 July 2018

403 MAWNAN PARISH NDP

VISION

In 2030, the unique current character and visual amenity of Mawnan Parish as defined by its status of wholly AONB or an Area of Great Landscape Value and its special coastal and estuarine shores and rural landscapes, are enhanced and protected by allowing future development only in accordance with policies defined within the Neighbourhood Plan.

OBJECTIVES

• HOUSING

To permit housing development iaw the Local Plan by means of infill or rounding-off and, within those developments, to make provision for homes that provide low-cost living to meet local housing need in perpetuity.

• DESIGN AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT

To support development that is high quality, respective and responds appropriately to the landscape and village-scapes of the Parish and the form and character of its natural and built environment.

• NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

To protect and enhance the unique landscape character of the Parish, including the AONB, ecology, biodiversity, and native trees and hedges.

• HISTORICAL

To protect, enhance and celebrate the important heritage of the Parish, including Listed Buildings, ancient monuments, locally important buildings, and ancient field patterns and features.

• SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE (Amenities)

- To support and safeguard social infrastructure by providing a high quality of life in our Parish with community facilities, open spaces and services to meet changing needs.

- To safeguard those facilities and local green spaces that are special to the local community.

• BUSINESS

To support and encourage local businesses particularly in agriculture, tourism, leisure, craft and creative industries, ensuring that people have good opportunities for and access to local employment, skills improvement and education.

404 • RENEWABLE ENERGY

- To encourage any development to utilise minimum use of energy.

- To permit carbon-free energy production.

• TRANSPORT

To permit schemes that seek to overcome traffic congestion within the main settlement area.

405 Minutes of a Progress Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 17 September 2018 at The Bowling Club, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Cllr Jackie Whibley, Mick Hartley, Georgena Morris

1. Apologies: Cllrs Rex Sadler and Graham Marsden, Jon Holt, Carrie Gilmore, Richard Martin, Melissa Mercer (Media)

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m.

The Chair stated that the purpose of the meeting was to finalise arrangements for the Exposition of Questionnaire results to be held on 21st/22nd September in the Bowling Club.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting a. The minutes of the last public meeting on 23 July 2018 had been distributed to the SG and via the NDP website. They were also e-mailed out to everyone on the electronic mail list. Minor alterations were requested and made; the amended minutes were accepted for signature by the Chair. b. A working meeting had been held at Chapel Town Close on 20th August to plan for the exposition and to arrange attendance at the Farmers Market on 25th August.

3. Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

4. Display Set-up a. Set-up would be undertaken from 3.00 p.m. on Thursday 20th September to enable Councillors to attend the Parish Meeting that evening. An all-hands appeal had been sent out with the rota framework. b. Anna Druce would collect the display stands (up to 10) from Pydar House and deliver to the Bowling Club (BC) on 20 September. She would return same after the event less 4 required for the Fun Run display on 28 September. Arrangements had been made to collect additional tables from the Memorial Hall. c. Whereas in earlier discussion consideration had been given to using the village History display, it was now considered to be too large to transport and to accommodate within the NDP event. d. The Administrator had arranged a rota for the period of the event to ensure that members of the Steering and Working Groups were in attendance to answer questions from the public. He would also provide attendance sheets, a comments book, a projector and screen, and a wifi speaker.

406 5. Review of Display Topics

A review of all topics to be presented was undertaken; some amendments were necessary and could be done in time for printing. Work had been undertaken by Kirsty Worden (a local volunteer) to translate analysis results into charts for display. After modifications they and narrative A3 panels were ready for printing, but the required paper weight and colour usage could not be met from Parish Council resources; the Chair would arrange for outsourced printing.

6. Disassembly

Take down of the display would occur either immediately after the event or the following morning.

7. Arrangements for the Fun Run on 28 September

Four tables had been requested from the organiser of the Fun Run to accommodate a condensed version of the display. Mick Hartley, Georgena Morris and Dennis McQuillan would set-up and attend with awnings.

8. Any Other Business

The narrative comments taken from the questionnaire returns, some 1300, had expressed views that were not strictly a matter for the NDP but were highly relevant to the Parish Council. Given the sensitivity of some comment, the means of transferring the information was discussed. It was agreed that a written report was not necessary considering the amount of analysis work already undertaken but that a round-table discussion might prove suitable. It was necessary to keep the Council informed and involved.

T Damer

Chair

Mawnan NDP

15 November 2018

407 Notes for the Record of a Progress Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 3 October 2018 at 5 Chapel Town Close, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Cllr Jackie Whibley, Mick Hartley, Georgena Morris, Melissa Mercer (Media)

1. Apologies: Jon Holt, Carrie Gilmore, Richard Martin,

The meeting opened at 10.00 a.m. a. The Chair stated that the purpose of this meeting was to ensure that the information provided at the Exposition of Results of the questionnaire was made available to those parish residents who had been unable to attend either the expo itself or the condensed version shown at the Fun Run. b. He thanked those who had helped put the expo together. Especially as these notes cannot do justice to the extraordinary amount of effort applied by the Working Groups to analyse and represent the facts for public consumption. In particular, he thanked the Gilmore family for their work on the narrative database, Melissa for “spreading the word” via her newsletters, Kirsty Worden for her work on the eye-catching pie and bar charts used at the event, the County Council graphics department for their headline banners, and the Parish Council clerk for her forbearance and efforts to assist with the printing tasks. The expo arrangements worked well but the public turnout was somewhat disappointing (100 visitors); however, the atrocious weather on Saturday 22nd did not help. There had been some interest (10 visitors) at the Fun Run but again this was disappointing. However, the presence at the run of many children and other diversions meant that the adult attendees were otherwise engaged. These results reinforced the need to publish the results to a wider population.

2. Assembly of the Display Materiel

All the display files would be used to populate the public record in the order used at the expo i.e. Intro/Background; topic in Question order; LCA. Ideally the files should be in PDF format to easier enable uploading to Facebook and the website. As not everyone could do this, the Chair undertook to take most material and convert to PDF before sending the complete package to Melissa. Speech bubbles could be sent in Word. Once agreed with the Chair, the package would be transmitted to our NDP contacts via MailChimp and a Newsletter produced that provided links to Facebook and the NDP website.

3. Information for the Parish Council

Further to the Minutes of 17 September, it was agreed that a full database of the narrative comments be given to Cllr Wibley to allow the Parish Council sight of those comments that were not strictly NDP related.

408 4. Potential Conflict of Interest

Melissa advised the Chair that her close family had applied for planning permission to build a 2-storey house to the North of Goldmartin Square behind the cottage letting agency. The Chair thanked Melissa for the information but felt that in her role as media advisor outside the formal Steering Group, no conflict should arise.

5. Next Meeting

The Chair advised that contact had been made with the Cornwall AONB team who were prepared to give a public presentation on AONBs and the part that NDPs play in protecting and defining their status. Our next scheduled meeting would be on Monday 19 November in the Bowling Club at which the presentation will occur. Publicity would be needed to bring this to the attention of our wide audience.

T Damer

Chair

Mawnan NDP

15 November 2018

409 Minutes of a Public Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 19 November 2018 at The Bowling Club, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Cllrs Rex Sadler and Graham Marsden, Carrie Gilmore, Richard Martin, Mick Hartley, Georgena Morris, Melissa Mercer (Media).

The signed-in public attendance was 50; however, a head count indicated that a further 20 were also present – the hall was full. The audience included Cllr Moyle, chair of the Parish Council, Cllrs Bradley, Brooksbank and Nash.

1. Apologies: Cllr Jackie Whibley, Jon Holt.

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and was grateful for the exceptional turnout, undoubtedly the result of advertising the presentation by the Cornwall AONB team.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the last progress meeting on 17 September 2018 (arrangements for exposition) and the record of a further mini-meeting on 3 October 2018 (dissemination of Questionnaire results) had been distributed to the SG and via the NDP website. They were also e-mailed out to everyone on the electronic mail list. The minutes and record were accepted for signature by the Chair.

3. Matters Arising

There were no matters arising. However, given the attendance, the Chair summarised events since the last public meeting:

• A 40% returns rate on the Questionnaire and the importance of that to the NDP consultation process. • Some 1300 written comments received which added flavour and colour to parish detail. • Led to the analysis exposition on 21/22 September which 100 people attended. • A mini-display at the Fun Run on 29 September. • Circulation of the Q analysis on the website and via our contact list.

4. Presentation by Cornwall AONB

The Chair welcomed Jane Davies, LLB (Development Officer) who represented the Cornwall Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, (AONB). The slides used in her presentation are available on the NDP website at www.mawnan.org. The following summary of her talk was provided by Cllr Peter Bradley.

• There are 46 AONBs designated in the UK.

410 • Cornwall has 958 square Km of designated Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. • The current Cornwall AONB set-up was created in 1959, when 12 sections; which include 10 coastal sections of the South-West Coast Path (including Constantine & Mawnan Smith) and 2 landward areas of Moor and the Camel Estuary; were designated by the UK Government, under the National Parks & Access to The Countryside Act 1949.

• This was reaffirmed in the Countryside & Rights of Way Act 2000.

• AONB Cornwall are an independent organisation but are based in Cornwall Council HQ; the infrastructure and IT are supported by the same Authority.

• Financially, 75% of the annual budget is funded is by the Department for Environment, Farming & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and 25% by Cornwall Council.

• AONB Cornwall are a relatively small operation but is partnered with 21 other organisations (for example National Trust) giving them knowledge and expertise across a wide range of Countryside & Rural practitioners. As a result, they campaign for and routinely suggest that new developments should be required to fund and fit schemes to support and encourage bio-diversity, such as nest boxes, bee bricks, bat boxes and meadows.

• They produce a 5-year plan, which carries limited protection from planning and other developments (mainly large-scale schemes) and under Policy 23 of Cornwall Local Plan 2016, are considered as a consultee, but not a statutory consultee.

• Part of the small Team includes a Planning Officer, but due to the frequency of applications and pressure on their limited resources, regularly they miss and are unable to respond to contentious applications within their remit.

• AONB Cornwall on the whole have a good relationship with Cornwall Planning Officers, who frequently respond favourably to objections. However, due to missed opportunities (see above paragraph) many objectionable applications slip through and are passed, much to their regret.

411 • In April 2017, following fears that funding from Central Government would soon drastically reduce or even end altogether, AONB Cornwall registered as a Charitable Incorporated Charity (CIC) and recently added a fifth Trustee to oversee running of the Charity. The reason for forming a Charity is that in the future it will be easier to access grants and other income to hopefully become financially self-funding. However, Jane stressed that if Government funding ended, then AONB Cornwall would have to drastically downsize and would not be able to fund the current Team or operations.

• AONB have set up a number of practical environmental projects, the most recent being funding and practical assistance to a group wishing to preserve a wooded area between Perranarworthal and Mylor. The Environment Landscape Trust (ELF) enables professional woodmen to coppice the woods and educate/train volunteers in the skill set of wood craft. Participants receive payment in kind, with seasoned logs and wood prepared on site, by use of a solar dryer (poly-tunnel) purchased with the AONB grant, whilst helping to preserve and improve the woodland.

• On 5th November 2018, after 18 months of planning and development, AONB Cornwall launched an “App” available for Apple (iPhone/iPad) and Android platforms via respective “App Stores” which gives users an interactive experience when accessing AONB including information from their database (e.g. - Maps & detailed descriptive data).

• “Beauty Betrayed...” it has been noted nationwide, not just locally, that pressure to build more housing is pushing Councils and Planning Authorities to permit developments in otherwise “safe” areas. In the past 5 years building projects and housing developments have doubled on land adjacent to and even within some AONBs which has provoked anger and disgust in the local community.

• There is currently a review of AONB and National Parks underway at the request of DEFRA Secretary, Michael Gove, entitled the Glover Review.

• It has been suggested that Cornwall's AONB be dissolved and replaced with a National Park, which would strengthen their status, and empower them as a planning Authority. This could prevent planning decisions that despoil the countryside being pushed through by unsympathetic Planning Officers. However, recent political upheaval has cast doubt on whether the Glover Review will ever be implemented; even if it does find in Cornwall's favour.

412 Responses to Questions & Comment

There was general surprise that the AONB, unlike National Parks, had no statutory power over planning applications. The European Union has strong environmental policies that are incorporated within UK policy and these would hopefully be retained whatever the Brexit outcome. In the face of increasing development pressure, it has been proposed that the whole of the Cornwall coastal fringe be a National Park. These and other matters would be addressed by the Glover Review and the Chair encouraged the audience to participate via the DEFRA website.

The rules regarding wind turbines were raised. Jane noted that the AONB team do comment on their appropriateness. There were restrictions via European Directives, however, she noted that applications had diminished in line with government funding.

The Chair commented on the evolution of the NDP housing process that showed that most residents were in favour of some housing development but were concerned that a large development had occurred within the AONB. Jane commented that no parish plan had been in place at the time of the application to develop Lowenna Fields and that the planning officer had to balance housing demand and other pressures. She reinforced the importance of an NDP which could be as permissive as the National Framework and Local Plans and could limit development sites within the parish. She also highlighted the role of a Local Landscape Character Assessment as a supporting tool for the AONB team. Cllr Marsden echoed the need for an NDP and urged the audience to support and engage with the process.

5. Any Other Business

The Chair outlined the “Next Steps” in the NDP process. Objectives and policies were being drafted and plans were in hand to engage a planning consultant to help with the development of the draft plan. The public would be kept informed to ensure that no interest areas had been overlooked.

6. Next Meeting

The next public meeting of the Steering Group would be held in the Bowling Club at 7.00 pm on Monday 17th December 2018.

The Chair thanked Jane for the excellent AONB presentation. The meeting was closed at 8.40 pm.

T Damer

Chair

Mawnan NDP

14 December 2018

413 Note for the Record of a Briefing to the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 3 December 2018 at the Bowling Club, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Cllr Jackie Whibley, Jon Holt, Carrie Gilmore, Mick Hartley, Georgena Morris

Also present: Cllr Tim Brooksbank, Nigel Gilmore

Apologies: Richard Martin

The meeting opened at 7.00 pm.

There was no formal agenda for this meeting. The Chair welcomed Nigel Gilmore who, as a planning consultant, had been invited to brief the Steering Gp on the key issues that need to be considered as it undertakes the Next Steps in the NDP process. Nigel’s speaking notes are reproduced here with discussion/comment shown in italics.

Mawnan NP

1 Introduction

Brief presentation to allow time for discussion

• Outline some of the key things you ought to be aware of, or need to consider • Only got time to give brief outline…happy to go into more detail if time, or separately • What are the key issues • My thoughts on next steps • Open for discussion….but don’t wait if have burning questions

2 What I think you ought to be aware of …this is really about the policy context in which the NP is being prepared

• There are 3 levels o National (Govt) o Strategic and Local (Cornwall Council) o NP

• National

• National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) o Published in 2012, but revised in July this year o 74 pages of national policy, replaced thousands of pages of previous guidance, but now backed up by National Planning Guidance (web based and more detailed) o Key and relevant bits for the NP

414 ▪ Purpose of planning is to help achieve “Sustainable development” (won’t go into this now, but about trying to balance social, economic, and environmental objectives …often these will compete) ▪ Section 3 Plan making…paras 28 – 30 about NPs ▪ Section 5 Housing ▪ Section 6 Economy ▪ Section 12 Design (para 125…NPs role in identifying special local qualities and explaining how this should be reflected in devt) ▪ Section 15 Natural envt (para 172 “great weight should be given to enhancing landscapes and scenic beauty in …AONBs)

• Strategic and Local (Cornwall Council) • Cornwall Local Plan (Strategic Policies) 2016 • Cornwall Local Plan Site Allocations (sites and more detail on some policies)…at examination • Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance (consultation draft) • Chief Planning Officer Advice Notes (including Infill/Rounding off, Lifting Holiday Occupancy Restrictions) • Cornwall Design Guide

• Cornwall Local Plan 2016 includes policies, especially relevant are

o 3 Role and function of places (includes rounding off and infill, and AONB o 4 Shopping, services and community facilities o 5 Business and tourism o 6,7,8,9,10 Housing o 12,13 Design and development standards o 14,15 Renewable Energy o 23, 24 Natural and historic envt

• Neighbourhood Plans

• Opportunity to provide localised and more detailed guidance, e.g local character, design, or any issue that is of particular local significance

• Whilst can reasonably assume that local residents won’t be overly familiar with NPPF or Cornwall Local Plan, NP will need to focus on adding something that is not already addressed, or where you might want to add some local context. What you can’t do in the NP is take an approach that is contrary to national and strategic policy. But whilst I would advise you as the Steering Group to be aware of these existing policies, you may need to include a brief explanation for local readers of this broader context.

415 What are the key issues and next steps

As a steering group, you do now know local views on a wide range of issues thanks to the questionnaire. One of your first tasks to discuss with your, soon to be appointed, planning advisor and/or the Parish Council is which of these are issues for the NP to address, which should be looked at by the Parish Council, and which probably can’t be taken forward at all….such as traffic calming.

(Jon Holt commented that liaison to and from the Parish Council was vital as the Plan progressed. It was generally considered that this was happening with NDP statements at Council Meetings and via Councillors embedded in the Steering Group. However, the means of transmitting those issues derived from the Questionnaire which were PC specific still had to be resolved. A generic summary of those issues would be preferred to handing over the comments database.)

The key issues for me for the NP:-

• Settlement boundaries…Kerrier did draw one for Mawnan Smith, but this was never adopted. Cornwall Council are leaving this for NPs, so you will need to consider whether there is any value in doing this for Mawnan Smith, and possibly Helford Passage, Budock Vean, Penwarne, Durgan, Maenporth…? You might also want to reflect on how challenging and divisive this might be. • If you don’t identify settlement boundaries, the potential for rounding off could be important • Should the NP include any policies about scale of development? Could the questionnaire responses help with this? • There appears to be a lot of support for some form of local design or character policy or guidance, but many people have pointed out that local character in Mawnan is hard to define. There might some value in the Steering Group looking (discreetly) at recent local development to help identify examples of development that respects local character, and whether this could help form the basis for design guidance. You would need to be very careful about how you do this, if you don’t want to upset people! • The AONB covers most of the parish, but some parts are clearly of higher scenic value than others. Should the NP think about whether some parts of the parish should be regarded as especially sensitive? • Should the NP try to identify any specific proposals, e.g. a location for a small business centre, or leisure facilities, or car parking? Or should the NP simply include policies supporting their provision? • Should the NP include a wish list of facilities or projects that the community would want to support, especially as the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is introduced in Jan?

416 Secretary’s Notes:

Cornwall council are not supportive of settlement boundaries, but should we define them nevertheless to identify areas at risk of inappropriate development? We could use Lowenna Fields to highlight dislikes.

Are there areas within the AONB which are more sensitive than others, for example Durgan or parts of Mawnan Smith itself?

We should list and talk to landowners about any development plans or intentions they have for the future. A National Trust land map should be acquired – Jackie Whibley would pursue.

We should consider drawing up a development wish list for funding by the CIL. This could include car parking.

Nigel felt that we should take a risk to make the NDP more realistic – must include some development to reflect need.

Draft Aims and Objectives

The Chair, Jon Holt and the Secretary had met to draft a Vision and Objectives which were essential components of the Plan document and which should lead to the Policies to be applied. The slides were displayed by the Secretary, discussed and amendments suggested. These have been incorporated and are given below:

VISION

In 2030, the unique current character and visual amenity of Mawnan Parish as defined by its status of wholly AONB or an Area of Great Landscape Value and its special coastal and estuarine shores and rural landscapes, are enhanced and protected by allowing future development only in accordance with policies defined within the Neighbourhood Plan.

OBJECTIVES

• HOUSING

To permit housing development iaw the Local Plan by means of infill or rounding- off and, within those developments, to make provision for homes that provide low-cost living to meet local housing need in perpetuity.

• DESIGN AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT

To support development that is high quality, respective and responds appropriately to the landscape and village-scapes of the Parish and the form and character of its natural and built environment.

417 • NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

To protect and enhance the unique landscape character of the Parish, including the AONB, ecology, biodiversity, and native trees and hedges.

• HISTORICAL

To protect, enhance and celebrate the important heritage of the Parish, including Listed Buildings, ancient monuments, locally important buildings, and ancient field patterns and features.

• SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE (Amenities)

- To support and safeguard social infrastructure by providing a high quality of life in our Parish with community facilities, open spaces and services to meet changing needs.

- To safeguard those facilities and local green spaces that are special to the local community.

• BUSINESS

To support and encourage local businesses particularly in agriculture, tourism, leisure, craft and creative industries, ensuring that people have good opportunities for and access to local employment, skills improvement and education.

• RENEWABLE ENERGY

- To encourage any development to utilise minimum use of energy.

- To permit carbon-free energy production.

• TRANSPORT

To permit schemes that seek to overcome traffic congestion within the main settlement area.

The Chair reminded the SG that the next meeting would be on 17 December and that he would be meeting with James Evans, an NDP consultant, on 19 December. He would also be present at the Parish Council Meeting on 20 December. He closed the meeting at 9.20 pm.

T Damer

Chairman

Mawnan NDP Steering Group

15 December 2018

418 Minutes of a Public Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 17 December 2018 at The Bowling Club, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Richard Martin, Mick Hartley, Georgena Morris, and 6 members of the public.

1. Apologies: Cllrs Jackie Whibley and Graham Marsden, Carrie Gilmour, Jon Holt, Melissa Mercer.

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and reprised events since the last public Steering Group (SG) meeting on 23 July:

• The circulation of the Questionnaire (Q1) which achieved a 40% return. • The analysis of the Q1 and subsequent exposition in September. A resumé of the analysis is on the website. • The presentation by the Cornwall AONB that attracted some 80 people and which has also been placed on the website.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting

Due to time constraints, the minutes of the 19 November meeting, which was largely a record of the AONB event, were not circulated in draft form. The Note for the Record of Nigel Gilmour’s briefing on “Next Steps” to the SG on 3 December was essentially restricted to his briefing notes. The Chair accepted both as true records of those events and duly signed them off.

3. Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

4. Aims, Objectives and Policies

A focus group of the Chair, Secretary and John Holt had drafted a Vision statement and enabling objectives. Although reported on in the Notes of the 3rd December meeting they had not been made widely available. Copies were circulated to those present and are attached at Annex A. Sarah Mason felt that the Vision needed to include words to reflect a need for affordable housing; however, it was felt that this was covered in the Housing objective. Nevertheless, the SG was open to suggestions and would revisit the Vision. The Chair indicated that the objectives had to be cascaded down into policies for each area; these policies would form the crux of the NDP and this work would need to be undertaken by the Working Groups. The Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) was a standalone document that provided critical background to the Plan.

Action: Working Group and LCA Leaders

419 5. Engagement Schedule

The Chair was concerned that the 2012 attempt at a Parish Plan had failed due to a lack of engagement with residents and poor inter-communication with the Parish Council. Therefore, a Statement of Engagement had been compiled by him stretching from the Parish Council deliberations in 2016 to the AONB meeting in November 2018. It detailed all contact with the local community through meetings, Farmers Markets, Fun Run, advertising, the use of a website and Facebook, and mailings via MailChimp to our contact group which is some 260 strong. There is a little further work to do but the aim is to have the document with County NDP Planning (Sarah Furley) in January 2019 so that they can confirm their verbal deduction, based on the results of Q1, that a further survey of Parish residents is not going to be required. This will save considerable time and money which could be devoted to expediting the Draft Plan. He saw the need for more focus group meetings and commented on the importance of placing our documents on the website for public viewing.

6. Finance a. Invoicing. There had been a problem in handling the invoice from Cornwall Wildlife Trust (CWT) for their map of the parish. The Treasurer would resolve the matter with the Parish Clerk and reiterated that all invoices should be passed to him for payment so that VAT could be reclaimed via the parish. b. Budget. The current funding period was coming to an end; to obtain further funding the balance, approximately £150, would be returned to Groundwork. Funding for the period Jan – Mar 19 would be applied for and consist of stationary, hall bookings as the basics but could include costings for LCA support and the engagement of a planning consultant to help draft the NDP.

Action: D McQ was to consult Kath Statham on how to expedite the LCA document and determine the potential costs.

(After a meeting with James Evans, the planning consultant, on 19 December, the Chair and Jon Holt had agreed to forward documents to him for his appraisal of the task with a view to produce a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) by end March 2019. He would quote for that work and produce a quote for work on the Draft NDP and its presentation from April 2019.) c. Consultancy. From the floor, Sarah Mason, a local resident and the CEO of the Cornwall Association of Local Councils (CALC) commented that when the steering group meets with the consultant, they try to identify where his time is best focussed to get the best value for money. She believes some policies are not sufficiently robust and there is some suspicion that consultants cut and paste planning policies which then lead to weakness which developers can use. It will be important to get best use of his expertise. d. She also advised that the Crantock action for judicial review of a planning decision against their NPD has been turned down at the court. Clarification is now being sought from Government on the three key areas of their appeal against the decision to grant permission for affordable housing on an exception site. These areas were:

420 • That ‘local’ means the area of Cornwall Council, not the designated area of the NDP. • That the parish council cannot automatically count existing planning permissions when looking at applications towards the housing need threshold. • That because the NDP policies meet and agree with Cornwall Council’s local plan, the local plan effectively trumps the local NDP.

A private member’s bill has now been introduced in parliament to limit the rights of a developer appealing against a planning decision taken in an area covered by a neighbourhood plan.

7. Any Other Business a. The Chair outlined the “Next Steps” in the NDP process. Based on the meeting with JE, the target was to hold a referendum on the Plan by January 2020. We would need to work closely with the Parish Council to consult and review the plan as it develops and proceeds towards inspection. Work on the policies would need to be undertaken by the Working Group leaders who should heed Sarah Mason’s advice and make them both robust and reflect the public view. b. A question was asked as to whether a meeting had taken place with local business and landowners as to their thoughts on future development. It was felt that some reticence would be forthcoming, and these people had had the opportunity to express their wishes via the Questionnaire. Focus groups could be useful when determining policies. The secretary agreed to obtain a National Trust (NT) map showing their land ownership.

Action: Sec to obtain NT land map. c. There was concern at how to pass non-NDP related comment from the Q1 database to the Parish Council. The whole database, if handed to the PC would go into the public domain and could enable attribution of comment to an individual. This would breach the privacy accorded in the Q. It was agreed that the non-NDP topics should be given to the PC in general form at a private meeting.

6. Next Meeting

Due to the absence of the Secretary on holiday, the next public meeting of the Steering Group would be held in the Bowling Club at 7.00 pm on Monday 28th January 2019.

The Chair thanked those present for their involvement and the meeting was closed at 8.30 pm.

T Damer Chair Mawnan NDP 4 January 2019

421 ANNEX A to

Minutes 17 December 2018

VISION

In 2030, the unique current character and visual amenity of Mawnan Parish as defined by its status of wholly AONB or an Area of Great Landscape Value and its special coastal and estuarine shores and rural landscapes, are enhanced and protected by allowing future development only in accordance with policies defined within the Neighbourhood Plan.

OBJECTIVES

• HOUSING

To permit housing development iaw the Local Plan by means of infill or rounding- off and, within those developments, to make provision for homes that provide low-cost living to meet local housing need in perpetuity.

• DESIGN AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT

To support development that is high quality, respective and responds appropriately to the landscape and village-scapes of the Parish and the form and character of its natural and built environment.

• NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

To protect and enhance the unique landscape character of the Parish, including the AONB, ecology, biodiversity, and native trees and hedges.

• HISTORICAL

To protect, enhance and celebrate the important heritage of the Parish, including Listed Buildings, ancient monuments, locally important buildings, and ancient field patterns and features.

• SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE (Amenities)

- To support and safeguard social infrastructure by providing a high quality of life in our Parish with community facilities, open spaces and services to meet changing needs.

- To safeguard those facilities and local green spaces that are special to the local community.

• BUSINESS

To support and encourage local businesses particularly in agriculture, tourism, leisure, craft and creative industries, ensuring that people have good opportunities for and access to local employment, skills improvement and education.

422 • RENEWABLE ENERGY

- To encourage any development to utilise minimum use of energy.

- To permit carbon-free energy production.

• TRANSPORT

To permit schemes that seek to overcome traffic congestion within the main settlement area.

423 Minutes of a Public Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 28 January 2019 at The Bowling Club, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Richard Martin, Mick Hartley, Georgena Morris, Jackie Whibley, Jon Holt, and 9 members of the public.

1. Apologies: Cllrs Graham Marsden and Rex Sadler, Carrie Gilmour, Melissa Mercer.

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the last meeting (17 Dec 18) had been circulated. No alterations had been requested and the Chair accepted them as a true record.

3. Matters Arising

The action to develop policies under item 4 was ongoing. Item 6 - Kath Statham was not in a position to undertake writing the LCA document but would provide oversight of drafting work; no costs were involved. A National Trust map of land ownership in the Parish would be obtained via Jackie Whibley. (The map is now with the administrator.)

4. Vision, Objectives and Policies – Next Steps a. Overview. The Chair outlined recent discussions with Sarah Furley (CC Planning) following his provision of a Statement of Engagement 2016 – 2018. She agreed that a further questionnaire would not be required as enough evidence to allow a draft plan had been gathered. The next step should be to draft the plan with the assistance of a consultant; it would be screened for a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA). The draft plan would provide further opportunity for community engagement. b. Consultant. Jon Holt briefed the SG on the appointment of James Evans (JE) as our NDP Planning Consultant. Jon Holt advised that he, the Chair and DM had met with JE on 19 December 2018. JE provided details of his experience and credentials of dealing with NDPs generally and demonstrated his knowledge of Mawnan parish. As a result it was decided to appoint JE (subject to funding) to produce a draft plan which would be sufficient for CCC examination for compliance for SEA and HRA. JE set out the information he would require from the Steering Group to enable him to produce the document. Jon stressed that much of the required evidence is available from the Questionnaire output. On a query about JE’s competence, Jon assured the audience that with 15 plans already drawn up and high recommendations from other NDP groups, we were confident of his ability.

424 c. Environment. The Environment group had undertaken considerable work and would meet shortly to determine their policies. They needed clarity on the material and/or references that the consultant would require. It was agreed that a face-to-face meeting with him would be very beneficial.

Action: Administrator to set up a meeting for all working groups with the consultant. d. Leisure and Tourism. Jackie Whibley accepted that the group had been in hibernation but that she would prepare a summary of the data held and meet with businesses and leisure services to determine policies. e. Business. The Chair reported that Carrie Gilmore had decided to step down from the Steering Group owing to family commitments. An appeal for a new leader of the group would be made via the newsletter. In a later appeal to the audience, Malcolm Leather indicated that he would be able to assist with a letter to businesses to discover whether they had any development plans and what policies might influence their operation.

(Subsequent to the meeting Simon Sheldrake had indicated his willingness to form a new business group comprised of himself, Malcolm Leather, Martin Barlow, Ruth and Barry Walker, and Nick Rawley.) f. Draft Plan. In lieu of a further questionnaire, which could provoke a poor response, it was essential to promote a 6-week public consultation exercise on the draft plan to engender a wide response. This is known as a Regulation 14 exercise under the NDP planning guidelines.

Action: Working Group and LCA Leaders

5. Finance

The end of grant report for the period Apr – Dec 2018 had been completed. A budget for the period Jan – Mar 2019 had been submitted to cover:

Professional fees (Consultancy) £2100

Room Hire £150

Publicity £300

Stationary £250

Website £30

Mileage £100 Total: £2930

Locality had accepted the application for funds which were now with the Parish Council.

425 6. Any Other Business a. To a query from the floor regarding relations with the Parish Council (PC), the Chair noted that 3 members of the Steering Group were councillors and liaised accordingly; he also attended PC meetings and briefed the Council on a 2-monthly basis. In the coming months it would be essential to have closer relations as the Draft Plan develops. b. Carbon policies should be reflected in the NDP. The Chair would attend a Conference on Climate Change and NDPs on 9 March 2019 at Tremough Campus. Details for anyone else wishing to attend are on the Eventbrite website. c. Dennis and Jon Holt would attend a briefing by the Cornwall Community Land Trust on 20 February 2019 to determine how the trust could assist in achieving affordable housing. d. Cornwall CC had redesigned their planning service structure. Area Team Planning would embed a planning officer into each of 8 areas to provide greater continuity and knowledge of the assigned area. Jon Holt would attend a briefing on the scheme on 13 March in Falmouth. e. Jackie Whibley informed the meeting about the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) concerns for rural amenities and infrastructure. She has provided the Administrator with their analysis which could influence amenities policy. f. The Chair reiterated his view that the social (community) infrastructure in the parish was especially strong and policies should be adopted to ensure their sustainability. Currently, the working group was leaderless, and effort was needed to remedy the situation. g. Raised by the floor, the Daily Telegraph had recently produced an article on ancient footpaths. Jackie Whibley as the PC “rights of way” officer would investigate their existence within the parish. Public footpaths were important to the parish and would feature in the LCA and, likely, under amenities and tourism policies.

6. Next Meeting

The next public meeting of the Steering Group would be held in the Bowling Club at 7.00 pm on Monday 18th February 2019.

The Chair thanked those present for their involvement and the meeting was closed at 8.15 pm.

T Damer Chair Mawnan NDP 11 February 2019

426 ANNEX A to

Minutes 17 December 2018

VISION

In 2030, the unique current character and visual amenity of Mawnan Parish as defined by its status of wholly AONB or an Area of Great Landscape Value and its special coastal and estuarine shores and rural landscapes, are enhanced and protected by allowing future development only in accordance with policies defined within the Neighbourhood Plan.

OBJECTIVES

• HOUSING

To permit housing development iaw the Local Plan by means of infill or rounding- off and, within those developments, to make provision for homes that provide low-cost living to meet local housing need in perpetuity.

• DESIGN AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT

To support development that is high quality, respective and responds appropriately to the landscape and village-scapes of the Parish and the form and character of its natural and built environment.

• NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

To protect and enhance the unique landscape character of the Parish, including the AONB, ecology, biodiversity, and native trees and hedges.

• HISTORICAL

To protect, enhance and celebrate the important heritage of the Parish, including Listed Buildings, ancient monuments, locally important buildings, and ancient field patterns and features.

• SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE (Amenities)

- To support and safeguard social infrastructure by providing a high quality of life in our Parish with community facilities, open spaces and services to meet changing needs.

- To safeguard those facilities and local green spaces that are special to the local community.

• BUSINESS

To support and encourage local businesses particularly in agriculture, tourism, leisure, craft and creative industries, ensuring that people have good opportunities for and access to local employment, skills improvement and education.

427 • RENEWABLE ENERGY

- To encourage any development to utilise minimum use of energy.

- To permit carbon-free energy production.

• TRANSPORT

To permit schemes that seek to overcome traffic congestion within the main settlement area.

428 NDP notes for Mawnan parish council meeting 21 February 2019

• The NDP last reported to the parish council at the December meeting. It was then decided that for reasons of confidentiality the 1,300 written comments freely submitted by parish residents in last year’s questionnaire would be supplied for viewing by parish councillors in a restricted file held in the parish office. The almost completed file is (was) expected to be available next week. It also contains, as a reminder, a brief statement about the survey and the reasons for the need for confidentiality, a summary of comments relevant to the NDP as displayed at the exhibition of last September along with pointers to issues that may be directly relevant to the work of the parish council, and a table of the answers to the quantitative questions in the survey. Sufficient copies of the later are included for councillors to retain if they wish. • On 31 January, Locality, the funding body for NDPs, transferred £2,930 to the parish bank account being the sum we applied for to cover the period up to 31 March. Any underspend will be returned to Locality and may be included in our next application after 1st April; there was a small underspend on our earlier application. • As of that date our chosen consultant, James Evans, was able to commence work on the next stage of the NDP process, namely preparing a draft NDP and a Strategic Environmental Assessment which ideally we would like to have ready by the end of March although this date is probably a bit optimistic! • We have had one resignation of a working group leader, but helpfully following the public (open) meeting held in the bowling club on January 28, with nine members of the public present, a new volunteer came forward and has subsequently recruited several more helpers. • A number of meetings have been held at team member houses, and on Monday next (25 February) we will be holding a ‘surgery’ with James Evans with each working group team allocated a set time in which they can present to him the results of their work so far and learn from him but what is expected of them going forward and what specific data he still requires to enable him the prepare the draft reports. • Finally a meeting was held yesterday with the Cornwall Community Land Trust so we could learn more about their work in providing affordable homes, and how we might work with them in the future. • The next open meeting will be March 18th at the bowling club.

429 Minutes of a Public Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 18 March 2019 at The Bowling Club, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Richard Martin, Mick Hartley, Georgena Morris, Cllrs Jackie Whibley and Rex Sadler, Simon Sheldrake, and 14 members of the public.

1. Apologies: Jon Holt and Melissa Mercer.

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the last meeting (28 Jan 19) had been circulated. No alterations had been requested and the Chair accepted them as a true record.

3. Matters Arising

Para 4c. A face-to-face meeting had been arranged with James Evans on 25 February 2019 at which the Working Group leaders undertook to provide him with the required input (policies and supporting material) to formulate the Draft NDP. The LCA leader undertook to complete the draft LCA document by early March as this was a vital document in the process.

4. Finance a. £2930 had been lodged with the Parish Council (PC). There had been only minor expenditure in the current period to 31 March 2019. The consultant’s fees were awaited but it was likely that a surplus would be returned to Locality. A new bid would be produced in April and that would likely encompass the expenditure required until the end of the NDP process currently planned for April 2020. b. The Chair reminded the audience that a total of £9,000 was available from Locality. In addition, the PC had funded £700 of start-up costs outside the available grant.

(Since the meeting the need to return unspent funds to Locality by the end of the budget period had changed; instead they could roll-over to the next period. This would allow us to plan more precisely for the expensive period ahead which would encompass consultant fees, document production and public consultation exercises.)

5. Progress a. Landscape Character Assessment (LCA). The draft LCA had been completed by 12 March and had been forwarded to James Evans (Consultant), to Sarah Furley (CC NDP Planner) and to Kath Statham (CC Landscape Architect) for comment. It had also been circulated to the Steering Gp and a copy placed on the NDP website seeking comment. Links were provided via the Newsletter to the contact group (approx. 240 people). Three

430 hard copies were to be placed; one to the PC Chairman, one in the Parish Office for public access, and one in Cornish Maid for public reading. Initial comment from the consultant had been positive. D McQ explained the background and need for the LCA and recorded his thanks to the team who had helped bring the assessment to fruition.

(For the record, the team comprised: DMcQ, Mike and Carol Hurst, Ruth Walker, Melanie Williams, Rod Allday and Mick Hartley) b. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). The consultant was working on the SEA version of the Draft NDP document which would reflect the vision, objectives and policies sent to him by the working groups (WGs). It had been hoped to complete this work by end-March 2019, but it was now likely to be end-April before it was available for inspection, comment and redrafting before submission to Cornwall Council. They would check the legality of the policies and determine whether environmental factors such as AONB, SSSIs, heritage sites and scheduled monuments were impacted by the plan. The Chair emphasised the need for the WGs to expedite their input to the document. After discussion, and in the hope that the draft NDP would be available, it was agreed that the next public meeting would be held on 13 May 2019 at which the consultant had agreed to attend. c. Carbon Reduction. The Chair and Cllr Whibley had attended a Conference on Climate Change and NDPs at Tremough campus on 9 March. It concluded that climate change was a real and existential threat to us all. Cornwall Council had declared a Climate Emergency in January 2019 and several Parish Councils had followed suit. There were recommendations for the latter to follow and these would be followed up by JW at forthcoming PC meetings. The full text of JW’s speaking notes are at Annex A. NDPs had a role to play by including policies that promote and recommend:

• High standards of energy efficiency and the provision of renewable energy for all homes and businesses. • That all new homes be designed to meet Net Carbon Zero Building Standards and have rainwater harvesting facilities. • The use of ground/heat source pumps as an alternative to oil or gas heating systems. • Provision of clean energy systems such as wind turbines and solar arrays to supply local needs. • Improved insulation for new and current housing and for business accommodation. • Increased woodland cover. • Small scale and local farming to include community food production. • Protection and extension of local green space. • Resistance to “change of use” applications that may harm local amenities and services by increasing the carbon footprint.

The Chair emphasised that we could not dictate design to support eco-friendly initiatives but could recommend plans to reduce the carbon footprint

431 6. Settlement Character Assessment (SCA) a. The consultant considered that an SCA or Design Statement should be included with our NDP to provide developers and planners with principles which they should follow when considering applications for new builds within the parish. No such document currently exists, nor is there a parish-wide vernacular building design. However, certain areas of the parish had a local vernacular, and these should be respected. Mick Hartley would lead the assessment which would describe our main settlement areas by division of the parish built-environment into manageable bite-size chunks. The use of our street reps and LCA groups could support the description effort. The Chair would provide a checklist of design features against which to record findings and take photos.

(Subsequently, a team of 10 had been put together and work was on-going to evaluate the area. Base results should be available by Easter and correlation into a document for the consultant shortly after.) b. It was queried whether a settlement edge/boundary was required. As the main settlement (Mawnan Smith) lay centrally within an AONB and the likely policy for house building in the NDP would be for small-scale infill or rounding projects, a boundary was not required. The provision of one along geographic features (the normal method for defining a boundary) could give rise to unwanted development or provoke dissension among landowners.

7. Any Other Business a. A plea was made by the Environment and History WG for information about green spaces and modern artefacts in the parish that need to be protected. b. The Business/Leisure and Amenities joint WG were working towards a selective series of face-to face meetings with owners/managers to determine whether their plans included any development aspects. A common Questionnaire was to be used; it was hoped to conclude the interviews by Easter. c. It was suggested that the Town Planning Institutes Guide on Carbon Reduction (published 2019) was the gold standard and had been employed by Gwinnear and Gwithian parishes in their NDP submissions.

8. Next Meetings

The next meeting of the Steering Group would be held in the Bowling Club at 7.00 pm on Monday 15 April 2019. This would be an in-house WG meeting to ensure that progress had been made on input to the consultant.

432 The next public meeting would be held on Monday 13 May 2019 with the NDP consultant, James Evans in attendance. The Chair thanked those present for their involvement and the meeting was closed at 8.35 pm.

T Damer Chair Mawnan NDP 10 April 2019

433 Annex A to Minutes 18 March 2019

Notes by Cllr Jackie Whibley 12/03/2019

Climate Change and Neighbourhood Planning Conference

Penryn- Tremough Campus- Saturday 8th March 2019

Background:

Cornwall Council declared a Climate Emergency on 22nd January 2019 and a number of parish cancels have followed suit. The ambition is that Cornwall is carbon neutral by 2030. 75% of the reduction in emissions of greenhouse gas has been achieved by phasing out dependence on coal, but this is not enough. The conference was to share understanding of the impact of climate change on Cornwall, and to discuss how local councils and communities can help through Neighbourhood Development Plans and Emergency Plans.

A website has been set up to follow on from the conference, with speaker biogs and links via youtube to the presentations as they were delivered. Go to www.zerocarboncornwall.wordpress.com.

Key points:

• Climate change is a very real and existential threat to us all. Historical trend data and future predictions of climate change concur that global warming is occurring regionally across the globe at differential levels, and devastatingly in the arctic (much faster than predicted). • Greenhouse gases impact far more on sea temperature (and ph) than on the atmosphere. The last 4 years have been the 4 warmest in history. The goal is to contain the rise to +1.5 degrees C vs. pre industrial levels. Beyond this we can expect catastrophic changes in climate. Sea levels could rise by 25 metres if the planet warms to +3.0 degrees, and by up to 70 metres if it escalates to +4.0 degrees C. At this level 50% of all species will have become extinct- including humans. (200 species a day are already becoming extinct.) • The current level of CO2 is 411.75 parts per million, and has never been as high in the history of the planet. • 75% of greenhouse gas emissions (CO2 (carbon dioxide) and CO4 (methane)) are generated by energy production and usage, 25% from land use. • There will be more variability and extremes of weather for more sustained periods as slower-moving blocking systems of high/ low pressure develop. • Expect mass migrations from uninhabitable regions. And if high temperatures (35 degrees C or above) combine with high humidity, life will become extinct. • We are the first generation to realise the danger we are in, and the last that can do something about it. This will be our legacy to all future generations.

434 • Climate resilience needs to be embedded at all levels of society. Local government and parish councils are now operating in a new world, and need to get involved. NDPs can support the effort of Cornwall Council in seeking bio diversity, energy efficiency, local walking/ cycling routes, managing coastal change, green infrastructure and resilience to flooding.

What can our Parish Council do?

5 Big Objectives were suggested (see leaflet):

1. Declare a climate emergency: show support for the Council and demand that Westminster takes a meaningful lead on addressing climate change. 2. Form a Climate/ Environment Action Group: explore ideas and actions we can take within our community 3. Inform and educate- bring the community together to envisage a better future 4. Short- term actions- immediate opportunities with immediate impact, at little/ no cost 5. Longer-term goals- projects that may take longer , cost more or need to be planned

Several ideas were suggested for each of these objectives (see leaflet)

Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP):

• Very important to finish creating our legally binding NDP • Consider including policies which promote high standards of energy efficiency, and include provision of renewable energy for all homes and businesses • Consider policies for all new homes to be certified to Passivhaus Standards, or Net Carbon Zero Building Standards. And for no surface water to enter the public drainage system: they need to have rainwater harvesting facility. • Include policies to prevent installation of oil or gas heating systems in new homes or businesses: recommend ground/heat source pumps, and electric sourced from renewable energy. It will soon be cheaper to get electricity from PV panels than from a power station: and current metrics suggest they repay their carbon debt within a few months. • Include provision for Clean Energy Schemes (wind turbines, solar arrays) and electric car charging points within the parish: be as self- contained for community energy use as possible (65% of energy is wasted in the delivery of energy from a power station to a 3- pin plug). • 80% of today’s homes will still be occupied by 2055. We need to get on with improving insulation, and making them more energy efficient- even if they are listed buildings: retro-fitting should be possible when energy efficiency is weighed against heritage. • Can we set up community car sharing? • Cornwall has only 7-8% woodland cover: biogas is not a way forward unless we plant more (mixed coppice) woodland.

435 • Include policies to support small scale and local farming, and food growing in the community (shared tools, even?), and with a view to supporting increased biodiversity • Include policies to protect and extend local green spaces (for both social and environmental benefits) • Have policies to resist “change of use” applications in order to protect local amenities and services to the community (reduce carbon footprint)

General ideas:

• Talk about climate change! • Lobby our MP (George Eustice) and Westminster for all initiatives that will help our community reduce carbon emissions • Switch to renewable energy supplier for council/ community buildings • When awarding contracts for goods or services, consider carbon emissions, and source locally where possible • Support the community in ways to reduce consumption, reduce waste and increase recycling. Help people to buy less “stuff”, to get things repaired (skills/ repair cafes), share, keep for longer and to try and buy craft and locally made products. • Encourage local businesses to let people know bicycles are welcome etc • Familiarise ourselves with Cornwall Council’s Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) and policy documents e.g. “Building with Nature”, and “Connecting Cornwall 2030: Towards a green peninsula”.

436 NDP Notes for the Parish Council Meeting 18 April 2019

• The NDP chairman last reported to the Parish Council on 21 February. • The planned February NDP meeting was cancelled ahead of the meeting on 25 February with James Evans, our consultant. That meeting allowed face-to-face time with the Working Group leaders to determine the inputs required by him; these were essentially background research material, policies in support of objectives set earlier, and the justification for those policies. Housing policy is well established and is a key element of the document. However, work remains in the Business and Amenities, Environment, Historical and Carbon policy work areas. In addition, the consultant advised that a Design Statement (or Settlement Character Assessment) was required. • A key element of the NDP is the Landscape Character Assessment which supports policies and provides developers and planners with a refined local picture of the parish. The work was completed by myself and a willing band of 6 by early March and has been widely circulated in draft form for comment or alteration. The Parish Chairman has a copy and hard copies are available in the parish office and at Cornish Maid where, I understand, it has been read! I have received no comment thus far from interested parties at Cornwall Council; the consultant feels that it meets the requirement to support policy-making. • The Design Statement is a substantial piece of work to indicate the types of properties in our main settlement areas, their construction materials and their landscape setting. As there is no vernacular building type within the parish, the document will survey Mawnan Smith (6 districts), West Bay/Trelawne and Budock Vean Lane/Bar Road where some homogenous housing types exist A summary of outlying hamlets will be included. A team of 10 volunteers is undertaking this task as I speak. Their observations will support the design principles that developers and private planning applicants must consult once the NDP is “made” and will provide them with a checklist to assist with their planning application. We aim to complete the document by end April. • We had hoped that the Draft NDP document, Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) version would be ready for scrutiny by the Steering Group ahead of our next planned public meeting on 13 May at which the consultant will be present. The Design Statement will not allow this, so we intend that our June meeting will be a public exposition of the Plan before it goes to Cornwall Council (NDP Planning) for initial SEA inspection and determination. Any redrafting will then be undertaken before the formal examination process gets underway. We remain

437 hopeful that this will begin in the Autumn and that our planned final date for acceptance by Cornwall Council of April 2020 will be met. • In the last period there have been meetings/conferences with the CC NDP planners (written confirmation of no requirement for a further questionnaire); with the Cornwall Community Land Trust – a way to meet local demand for truly affordable housing; with our MP George Eustice to understand his views on maintaining green space; and the Climate Change and NDP conference which will inform Carbon policies. • ANY QUESTIONS

438 Minutes of a Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 15 April 2019 at The Bowling Club, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Jon Holt, Richard Martin, Mick Hartley, Georgena Morris, Cllr Jackie Whibley, Simon Sheldrake.

1. Apologies: Cllrs Graham Marsden and Rex Sadler, Melissa Mercer (Media)

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m. The main purpose of the meeting was to determine progress in sending policy justification evidence to the NDP consultant, James Evans. There were 2 additional items to the published agenda: a. To provide an NDP Update to the Mawnan Parish Council meeting on 18 April; It was agreed this would be provided by the Sec.

Action: Sec b. To consider the recent planning application regarding Penwarne Road. See AOB.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the last meeting (18 Mar 19) had been circulated. No alterations had been requested and the Chair accepted them as a true record.

3. Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

4. Finance a. £2930 had been lodged with the Parish Council (PC). There was now no need to return unspent monies to Locality. James Evans had not yet billed for his services to date. £200 had been spent on hall bookings and stationary. The bulk of the funding was committed to consultancy costs. b. A new bid would be produced in May that would likely encompass the expenditure required until the end of the NDP process currently planned for April 2020. It would need to encompass consultant fees, document production and public consultation exercises. c. RM was asked to determine likely end-costs from his contact at Feock NDP that had recently completed their plan.

Action: Richard Martin

5. Progress a. Settlement Character Assessment (SCA). The SCA team had started their work after a briefing held by the Sec on 3 and 4 April. The plan was to have the assessments completed by end April with correlation into a document (the Design Statement) by early May. This would be sent to the consultant and distributed in draft form to the wider community. A summary group (TD, DMcQ and MH) would meet on 29 April to monitor progress. b. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). The consultant was working on the SEA version of the Draft NDP document which would reflect the vision, objectives and policies

439 sent to him by the working groups (WGs). James Evans (JE) now hoped to have the basic draft available by the next meeting (13 May). The Chair emphasised the need for the WGs to expedite their input to the document. JE would attend the next meeting. c. Business, Amenities and Leisure. After consultation with JE, the database for interviews had been refined to provide a cross-section of businesses and amenities that would be interviewed by a team operating in pairs with either JW or SS in attendance. JH agreed to support the interview team. A standardised questionnaire would be used to ensure the robust analysis of comments received. Business would be asked “what they could do for the Parish”. The WG planned to complete interviews by end-April. JW would send the planned interview list to the Chair. Discussion revolved around the need for indoor sports facilities and the importance of such amenities as the Doctor’s Surgery. The NDP should aim to retain current facilities and not to let them wither, only to be replaced by housing.

Action: Jackie Whibley and Simon Sheldrake d. Housing. The consultant was content with the input received to date. JH reiterated that only main settlements, including Mawnan Smith, were subject to rounding and infill. Outside this, and within the AONB, other developments should be treated as rural exception sites. The Chair and JH had met with George Eustice MP who was interested in the NDP work and sympathetic with the avoidance of over-development in rural areas; he stood ready to offer support where a clear case could be established against such development. JH was also in contact with the Parish Council via Cllr Brooksbank regarding the very recent (1April) Penwarne application.

(1). It was recognised that apart from National Trust holdings, farmers in the area were the principal landowners. JM was trying to build a picture of land ownership; he asked group members to map out farm boundaries as they knew them. The intention was to hold a meeting with farmers to discuss pressures on their way of life and the potential impact on development. e. Environment/History. No response had been received to requests (via Newsletter) for information regarding new history or landmarks. Efforts were in hand to determine whether any common land or green spaces existed within the parish that might need protection. The group had still to compile a document for the consultant showing all Listed Buildings and designated ancient monuments.

Action: Georgena Morris

6. Any Other Business a. An outline planning application with all matters reserved, PA19/02775, had been submitted to build 11 homes of which 6 would be affordable on Penwarne Road. A previous application for 8 homes had been made in 2015 but had been refused. In discussion it was considered that the plan did not meet the terms of infill or rounding as these only applied to a main settlement area. Moreover, the proximity to the AONB boundary and the surrounding area would damage landscape character. Concern was also raised about road traffic, access to the site and the lack of footpaths. There were clear indications that the proposal did not meet current CC Local Plan or Supplementary Planning Guidelines. Although the NDP plan was still evolving, the 2018 questionnaire response indicated that the community at large did not wish to see development of this scale.

440 b. It was, therefore, considered necessary to bring the matter to the attention of the wider NDP community so that they could make their wishes known via the Cornwall Council Planning portal – the end date for comment was 25 April 2019. The Housing WG leader would provide questionnaire statistics and CC guidelines to assist comment and brief the community via a Newsletter written by the Chair to the contact group. In addition, in the absence of the Chair, JH would attend the forthcoming Parish Council meeting on 18 April to brief the council on the NDP view.

Action: Chair and Jon Holt

8. Next Meetings

The next public meeting of the Steering Group would be held in the Bowling Club at 7.00 pm on Monday 13 May 2019. James Evans would be present to outline the initial draft NDP document and reinforce where gaps still exist.

T Damer Chair

Mawnan NDP 8 May 2019

441 Minutes of a Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 13 May 2019 at The Bowling Club, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer), Richard Martin, Mick Hartley, Cllr Jackie Whibley, Simon Sheldrake, Cllr Rex Sadler

In attendance: James Evans (Consultant), Derek Stacey (Environment & History) and 12 members of the public.

1. Apologies: Jon Holt, Georgina Morris, Melissa Mercer (Media)

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m. Billed as a “Meet the NDP Consultant” in the lead up to the meeting, the Chair introduced James Evans.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the last meeting (15 April 19) had been circulated. Minor alterations were requested by JW at Para 5c to change the sub-heading to Business, Amenities and Leisure and to include Simon Sheldrake in the Action line. JW also asked that the phrase “all matters reserved” be applied to the Planning Application at Para 6a. Otherwise they were accepted as a true record and will be resubmitted to the Chair for signature at the next meeting.

3. Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

4. Meet the Consultant a. The Chair hoped that JE could:

• Explain how the NDP evolves from the current draft status and the point at which further public consultation occurs. • Mention the level of background data required and advise where the current draft requires further input. • Outline current plan objectives. • Give an opinion on progress to date when viewed against other NDPs that he had worked on. • Provide detail on the point in the process that the Mawnan Plan would bear weight in planning considerations. • Advise on how much NDP weight did the planning inspector use in refusing a recent Carnon Downs application. b. In opening his comments, James Evans stated his credentials in planning. He then used a series of slides to brief the audience on many of the matters raised by the Chair. The slides are at Annex A to these minutes and will be available on the website. c. In timescale terms, he suggested that from the point of delivery of the SEA version of the Plan to Cornwall Council for environmental assessment, a period of 6 weeks be allowed for their consultation with interested parties. We should allow a further 8 weeks for any redrafting required, and another 6 weeks for formal public consultation with the Parish Council and residents - the pre-submission stage. A 2-week period should then be allowed for any further redrafting. Following approval by the Parish Council the Plan

442 would be submitted to Cornwall Council for their formal assessment and consultation. It is expected that the pre-submission will occur in Autumn 2019 and the parish approved plan sent to Cornwall Council (CC) in early 2020. The target for referendum remains Spring 2020. During the SEA assessment period, the draft plan would be shared with the Parish Council and with the wider population to familiarise them with it and to seek views. d. Within the presentation period the following queries were raised:

Q. Following earlier public consultations, could any weight be attached to evidence gained?

A. Only after examination by CC and their endorsement of the policies contained within an NDP. In the case of a recent Carnon Downs refusal, the Feock NDP bore full weight with the inspector as it had passed referendum and had been made/adopted. On the other hand, although the Falmouth plan was reasonably advanced (pre-submission consultation) an appeal by Linden Homes had been allowed as the inspector gave no weight to the emerging NDP.

Q. Could a legal challenge be raised against NDP policies?

A. As provided by James Evans:

If the majority of those who vote in a referendum are in favour of the draft neighbourhood plan or Order (or, where there is also a business referendum, a majority vote in favour of both referendums), then the neighbourhood plan or Order must be made by the local planning authority within 8 weeks of the referendum.

A neighbourhood plan comes into force as part of the statutory development plan once it has been approved at referendum. An Order must be made by the local authority before it has effect.

The 8 week time limit does not apply where a legal challenge has been brought in relation to the decision to hold a referendum or around the conduct of the referendum. Where there is also a business referendum and a majority of those voting, vote in favour of the proposals in only one of the referendums, then the local planning authority may make the neighbourhood plan or Order but is not required to. There are narrow circumstances where the local planning authority is not required to make the neighbourhood plan or Order. These are where it considers that the making of the neighbourhood plan or Order would breach, or otherwise be incompatible with, any EU or human rights obligations (see section 61E(8) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Act as amended).

Paragraph: 064 Reference ID: 41-064-20170728

Revision date: 28 07 2017 See previous version d. Concerns were raised over the status of the AONB; although a non-statutory body, it carried considerable weight in consultation on planning applications especially when associated with an NDP for which Landscape and Design Character Assessments had been produced. Our plan would have both.

443 e. A further concern was that the SHLAA (Meudon Farm) had capacity for up to 1800 homes and could be developed. The Chair reinforced that the SHLAA was a governmental requirement on local authorities to maintain a register of their land holdings. He had been reliably informed that no such development was intended. Moreover, the parish had a zero-home provision requirement until 2030 that would be reflected in the NDP. f. A past-resident of Penwarne Road whose home was adjacent to the PA019/02775 application site raised his concern about sewage and water drainage from the site into the woods opposite. While the Chair shared his concern, this was a planning issue for Environment Agency and SW Water comment. The NDP could only provide policies for wider environmental issues. g. Background documents to support of plan policies still needed were;

• A list of non-designated assets • A Design Statement (in progress) • The results of business/amenities and leisure consultations • Local green space designation. These should be within or in the immediate vicinity of a main settlement. In response to a query about protection for Anna Maria Creek, it was stated that the NDP already considered the constraints that affect the area but could not impose restrictive conditions that require enforcement. That remained a Parish and Local Authority matter. JW informed the meeting of arrangements made by the PC to remove non-organic material from the creek. h. In relation to the above, it was questioned whether any protection had been applied by any NDP and had been rejected. James Evans provided the following response immediately after the meeting;

“I have not found a single NDP or local plan that makes reference to enforcement, i believe this is for the reasons set out on Monday, i.e. the NDP is about setting policies for development, and its role is not with regard to enforcing development or having policies other than those dealing with development itself, the fact that something is retrospective in terms of the planning acts is ok - section 73 of the Planning Act allows for that. See below from Department for Communities and Local Government which sums up the role of the NDP and the LPA:

Decision making on planning applications rests with the local planning authority. The community leads on preparing the plan and setting out the policies for development in their area but it is the LPA that will grant planning permission in accordance with those policies and be responsible for enforcing them.”

5. Any Other Business

There being no other business, the Chair thanked James Evans for his presentation and responses, and the members of the public for their insight and interest.

444 6. Next Meeting

The next public meeting of the Steering Group would be held in the Bowling Club at 7.00 pm on Monday 17 June 2019. It was intended that the policies contained in the draft NDP (SEA) would be revealed.

T Damer Chair

Mawnan NDP 11 June 2019

445 Annex A To NDP Minutes 13 May 2019

Please see next page

446 447 448 449 450 Minutes of a Meeting of the Mawnan NDP Steering Group held on 17 June 2019 at The Bowling Club, Mawnan Smith

Present: Terry Damer (Chair); Dennis McQuillan (Sec); Peter Stokes (Treasurer); Cllr Jackie Whibley; Georgena Morris; Mick Hartley; Simon Sheldrake

In attendance: James Evans (Consultant), and 24 members of the public.

1. Apologies: Jon Holt, Richard Martin, Cllr R Sadler, Melissa Mercer (Media)

The meeting opened at 7.00 p.m. The Chair stated that this meeting formed a significant step in the NDP process and welcomed the strong community turnout. After a short period to deal with formal matters, the emphasis would be on a presentation of NDP Policies.

2. Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the last meeting (13 May 19) had been circulated. No changes were requested.

3. Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

4. Presentation of Draft NDP Policies a. The Chair stated that this meeting was a first step leading to ratification of the draft NDP by the Parish Council (PC). He emphasised that the policies in the plan were not standalone ideas formulated by the Steering Group but were based on the 344 responses and some 1300 additional comments to the June 2018 Questionnaire. Hence the policies were entirely informed by Parish residents. b. The 80-page draft plan had been shown to the PC Chair, Vice Chair and Clerk to inform them prior to a future joint meeting to explain the process, check legal limitations, and to amend the policies if required. The plan would thereafter be submitted to Cornwall Council for Strategic Environmental Assessment. Further down the line, once ratified by the whole PC, the plan would be submitted to the community by way of a Regulation 14 Public Consultation. After further revision, it would then proceed to County Council scrutiny, consultation, independent examination, and finally, to a Parish referendum. Policy weight builds as the plan moves through the latter stages and developers and planning authorities would need to take account of the document. c. The Chair introduced James Evans, our consultant, who would talk through the presentation which is at Annex A. No speaker notes were available, so comment is restricted to policy outlines and questions raised by the audience.

451 4.Presentation of NDP Policies

Questions and responses:

Policy 1. The Locations and Scale for New Housing Development.

The legal planning framework indicates that development should be linked to current settlements that have community infrastructure. The terms infill and rounding were explained with units restricted to 2. Outside the existing built environment, development of up to 6 units would fall into the category of a Rural Exception Site (RES) which had to be intricately linked to a settlement and meet local housing need. The status of West Bay and Budock Vean as settlement areas would be reconsidered given their distance from the main settlement of Mawnan Smith.

Q. Where had the numbers come from?

A. The 2018 Questionnaire clearly showed the community wanted only small-scale development. The 6 units came from discussion with Cornwall Community Land Trust as the minimum figure that a community developer would entertain to provide truly affordable houses to meet local needs. Over 90% of the community wanted no development to exceed 10 units.

Q. How would settlement boundaries be defined?

A. Settlements had been depicted in the Landscape and Design documents, but boundaries were only shown for assessment purposes. As we had no Cornwall Council direction to plan development to meet housing needs to 2030, there was no requirement to identify land for development. Had it been the case, a complex scenario would have unfolded. It was normal for boundaries to be set as the current built environment. Development outside this would impact the AONB and, therefore, would be classified as a RES which has strict criteria. Overall, it was considered not necessary to define settlement boundaries.

Policy 2. Small Scale Rural Exception Sites.

The emphasis was on allowing for truly affordable houses that meet local demand. Such homes would be linked to a perpetuity agreement that prevented transfer of such homes into the open housing market.

Policy 3. Replacement Dwellings.

Q. What was the footprint policy?

A. It would be expected that a replacement dwelling development should take up a similar footprint to the existing dwelling not considering the floor areas/volume of ancillary buildings or show no increase in visual prominence. It should respect the proportion of the plot occupied by existing and neighbouring dwellings.

452 Policy 4. Housing Mix, Size, Layout.

The intention was that the size and type of new dwellings in the Parish should respond directly to existing and projected needs. Design should allow for the potential addition of extensions.

Policy 5. Design Principles.

It is important that future growth is conducted sensitively to safeguard the character of the area. The NDP would be accompanied by a supporting Design Statement that would cover in detail the principles outlined in the slide.

Policy 6. Safeguard and Enhance Valued and Designated Landscapes and Seascapes.

Q. How would safeguarding be achieved?

A. Firstly, by having this NDP in place so that developers would have to abide by the policies set out therein. This plan has a Landscape Assessment that informs the character of the area and a Design Statement that indicates the style of the current built environment and sets out principles for future development to ensure harmony with the surroundings. Secondly, the weight of the AONB Management Plan would provide further safeguards against inappropriate development. Work is in hand to consider designating particularly valued land and seascapes which would further act as safeguards.

Policy 7. Safeguard and Enhance Biodiversity and the Natural Environment Through Development.

Developments should be planned and designed to conserve and enhance local wildlife species and habitats, including those that are undesignated, demonstrating how they aim to achieve a net gain in biodiversity. A range of opportunities exist to achieve this and are set out in the policy. Moreover, development proposals should show how they accord with the guidance contained within the Cornwall Council Biodiversity Supplementary Planning document.

Policy 8. Protect and Preserve Non-Designated Heritage Assets.

While the Parish has several listed buildings and monuments that are protected by their designations, there are several other non-designated assets such as WW2 features, old buildings, ancient field systems and hedgerows that are worthy of note. Planning applications should take account of such heritage assets. The NDP will map such assets and assistance is required to help draw up such lists.

Q. Would we need to consult owners?

A. Yes, and time is of the essence to map out the non-designated assets.

Policy 9. Support a Prosperous Rural Economy.

The policy would provide support for appropriate small-scale employment development within the Parish. The Business Working Group were still conducting surveys with existing businesses to determine how this could be best achieved.

453

Policy 10. Preserve Local Green Space Designations

Government guidance allows local communities, through neighbourhood plans, to identify for special protection green areas of particular importance to them, by designating land as Local Green Space. Development in such spaces would only be permitted in very special circumstances. When considering current green spaces such as sports fields, play areas etc, development would be constrained and would have to consider offsetting if proposers wished to build on an existing facility.

Q. What is meant by offsetting?

A. Any loss of facility because of a development would have to be replaced by equivalent or better provision in a suitable location, accessible to the community.

Policy 11. Promote Footpaths and Access

The intention of the policy is to ensure that existing footpaths are maintained and wherever possible, upgraded, and new routes and connections supported. To encourage, where appropriate, other sustainable methods of transport e.g., cycling.

Policies 12/13. Mawnan Smith Recreation Ground and Community Services

Q. Policy 12 seemed to have limited value.

A. The recreation ground was not the only valued community facility. The policies would be broadened and amalgamated to protect the wider range of community recreation areas such as playing fields and allotments, and buildings such as churches, village halls, shops and pubs. Support would be given for new community facilities that provide for the social infrastructure of the Parish.

Policy 14. Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

Q. What projects existed?

A. Cornwall Council control the 25% of CIL allocated to parishes with an NDP. Without the latter the allocation is 15%. There were no CIL supported projects at present and the aim of the policy was to ensure that the local element of CIL was directed at projects solely within the Parish.

Policy 15. Renewable Energy and Sustainability

There was great support for carbon reduction and renewable energy schemes. However, there were negative impacts for visibility and protected species. The policy would encourage incorporation of carbon reduction measures in the building design process and encourage broader low visibility renewable energy schemes that contribute significantly to the local community. The NDP could not dictate building materials to support eco policies.

At the conclusion of the slide show, questions were taken from the audience.

Q. Why had the NDP not included policies to cater for climate change?

454 A. The impact of climate change and the implications for development was not yet an established concern at the local level. We needed to know more about the things that could be done but awaited direction from central government and the local planning authority. Impacts such as flooding and coastal erosion are already matters for Cornwall Council and the Environment Agency who have management plans in place. We are unable to replicate these plans within an NDP.

Q. Why was there no policy about second homes?

A. Second home ownership is extremely low (< 6%) of homes in the Parish. There were no comments on the issue arising from the 2018 Questionnaire. Given the weak evidence and that St Ives policy on a similar issue had stumbled, it was not considered appropriate to provide such a policy now.

5. Any Other Business

There being no other business, the Chair thanked James Evans for his presentation and responses, and the members of the public for their insight and interest. He emphasised that the NDP looked to overall small-scale development to meet the needs of Parish residents.

6. Next Meeting

The Steering Group would be meeting with the PC and members of Cornwall Council NDP planning on 23 July 2019. Given the summer holiday period and the SG’s task to promote and plan the community exhibition in September, a further public SG meeting would be publicised later.

T Damer Chair

Mawnan NDP 10 July 2019

455 456 457 458 459 460 461 Policy 13 •Do we have a right to dictate to private businesses? (cafe/pub/doctors could• How to get evidence if a venue is no longer viable .. example all be seen as Community Senrices). Bowling Club. • There is already a protectionfac ility (Assets of Community Value) available - but unusedin parish. • More village settlementbased venues, given the traffic& parkingissues, not viable. We would like to see provision in a wider area • Yes - we can dictate to private businesses in terms of retaining specific use classes .. Need to provide full evidence proving the venue is not viable, cannot just be an arbitrary decision or solely based on finances. • ER to providedetails on Assets of Community Valuefor distribution

Policy 14 • Needs more clarity - who gets the CII, money;how will it bedistributed/ • Whatcan the community portion of CIL be usedfor - is it managed;who gets to have a say on how it's spent;are there any legal infrastructure specific too? restrictions • SF explained CIL: CIL is a general tariffon building; SI 06 are site specific legal agreements. It makes financialplanning by developers easier as they don't have lots oflater stage feesto consider. Both will be runningas they try to retain a degree of flexibility. S 106 funding is for infrastructureassociated to the development, without which a development could not go ahead and CIL is a general fundfor the infrastructureneeds that all developments generate; Highways also have a pot to bid for (thorough EOI formsat the CNP meetings) and there will hopefullybe a bidding process to the County retained portion of CIL. CornwallCouncil has committed to spend CIL through infrastructure projects such as: Local speed management and safety projects; Community buildings & social facilities; Economic regeneration & Local flood risk management. Individual parishes should look to spend their portion of the CIL on similar infrastructureneeded to 'support the development of the area'. • How the parish allocate anddecide this will need to be considered by the PC and a basic explanation might be useful.

Policy 15 • Many home renewable systemsdon't needplannin g.. • Can we incorporate the ALL new developments (extensions, replacements, new build, self.build, business and residential) must incorporate sustainability, carbon neutrality & offsetting measuresup to Nationally recognisedlevels and that all developments should include a CarbonFootprint report • SF - the NDP can only go up to levels as stated in current Building Standards. It can suggest more but has no powers to enforce or refuseif not met. The Energy Act revision which was supposed to tighten up sustainability & carbon neutralisation requirements did not happen as planned, but the government are reconsidering this. It was her opinion that this should be enacted 'In Law' and that trying to add at NDP level would be beyond the reasonablescope and capability of most smaller communities. It should be left to higher level Strategic policy, letting it flowdown fromtop level policy making. A much as reasonably possible appeared to have already been incorporated with the general ethos of the draft policy document.

This concluded the discussion of the points raised by the PC

Cllr Prasad at this point requested time to question the presumption ofO as a building number starting point and thus the validity of any planning for futurehomebuilding*. Information and explanation of this position was given not only by SF & JE but by other members of the Steering Committee, citing National Policy. It was pointed out that if the parish wished its development position to be O then there would be no point in doing a Neighbourhood Development Plan and that any planwith this is would failbefore it even made the examination stage. Cllr Prasad reiterated his position thatthis decision was made subjectively and could not be backed up by referring to the information/ responses in QI of the July 2018 community questionnaire. He felt that this matter was not being taken seriously and that if a furtheror additional question was posed to the community then a zero build position 462 would be the most likely outcome. TD said that this question was explicit in stating that how manyabove 463 SUMMARY OF MEETING OF THE MAWNAN NDP STEERING GROUP MONDAY FEBRUARY 10, 2020, 7.30pm – Mawnan Smith Bowls Club

Present: Terry Damer, Dennis McQuillan, Peter Stokes, Georgena Morris, Jackie Whibley, Mick Hartley, Richard Martin, Nigel Gilmore Apology: James Evans CC: Lisa Clements (for information)

1. The purpose of the meeting was to let everyone know what was currently being worked on, the status and timing of progressing the NDP, and to agree a timetable to take it to the Reg. 14 public consultation. 2. Dennis reported that the recent cataract operation appears to have been successful, and that he is gradually regaining useful sight in that eye, and therefore he expects to be able to make progress on his documents. 3. The Design Statement. Dennis’s original document was with Nigel who was reviewing it with a planners approach and he was in the process of making some recommendations as to revisions to the original to make it more robust. a. It was agreed that the long checklist could be dropped, and that the shortened 5-point versions suggested by the PC should be retained and probably brought to the front of the document. When he has completed his recommendations Nigel will meet with Dennis and Terry to agree the changes and let James have it for final approval prior to sending to the parish council (PC). 4. The LLCA. Cath Statham, the CC landscape architect who is a statutory consultee, has made a number of suggestions for changes and Dennis is incorporating these into the extant LLCA with a view to completing this work by the end of the week. As soon as ‘signed off’ it too could go to the PC for their scrutiny. 5. Non-Designated Heritage Assets listing. Georgena and her group have made great progress with this, ending up with some 80+ buildings and structures, all described and photographed and given map references. a. It was agreed that (perhaps with the help of Derek and Ellie Stacey) an introduction should be written, based on Historic England guidelines, that would explain how assets were selected for inclusion, and what this would mean for owners. b. A draft letter has been prepared, based on one use by St. Endellion Parish, which would be sent to owners at the beginning of the Reg. 14 consultation period, explaining their property has been included and offering them the opportunity to comment. Owners cannot refuse to be included. This letter should be accompanied by a copy of their entry on the list and an explanatory note about the effect local listing has. c. Paper maps have been given to James so he can create an electronic version showing the location of each asset. d. When this process is complete, the list can be sent to the PC. All the details of how it is to be distributed to the owners (addressing via the electoral roll, agreement on the text, printing, mailing and costs) have to be agreed with the PC well in advance of Reg. 14 launch. 6. Green space designations. Georgena has identified the most likely sites for inclusion. The advice is to include ‘everything’ and wait to see if the inspector rejects any sites. a. She will post to James paper maps marking the sites so he can turn them into electronic versions. 7. NDP revised draft document. Following the SEA/HRA submission and receipt of comments, the original NDP document has been revised, and a final version is being prepared by James for us to see and agree. 8. Consultation Statement. Terry is ploughing ahead with this, and expects to have a version available for scrutiny by James (and Nigel) to see if he is on the right track. He admits to

464 needing help on tying in the results of the questionnaire, and especially the freestyle comments, with the policies in the NDP. a. Decisions will have to be made as to how many appendices are necessary, and which ones. b. Only a draft is required for Reg. 14 as a revised version will have to be prepared to respond to any comments raised during that consultation, either by parishioners, business owners, landholders, or statutory consultees. 9. Timetable. The target timetable was discussed as follows: a. The five documents required to proceed to Reg. 14 are as itemised in points 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 above. It was agreed that all ‘authors’ would try to have these ready by early in w/c February 24 – or earlier if possible – for on-forwarding via Lisa Clements to the parish councillors. b. Lisa is on holiday that week, and the following week, but will be working from home in the last week of February and has kindly offered to on-forward anything sent to her that week. c. If we stick to that timetable we should be able to request a meeting with the PC w/c March 9 to answer any queries, and explain any outstanding points. It is not expected that CC will be required to attend, but obviously we would need to include James. d. All being well, the PC could formally agree to proceeding to Reg. 14 consultation at their meeting on March 19. If we miss these deadlines we would necessarily be delayed until April 16. e. We have the bowling club booked for Monday March 23, for a public SG meeting. This is the meeting at which we would expect to announce the launch of the Reg. 14 6-week consultation, on a (near) future date. Jackie is arranging for a presentation by the AONB unit to make the meeting more ‘exciting’, and to bring in a larger attendance than normal to maximise knowledge of the consultation. If launch has been delayed, the meeting can still go ahead with the presentation (see below). f. We still have to plan the detail of the consultation; publicity, web access to the documentation, printing 2-3 copies of all documents, Mawnan Diary and e- newsletters, venues in which to place printed copies for parishioners to study (pub, doctor’s surgery etc.?) street posters, noticeboard announcements (including that for the PC), room rental to hold 2 or 3 ‘surgeries, attendance at community events, PR to the Falmouth Packet etc. We will need to share these tasks out. 10. Business consultation. Jackie said she would look at Simon Sheldrake’s summary of the consultations with local businesses and see if she thinks anything should be added or amended. This will form part of the Consultation Statement Terry is working on. 11. Landowner consultation. It was agreed that no further consultations would be necessary with major landowners (farmers); as there are no absentee landowners with parish holdings, all will have received the original questionnaire and have therefore had the opportunity to register comments. They will also have seen the publicity for our exhibitions, and therefore had further opportunity for commenting; if they did so there was no indication they were doing so as major landowners, so we do not feel it necessary to contact them again. Note: The NDP is not not allocating land for development, and neither is it drawing settlement boundaries. a. It was agreed that Georgena would arrange with Richard to return a large-scale map to him so he could complete the task of marking on it the known extent of major land- holdings that could be useful for future reference. 12. AONB presentation. To mark the 60th anniversary of the formation of AONBs the Cornwall unit has commissioned a project to celebrate one of the most special aspects of what makes our landscape so unique – the humble Cornish hedge. The project has many elements and will cumulate in the construction of a classical labyrinth built from traditional Cornish hedging, drawing from the different vernacular styles across the whole of Cornwall. Negotiations between Jackie and the AONB are well advanced for them to present this project to the parish at our meeting on March 23. Given the huge attendance last time the

465 AONB presented to us we have high hopes this will be equally successful. It will need to be well publicised. 13. Budget. It would be sensible to close off our current funding tranche at the end of March; we applied for £3,760 of which we have spent approx. £1,600. Including £497 left in the ‘pot’ last time this would allow us to reapply for £2,656 in April which should be nearly enough to see us to the end of the NDP project. This will be the last application we can make to Locality. a. It’s important that anyone with current expenses to claim should submit them to Peter a.s.a.p. We should include travel expenses for the AONB presentation’s speakers. b. Likewise, please consider any personal expenses you see for the future. c. Off the top of the head, future expenses could include: i. James’s fees through consultation and examination ii. Printing and room hire for the Reg. 14 consultation iii. Room hire for all future SG meetings iv. Circulating the parish to encourage participation at the referendum, with a specially printed letter to all addresses v. Misc. printing, stationery, more printing of copies of the documents etc. d. The PC has indicated that should we run short of funds they would be in a position to help with funding to see us ‘over the line’. 14. The Community Hub. This was briefly discussed, with general agreement that a better parish office was required and that an additional meeting room facility in the parish would be useful. There was less agreement on whether this was the right proposal. 15. Parish Council meetings. Terry will make a very brief statement of progress at the PC meeting on February 20 whilst, as stated above, it’s hoped on March 19 the Reg. 14 consultation can be announced (albeit probably with a slightly later date for its launch).

The meeting closed at 9pm

GTD 14 February 2020

466 ADMINISTRATOR COMMENT – YEAR 2020

• No SG or Public meetings after 10 February until Zoom meeting on 8 December. • Covid struck in March causing meeting scheduled for 23 March to be cancelled. • Following CC guidance, Reg 14 Consultation could not proceed on a face-to-face basis. • NDP Draft documents to Parish for inspection, amendment, and approval to proceed to local consultation. The minutes of 10 February outline the work required. • March/April - Considerable amount of work undertaken by 3 core members of the SG to bring all NDP documents to the standard required for further Parish Council scrutiny and consent to proceed to Reg 14 Consultation. • Preparation for Reg 14 Consultation – in-house meetings by Chair and Admin to determine the method to conduct on-line internet consultation, letter to all Parish residents to inform them, printed copies of all relevant documents, and distribution system to enable residents without internet access to participate in the consultation, emails and letters to all statutory consultees. • September/October - Reg 14 Consultation – recording, filing, and ensuring responses to comments received. In some cases where comment clearly indicated that the author required further consultation, attempting to clarify their position. • Analysis of comment, preparation of a comments electronic file for distribution to SG and to Parish Council, and provision of checklist to ensure capture of comments that required further consideration by the SG. • 8 December – SG Zoom meeting to consider recommendations to PC for amendment of NDP documents following consultation.

467 APPENDIX Y TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 APPENDIX Z TO CONSULTATION STATEMENT

478 479 480 481