LOSTWITHIEL TOWN COUNCIL Taprell House North Street Lostwithiel Cornwall PL22 0BL

01208 872323

Dear Councillor,

Councillors are hereby summoned under the Local Government Act 1972 Sch. 12 para 10 (2) b to attend a Meeting of Lostwithiel Town Council to be held on Tuesday 3 November 2020 commencing at 7.00pm when the following business will be transacted.

S Harris

Mrs S Harris Town Clerk 28 October 2020

Lostwithiel Town Council Virtual Meeting will be held on Tuesday 03 November 2020 at 7pm

Members of the public are able to join the meeting from a computer, tablet or smartphone https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/6738865395790484496

or by dialling in using a phone on. 020 3713 5012

Access Code: 122-274-733

This meeting is open to the public and as such could be filmed or recorded by broadcasters, the media or members of the public. Please be aware that whilst every effort is taken to ensure that members of the public are not filmed, the council cannot guarantee this, especially if you are speaking or taking an active role. The council asks those recording proceedings not to edit the film or recording in a way that could lead to misinterpretation of the proceedings or infringe the core values of the council. This includes refraining from editing an image or views expressed in a way that may ridicule or show lack of respect towards those being filmed or recorded.

Housekeeping – Mayor Hughes will advise that the meeting may be filmed or recorded Members and Members of the Public are asked to set device ring tones/alerts to silent

• To receive the Cornwall Councillor Report

Meeting Agenda

1. Apologies – to receive and accept Apologies of Absence.

If you are unable to attend this meeting please email [email protected] with your apologies before midday on the day of the meeting. Thank you to Councillors who have already advised the office that they are unable to attend the meeting.

2. To receive any Declarations of Interest or written requests for new DPI dispensations from Members.

Members are invited to declare disclosable pecuniary interests and other (non-registerable) interests in items on the agenda as required by Lostwithiel Town Council’s Code of Conduct for Members and by the Localism Act 2011.

3. Public Participation - Time allowed for members of the public to address the Council on matters on the agenda – Maximum time allowed 15 minutes.

The Council has varied meeting Standing Orders and until physical meetings can be re-established Members of the Public are asked to submit any questions regarding items on the agenda to [email protected]. For this meeting please submit your questions by 5pm on Monday 2 November 2020.

Planning Applications & discussions – ‘Whilst Members may express an opinion for or against the proposed development plans at this meeting Members minds are not closed and they will only come to a

conclusion on whether they should support the scheme or offer an objection after they have listened to the full debate.’

4. To receive the minutes of the Extraordinary virtual meeting held on 27 October 2020 having previously been circulated and taken as read.

Please see separate document.

5. To receive and adopt the Staffing Committee minutes dated 9 July 2019, 08 October 2019, 10 December 2019 & 11 February 2020 having previously been circulated and taken as read.

6. Planning applications- a) To consider planning applications PA19/11224 Land known as Bartholomew Meadow, Grenville Road, Lostwithiel Reserved matters application for access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale, following outline approval PA18/05607 dated 13.08- 2019 for the construction of 47 residential units to include affordable housing.

Mr John Leaper Comment submitted date: Fri 16 Oct 2020 In examining this submission and the previous outline approval in 2019 it is apparent that this proposal MUST take into account and respect the neighbourhood plan. The original outline was for a mixed development of houses to include some affordable housing. It has now moved to total affordable including flats. This is totally out of keeping with the local area. It will establish an isolated pocket of houses not integrated

with the community and totally different to the surrounding area to the east of Lostwithiel This developer already has a major affordable development in nearby Bodmin and has recently submitted a plan for a further 200 affordable homes in Truro. It questions whether the plans are to meet need or just for profit. The government directive today is to protect our environment and rural areas. Building in an isolated field destroying natural wildlife habitats and potentially creating an environmental disaster seems to place Cornwall Council at odds with Government. The views and fears of the local community are being totally ignored. It has been pointed all of the issues relating to using Grenville Meadows as the drainage and sewage connection. Even the numerous surveyors can't agree whether it will work. The approach seems to be suck and see and if there is a problem we all walk away and leave the nearby residents to pick up the pieces. Both the developer and Cornwall Council are not prepared to accept responsibility if anything goes wrong. For once let sanity prevail and stop this going any further. I would add that there is a lot of affordable housing already available in Lostwithiel. The last point is that the current Lostwithiel infrastructure relative to NHS facilities cannot take any further demand from an additional 100+ residents and take that against the current COVID situation which is likely to continue for some time.

Comment submitted date: Thu 23 Jul 2020 In examining the progress of this application it should be noted that any works in the field west of the development must be subject to the same archeological study as decreed in the original planning approval. Further the 200 year old oaks that surround the development should be subject to tree preservation orders. Also the 200 year old rare bowl oak that borders Grenville Meadows has roots that would lie in

the path of the proposed drainage scheme. This tree which is privately owned must also have a TPO places on it. Comment submitted date: Tue 05 May 2020 I would like to draw the attention to all parties involved in this proposal that the original approval was based on the development to include affordable housing. The latest proposal is for the development to be totally affordable which has never been approved. Legally I do not think this proposal can ride off the back of a previously approved planning decision which was for a completely different development. This proposal should be submitted as a totally new proposal and would therefore be subject to the agreed neighbourhood development plan.

Comment submitted date: Mon 20 Apr 2020 Please circulate or read this email to the Town Council. Thank you.

The Town Council has a responsibility to the electorate of Lostwithiel to protect and serve its community. The council spent a lot of time, money and effort in developing a neighbourhood plan that the majority of residents signed up to expecting the Council to wherever possible ensure that developments reflected the plan. Governance today both local and central is charged with protecting the environment, managing climate change and meeting the challenges of achieving carbon neutral.

At the first real test of the neighbourhood plan (the above development) the council has failed to achieve its objectives making the whole process of developing a neighbourhood plan a waste of taxpayers money.

To accept a dramatically changed development plan of very high density including blocks of flats on the fringe of the town is creating a potential environmental disaster through flooding, sewerage

overflow and personal endangerment is not protecting the best interests of the majority of Lostwithiel habitants.

Whilst accepted that development has to occur if we as a community are to move forward this development must mirror the neighbourhood plan. Density has to be in keeping with the area and reduced to below that of if its nearest neighbour Grenville Meadows and should mixed with both affordable and open market housing. Safe pathways for adults and children must be incorporated enabling central town access to the local shops ensuring local trade survival The wildlife must be protected so that generations to come will appreciate its value.

I would therefore ask you to re-examine your agreement in principle and push to have this development reflect Lostwithiel’s majority agreed neighbourhood plan.

I thank you in advance for considering the points made in this email. Comment submitted date: Wed 18 Mar 2020 Could I draw your attention to the latest drainage plan which is based on a 30 year event. In view of the flood history of this area, climate change indicating increased rainfall to become normal it seems ludicrous that a plan is submitted based on 30 years and not even 100 years which is the planning norm. Additionally it is apparent that there has been a total lack of professional surveying as the current route for foul water connecting to Grenville Meadows passes through the roots of a 100 year old specimen oak tree a subject of a TPO.

The calculations for the surface run off are wildly underestimated illustrating the lack of local knowledge. The stream behind Grenville Meadows rises several feet over a short time when it rains and any increase will overwhelm the culvert lower down. It should be born in mind that this stream is the run off of the underground fissures which drain Bodmin Moor.

Additionally I see that this change of planning is being forced through at a questionable pace. I would suggest that this approval is not subject to delegated powers but the full planning committee as if it is approved in this manner it will become a disaster waiting to happen.

John Leaper Comment submitted date: Sun 01 Mar 2020 The neighbourhood plan suggests a reduction in density as development nears the planning boundary. This development is well in excess of the density to its nearest development Grenville Meadows. Further it should be noted that any sewage works likely to cross the field to the west of the development must take into consideration the SUDs system and its outfall pipes. This system stops Grenville Meadows being flooded from the underground spring that emerges into the field. D G Roberts Comment submitted date: Fri 13 Mar 2020

Comment submitted date: Fri 06 Mar 2020

Mr John Butler Comment submitted date: Tue 03 Mar 2020 Re: Planning Application, Bartholomew Meadows, Grenville Road, Lostwithiel, Ref. No. PA19/11224. The land referred to above was subject to a previous planning application PA18/05607 and prior to that planning application PA14/05685. Outline Planning consent was previously granted on 13/08/2019 subject to Reserved Matters, including access, appearance, landscaping and layout, and apparently drainage and no apparent development of the site resulted. This latter item - drainage - is not included in the current entry on the Council's web site as a Reserved Matter. Is this an error or is drainage no longer a Reserved Matter to be resolved to the satisfaction of the planners? We now have another application on the same site for a different layout for 100% Affordable Housing. In view of the wet and water logged nature of the land comprising the site in question, together with the recent well documented widespread flooding elsewhere in the country, and the location and proximity of the Bartholomew Meadows Site to the existing neighbourhood of Grenville Meadows, and the natural drainage from Bartholomew Meadows site towards Grenville Meadows, the issue of drainage is of serious concern. This concern has been heightened by the recent investigation of the inspection chambers of the main sewer serving Grenville Meadows, to check the invert levels to ensure there is enough fall to facilitate connection of the new sewer to the existing system serving Grenville Meadows. There have been a number of problems with the existing surface water sewer serving Grenville Meadows which were designed to cope with the dwellings on the existing neighbourhood. We need reassurance that the drainage of the new site will not merely involve connecting into the Grenville Meadow sewers as a cheap and easy option. It also has to be asked, is there a need for 47 more affordable

housing units in Lostwithiel. I think not when you consider the amount of affordable housing recently built in and around the town.

Education Infrastructure Comment Date: Tue 20 Oct 2020 Thank you for consulting Cornwall Council's Education and Early Years' Service regarding the impact of this application on the infrastructure of the local schools. The attached Education Infrastructure Needs Assessment summarises the relevant data for the designated school admissions area relating to the application site. In order to offset the additional infrastructure demands created by this application under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, The Education and Early Years' Service requests agreement of a Planning Obligation towards the provision of additional or improved school places or school facilities.The Education and Early Years' Service is unable to support this application without agreement of the minimum mitigation required as identified in the Education Infrastructure Needs Assessment. For applications of 100 or more dwellings, we will need to confirm if the proposed mitigation identified is sufficient.

Principal Public Space Officer (OPEN Space) Comment Date: Fri 21 Feb 2020 REQUIREMENTS: ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS TO OPEN SPACE AND DESIGN AMENDMENTS TO MEET THE COUNCIL'S STANDARDS FOR PROVISION FOR CHILDREN'S EQUIPPED PLAY

Please note that this response relates to open space provision only. For matters relating to landscape and trees, the relevant Landscape & Forestry officers should also be consulted.

An objection was made on 21/09/18 due to the lack of a suitable open space on or nearby the development, contrary to Cornwall Local Plan policies 12, 13, 16 or 25. The current proposal includes an area indicated as public open space. In quantity terms the area is

sufficient, and benefits from natural surveillance from the road and housing frontage. However, there are certain quality issues that make the proposals unacceptable in quality design terms.

According to the Hard & Soft Landscape Plan (dwg: 2002-4DAS-A- 004(P04)) 75% of the open space is given over to a bank ranging from 1:2.5 to 1:8, which significantly reduces the usability of the space, and prevents access to people with mobility difficulties. The area given over to the parking of the plot 2 & visitor cars exacerbates the problem and seems excessive. The parking & pavement layout could use space more efficiently, if the parking was aligned in parallel with the road. Or just a slightly wider road? Is the footway to the open space side opposite plots 1-5 even necessary? Furthermore, the entire slope is to be planted with 'dense natural shrub planting', with no indication of how residents will be able to access the open space, or how it will be maintained. In time this vegetation might also cause visibility problems, reducing natural surveillance, contrary to Cornwall Local Plan policy 12.1b. A surfaced pathway with a suitable gradient for access will be required. Even then, it seems that the designs have not given sufficient regard to drainage. It is highly likely that the shaded amenity lawn area at the bottom will remain a wet quagmire for most of the time. To make the area usable this too may require raised surfacing. Alternatively, the entire POS could be split into three sections involving two slopes with a near level area in between. Steps could be made to the lowest area, which would maintain the existing level over the tree roots.

A miniscule area is indicated for the type 4 equipped play space, which is too small to meet the standards for a Local Equipped Area for Play (LEAP). Furthermore, it is too close to existing housing. The minimum distance for play equipment is 20m from the nearest habitable building, in support of Cornwall Local Plan policy 12.2c. To be acceptable the design & location of this needs to be amended. Play equipment, safety surfacing & furniture located underneath a dense tree canopy will very quickly develop algal & grime deposits

that becomes slippery, resulting in a safety problem and limits the lifespan of the equipment. The cost of maintaining the equipped play space in the position suggested would be much higher than in the open. It should also be borne in mind that excavations to install play equipment footings and surfaces are likely to be unacceptable within the tree root zones. Were a second lesser bank to be introduced, as suggested some play equipment such as embankment slides & climbing trails could make use of the play value & affordability it offers.

Any development creating open space will require an open space delivery plan outlining phasing, detailed design specifications, maintenance requirements & estimated costs and how this will be sustained in the long term, which must be submitted prior to commencement for approval by the planning authority. Thank you for consulting the Public Space Team. Stuart Wallace Public Space Officer

Devon & Cornwall Police Architectural Liaison Officer Comment Date: Mon 17 Feb 2020 Re Planning Application PA19/11224 | Reserved matters application for access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale following outline approval PA18/05607 dated 13.08.2019 for the construction of 47 residential units to include affordable housing | Land Known As Bartholomew Meadow Grenville Road Lostwithiel.

Dear Ms Billing,

Thank you on behalf of Devon and Cornwall Police for the opportunity to comment on this application.

The proposed layout will in general terms provide active frontages and overlooking to the new internal streets which is supported. The

use of back to back gardens is noted.

Vehicle parking is overlooked with spaces located either within curtilage or mainly in front of dwellings. The spaces shown in front of plot 1 and adjacent to plot 6 should be enclosed by say 1 metre high railings or similar to deter pedestrians from cutting between vehicles.

The position of the public open space and LEAP appear reasonable but given the topography I am slightly unsure how much natural surveillance there may be of this space.(There was a document in the application labelled site sections but this was just another site plan)

Another concern is that it must be ensured that where back gardens will back onto the existing site boundaries that we do not have a pedestrian accessible space between new fencing and the existing hedge. Again I appreciate site topography may make this unlikely but from the information provided I am slightly unclear regarding this. If necessary then these spaces should be suitably fenced to prevent access. The spaces concerned are the rear of plots 1-5, 47,31,6-15, 26-30 and 16-25. Linked with this that there are open paths shown to back garden gates 'Plot 16,26 and side of plot 5. These paths and spaces need to be secured appropriately. Access gates should be key operated.

Further additional lockable gates are also needed between plots 21/22, 45/46, 32/33, 38/39. These gates should be located level with the front of the building line so as to avoid the recessed paths that currently are shown

There should also be appropriate defensive planting within the small open space next to plot 16 to discourage mis-use.

I note the boundary treatments proposed. There does seem to be a variance between the boundary plan and the DAS regarding back

garden fence heights? I would suggest they should be as the plan namely 1.8m high.

I assume the development will be adopted and lit as per normal guidelines? If not what will the lighting strategy be?

Yours sincerely,

Martin Mumford Police Designing Out Crime Officer 17/2/20

Highways Development Management East Majors Comment Date: Fri 14 Feb 2020 Application is for reserved matters consent including access. The outline consent considered the principle of access and the subsequent impact of this overall development on local highway network. Whilst a reserved matter at that time, a condition was applied to secure the access arrangement works, including offsite highways improvement measures, being an extended pedestrian footway/cyclepath westwards between the application site and the junction of the B3268, the footway to the east, the pedestrian refuge and associated street lighting. An indicative plan is referenced, however, given access is to be considered on this application, the Planning Officer will need to confirm which arrangement takes precedence.

Estate road layout has been considered and is broadly acceptable for planning purposes. The parking spaces for unit 28 appear to be blocked by the parking space for 27. They need to be moved over, as any overhanging vehicle, as a consequence of the retaining walls to the rear of the spaces, will result in an impact on the turning area.

For the avoidance of any doubt, approval for adoption is not offered by virtue of acceptance of layout details on this application.

The applicant is advised that in order for the Highway Authority to adopt any road offered for adoption, the applicant will need to enter into a S38 agreement with the Highway Authority and go through the Technical Approval process which may require further changes in design. Likewise, proposal for works to the existing highway, will need the applicant to enter into a S278/S38 agreement with the Highway Authority. Again, there will be a Technical Approval process which may require further changes in design.

Conditions should secure: - Detailed design including construction, surfacing, drainage and street lighting details for all works (including all roads/footpaths) affecting public highway, or forming junctions with public highway. Construction, surfacing, drainage and lighting details for all roads and cycle/footpaths to Cornwall Council Highway Design Guidance/Specifications. (PS).

Natural England - Consultations Comment Date: Thu 13 Feb 2020 Natural England has no comments to make on this application.

Natural England has not assessed this application for impacts on protected species. Natural England has published Standing Advice which you can use to assess impacts on protected species or you may wish to consult your own ecology services for advice.

Natural England and the Forestry Commission have also published standing advice on ancient woodland and veteran trees which you can use to assess any impacts on ancient woodland.

The lack of comment from Natural England does not imply that there

are no impacts on the natural environment, but only that the application is not likely to result in significant impacts on statutory designated nature conservation sites or landscapes. It is for the local planning authority to determine whether or not this application is consistent with national and local policies on the natural environment. Other bodies and individuals may be able to provide information and advice on the environmental value of this site and the impacts of the proposal to assist the decision making process. We advise LPAs to obtain specialist ecological or other environmental advice when determining the environmental impacts of development.

We recommend referring to our SSSI Impact Risk Zones (available on Magic and as a downloadable dataset) prior to consultation with Natural England. Further guidance on when to consult Natural England on planning and development proposals is available on gov.uk at https://www.gov.uk/guidance/local-planning-authorities- get-environmental-advice.

Countryside Access Team Comment Date: Thu 06 Feb 2020 Thank you for consulting Countryside Access Team in respect of this Planning Application. I can confirm that Countryside Access Team in its role as Highway Authority for Public Rights of Way has NO OBJECTION to the proposals.

Lostwithiel Town Council Comment Date: Wed 05 Feb 2020 Lostwithiel Town Council supports this application in principle subject to the following two issues being addressed by the developers - a) a full drainage strategy being prepared for the development. Rationale - to alleviate the potential for run off water to exacerbate the flood risk to properties further down and closer to the town centre.