SALTASH NEIGHBOURHOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2020 - 2030
REGULATION 14 CONSULTATIONS RESPONSE ANALYSIS REPORT
APPENDICES A TO E
INTRODUCTION
This document records the comments made on the Saltash Neighbourhood Development Plan verbatim and allocates a look-up reference number so that the response to each comment may be found in the main Response Report document.
Note Responses are coded as follows:
A – Statutory Organisations B – Local & Regional Organisations C – Community D – Developers E – Cornwall Council Officers
Appendix A. Pre-submission consultation (Regulation 14) Consultee Comments and Reference Look-Up: Statutory Organisations The table sets out the statutory organisations that were consulted during the Pre-Submission consultation stage of the Neighbourhood Plan process, and their responses. Statutory Organisation Comment Received Reference Look-Up Historic England This is our first involvement with the Plan since we were consulted on the associated SEA Screening Opinion by Cornwall Council last autumn. In our response to that exercise we endorsed the Council’s view that a full SEA was required due to the harmful impact to designated heritage assets which the evidence base to the Plan identified would be a consequence of proposed site allocations under Policy RUR2(3) (see enclosed).
We now note that a revised SEA Screening Report has been prepared (dated March 2019) which we were not consulted upon, and which arrives at the conclusion that a full SEA is not now required, notwithstanding that the proposed Policy and its evidence appears to be unchanged. The SEA report continues to acknowledge that the evidence base identifies that there is likely to be a harmful environmental impact on nationally designated heritage assets but now concludes that as the level of impact is judged to be “less than substantial” that it is also by implication likely to be less than “significant” for SEA determination purposes.
However, this conclusion does not refer to the imperative within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) to avoid harm to (especially, nationally designated) heritage assets, and the need to provide evidence that this cannot be avoided and where unavoidable has been minimised and suitably mitigated.
The evidence upon which the Plan and the revised SEA Screening Report draw is the Village Settlement Boundary A1[1] and Site Appraisals report (undated). This identifies the designated heritage assets deemed relevant to the determination of suitability for development of sites RUR2-3-1, 2-3-2, and 2-3-3. While the Heritage Assessment table provides summary descriptions of the assets and their context this is not a description of their significance or the role which their settings (individually and collectively) might play in contributing to this. While minor heritage impacts are identified there is no elaboration on what these are or why they will arise and on this basis it is difficult to confirm that they are in fact minor, that they cannot be avoided, and that they can be suitably minimised or mitigated in accordance with the provisions of the NPPF.
For example, both 2-3-1 and 2-3-2 identify the existence of Grade II Listed farmhouses (Trematon (& barn) and Little Trehan respectively) in close proximity to the proposed site allocations. These areas of previously undeveloped land may for all we know have been historically associated with the farmhouses and therefore form part of their settings. Development in principle could then potentially sever the buildings’ association with that open land, thereby compromising – to a degree to be determined – their respective settings and significances.
The heritage assessment therefore needs to demonstrate a more informed understanding of the significance of relevant heritage assets in order to appropriately determine the level and nature of harm which the report identifies. If it transpires that an issue of principle is at stake i.e. the sites are not suitable in principle for development from a heritage perspective, then subsequent heritage impact assessments – as advocated in the report and accepted in the revised SEA Screening Report - will not be able to identify ways in which harm can be adequately avoided or mitigated. This then risks bringing into question the very deliverability of the sites for development and undermines the value of (their inclusion in) the Plan.
Had the full SEA process proceeded we would no doubt have been consulted on the Scoping Report which would have provided us with a prompt to recommend that the sites be assessed using our respective guidance on Setting, SEAs, Site Allocations, and updated guidance on Neighbourhood Plans, for which we now enclose links: https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/gpa3-setting-of-heritage-assets/ https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/historic-environment-and-site-allocations-in-local- plans/ https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/sustainability-appraisal-and-strategic-environmental- assessment-advice-note-8/ https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/neighbourhood-planning-and-the-historic- environment/
While the necessary exercise need not be onerous it does need to be undertaken with an appropriate level of heritage expertise. Mindful of the advanced stage which the Plan has reached a simple expedient would be for the Council’s heritage team to confirm the suitability of the sites for up to the 5 dwellings each which the Plan proposes. It is useful to bear in mind that an informed assessment could conclude that the potential for harmful impact is in fact less than the current Appraisals report suggests, thereby simplifying the situation overall.
Until this exercise has been completed and the outcome used to inform, and as appropriate, update the Plan and its evidence base, regrettably we do not believe that it displays adequate conformity with national and local policy for the protection and enhancement of the historic environment. As the revised SEA Screening Report is also A1[2] based on the Plan’s existing evidence base we unfortunately must disagree with its conclusions and as a consequence have no option but to lodge an objection until it too is updated.
Otherwise, this is a most impressive Plan in its scope and depth of the issues it addresses and its policy coverage. We particularly applaud the detailed consideration of the area’s historic environment and the proposals identified for the protection and enhancement of its locally distinctive heritage and character.
Once the matter concerning the site allocations has been satisfactorily resolved we look forward to giving the Plan our unreserved endorsement.
Natural England We welcome the emergence of the Saltash Neighbourhood Plan and we would like to make the following A2 comments: Policy WF1 A2[1] This policy states that all developments at the waterfront should draw out and preserve the economic, cultural and heritage values inherent in the area. We strongly recommend that you amend this sentence and add the environmental values of the area to this. The site derives its special qualities from being immediately adjacent to the estuary, which has the highest level of environmental significance. Point 2.iii of Policy WF1 should be amended to: ‘a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) to ensure that any effects from the construction phase upon the Tamar Estuaries Complex SPA and the Plymouth Sound and Estuaries SAC are avoided or appropriately mitigated. Point 3 of the policy requires an appropriate off-site contribution to mitigate against adverse in-combination recreational impacts on the Tamar Estuaries Complex SPA. Potential recreational impacts on the SPA and the SAC from new development, excluding those associated with new residential development, should be addressed within a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) of the Neighbourhood Plan. Where the HRA identifies the need for mitigation this will need to be reflected in Plan policy. Policy 22 of the Local Plan seeks a contribution to mitigate for recreational impacts from new residential developments only. Point 5 of the policy refers to the Tamar Estuaries Complex SPA only, as do points 2 and 3, and this should be amended to include the Plymouth Sound and Estuaries SAC also.
Policy GRN1 Point 2 of this policy provides options to deliver biodiversity net gain. Whilst we welcome suggestions, bird boxes A2[2] and bee bricks etc are just a few of all possible solutions to achieve biodiversity net gain and they do not necessarily achieve the required level of net gain for a development. We are also concerned about points 2.iii and 2.iv which refer to the ‘intentional use of SUDS, and drainage ponding, as habitat’ and to nearby ‘green reserves’. If you use these terms you have to be absolutely clear about what ‘intentional use’ and ‘green reserves’ are. We strongly recommend that you remove points 2.i to 2.vi and that instead you refer to emerging Defra proposals and the associated ‘biodiversity metric’ for calculating net gain, and to the emerging Cornwall Biodiversity SPD/guidance. The suggestions about net gain could be shown as simple examples in the supporting text. Policy RUR 2 We note the allocations in Trematon and Trehane, which lie directly adjacent or entirely within the AONB, and the A2[3] site appraisals as shown in the evidence base. We advise that the identified mitigation measures (planting of the boundary, restricted roof heights, sensitive layout of development) should be set out within policy RUR2 as a policy requirement for each allocation site. Essential mitigation that is required to make developments acceptable should not be left buried in evidence documentation. We also recommend that apart from a heritage impact assessment, a suitable landscape impact assessment will also be required as part of any planning proposal. Figure 25:
We advise that you remove the estuary element from the Forder development boundary. Given the presumption for development within development boundaries, and policy RUR2 which is in essence supportive of new development within these boundaries, it does not seem logical to include part of the estuary within the boundary.
Lastly, we would like reiterate our previous comments in response to the SEA screening and HRA screening/Appropriate Assessment.
Environment Agency No Response A3 Network Rail No Response A4 Homes England No Response A5 Homes and Communities Agency No Response A6 Highways England Thank you for providing Highways England with the opportunity to comment on the pre-submission draft of the Saltash Neighbourhood Development Plan. As you are aware, Highways England is responsible for operating, maintaining and improving the strategic road network (SRN) which in this location comprises the A38 which runs through the north of the plan area.
In general terms we are satisfied that the plans proposed policies are unlikely to lead to development which will A7 [1] adversely impact the trunk road. It is acknowledged that the A38 and its associated junctions experience congestion especially at peak periods, and this is particularly relevant for Saltash given the significant proportion of commuter trips between Saltash and neighbouring Plymouth. We therefore welcome those policies which seek to support and encourage the provision of improved walking, cycling and public transport facilities to offer realistic and attractive alternatives to the private car for both leisure and commuting, thereby reducing congestion as well as delivering health and environmental benefits. In particular we have noted policies EM1, EM2 and CON8. A7[2] We have also noted policies TC1 and TC2, particularly with reference to preferred land uses at Carkeel, and policy H1 to provide contingency for meeting the Saltash housing allocation to 2030 if Treladon under-delivers. Highways England will expect any large scale proposals which have the potential to impact on the operation of the A38 to be supported by a transport assessment and if necessary mitigation measures in line with the requirements of DfT Circular 02/2013 The Strategic Road Network and the Delivery of Sustainable Development.
These comments do not prejudice any future responses Highways England may make on site specific applications as they come forward through the planning process, and which will be considered by us on their merits under the prevailing policy at the time.
MMO No Response A8 3 No Response A9 ee No Response A10 O2 and Vodafone (Mobile) No Response A11 OFCOM No Response A12 Royal Cornwall Hospital Trust No Response A13 Peninsula Community Health No Response A14 Healthwatch Cornwall No Response A15 Kernow Clinical Commissioning 13.6-13.8, page 65 A16 Group/NHS Kernow • Support with Modifications • As the project manager for undertaking the current local services review which includes the future role of St Barnabas in health and care provision, I would like to propose the below sections to REPLACE what is currently captured in sections 13.6-13.8, referencing St Barnabas hospital. This wording has been shared with the current local stakeholder reference group that includes members of the Saltash community- clinicians, practitioners, voluntary sector staff, local school, Cornwall councillors, commissioners, health and social care managers and representatives from the town council, GP patient participation groups and St Barnabas League of Friends. We are proposing that the below provides a more accurate context for the current work that was not underway when the NDP was initially developed. We feel the below wording will allow the necessary flexibility and more accurately describes what the stakeholder group want to see with planning to the long term future for provision of fit for future health and care services and support.
POLICY HWB 3-THE FUTURE OF HEALTH AND CARE PROVISION IN SALTASH 13.6 JUSTIFICATION We need sustainable local health and care provision to ensure we safeguard the model of the NHS and support our population of Saltash to live well and to be able to access timely and appropriate support as and when it is required. In the light of the current challenges around population growth, quality and regulatory requirements, workforce recruitment and retention and limited real investment in health and care provision we need to maximise all available resources to place more emphasis on prevention to achieve improved outcomes for individuals and reduce demand on services. Part of this is recognition that we need to improve our out of hospital care, whilst ensuring we have sufficient bed based care within communities (which includes support provided to people in their own homes and care homes) to provide adequate care for people’s needs. St Barnabas community hospital is part of the local health and care system, located within a residential area which is reasonably well related to the town centre. The Minor Injuries Unit in the site was temporarily closed in December 2016, and the 9 inpatient beds temporarily closed in February 2017. Since the summer 2018 several community health teams have been based at the hospital, some 70 staff in all, and regular clinics continue to be offered from the site. There is currently a service review underway which is focussing on the population need of Saltash and the surrounding area. This review is working in partnership with communities to understand how we can ensure people are in the right care setting that will result in the ideal outcomes for them. The review will identify options for delivery of local services and within that what the future role of St Barnabas community hospital will be. 13.7 The implications of all this for St Barnabas Hospital are therefore not yet known. Given the town’s proposed growth to 2030, it is important to consider the town’s future health and care needs and to ensure that all resources and local assets are utilised to their maximum as indicated by this need. The aspirations of the local community are to ensure a modern health and care system that is fit for the future. This may involve delivering services in a different way and the local community will be involved in the discussions and evaluation of these ideas. Any change in services or provision of alternative services will need to improve the health and wellbeing of the local population, address health inequalities and be based on the projected future population needs in relation to services and support required to meet those needs. The options for change (considering both how services are provided and where they are provided) will determine the future role of St Barnabas community hospital. 13.8 The current service review recognises that any perceived or actual loss of local health and care services, building assets or permanent change to the services offered there will only be acceptable where the proposal shows there is no need for the facility or service, it is not viable; or adequate facilities or services exist or the service can be re- provided in alternative accessible locations or in different, more effective ways. POLICY HWB 3 – THE FUTURE OF HEALTH AND CARE PROVISION IN SALTASH 1. Proposals for the regeneration and enhancement of local GP surgeries, community health and social care services (which may include development of new ways of working including use of existing services, buildings and support infrastructure) will be supported, subject to: i. Sufficient evidence of local public and staff engagement in the development and evaluation of options ii. Sufficient evidence that proposals are based on population need and aim to enhance local services and improve the health and wellbeing of the local population 2. The following enabling development will be supported at appropriate sites (including St Barnabas-see also para 13.7 re the implications for St Barnabas are under discussion) based on the above evidence (this is not an exhaustive list) : i. Workshop, business and retail space for health and care-related activities ii. Residential development including key sector worker housing iii. Flexible housing and accommodation options with care and support e.g. extra care housing iv. Fitness and wellbeing facilities including improved access to green space v. Community ‘hub’ provision for health, care and community services, support and information and/or the administration of the same.
National Grid National Grid has appointed Wood to review and respond to development plan consultations on its behalf. We A17 are instructed by our client to submit the following representation with regards to the above Neighbourhood Plan consultation.
About National Grid
National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) owns and maintains the electricity transmission system in England and Wales and National Grid Electricity System Operator (NGESO) operates the electricity transmission network across the UK. The energy is then distributed to the eight 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 previously owned part of the gas distribution system known as ‘National Grid Gas Distribution limited (NGGDL). Since May 2018, NGGDL is now a separate entity called ‘Cadent Gas’.
To help ensure the continued safe operation of existing sites and equipment and to facilitate future infrastructure investment, National Grid wishes to be involved in the preparation, alteration and review of plans and strategies which may affect National Grid’s assets.
Specific Comments
An assessment has been carried out with respect to National Grid’s electricity and gas transmission apparatus which includes high voltage electricity assets and high-pressure gas pipelines.
National Grid has identified that it has no record of such apparatus within the Neighbourhood Plan area.
Electricity Distribution
The electricity distribution operator in Cornwall Council is Western Power Distribution. Information regarding the transmission and distribution network can be found at: www.energynetworks.org.uk
Appendices - National Grid Assets
Please find attached in: • Appendix 1 provides a map of the National Grid network across the UK.
Please remember to consult National Grid on any Neighbourhood Plan Documents or site-specific proposals that could affect our infrastructure. We would be grateful if you could add our details shown below to your consultation database.
I hope the above information is useful. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Western Power No Response A18 Wales and West Utilities Our records show those pipes owned by Wales & West Utilities (WWU) in its role as a Licensed Gas Transporter A19 (GT). Service pipes, valves, syphons, stub connections, etc. may not be shown but their presence should be anticipated. No warranties are therefore given in respect of it. They also provide indications of gas pipes owned by other GTs, or otherwise privately owned, which may be present in this area. This information is not information of WWU and WWU is unable to verify this information or to confirm whether it is accurate or complete.
The plan must be printed in A3 size and will also need to be produced in colour. If this is not possible, we can send you a hard copy if requested.
Any questions please let me know. Thanks
EDF Energy No Response A20 British Gas No Response A21 Civil Aviation Authority No Response A22 Forestry Commission No Response A23 South West Water No Response A24 Regulator of Social Housing On 1 October 2018, the Regulator of Social Housing was established as a standalone organisation and has now A25 separated from Homes England. Your enquiry is not within the Regulator's remit and there is no longer any requirement to send these emails to us. These should be directed to Homes England instead. The telephone and email address you need is: 0300 1234 500 [email protected]
Landulph Parish Council Revitalise the waterfront - improve access to the water for all tides s to enable the use of water taxis for A26 commuting and leisure. Connect to Plymouth Rame Mount Edgecumbe Torpoint cargreen cotehele calstock and other Devon bank sites can also apply to connectivity to improve transport connections in an environmental way in reducing single car journeys improvements; supports the economic development plan for south-east Cornwall and will improve tourism for the area.
Appendix B. Pre-submission consultation (Regulation 14) Consultee Comments and Reference Look-Up: Local Organisations The table sets out the local organisations that were consulted during the Pre-Submission consultation stage of the Neighbourhood Plan process, and their responses.
Local Organisation Comment Received Reference Look-Up Cornwall AONB Partnership No Response B2
Fire and Rescue Service No Response B3
Devon and Cornwall I note and welcome the inclusion of a statement regarding the importance of designing out crime etc within the NDP B4 Police Cornwall I have no further comments to add at this time
Cornwall Buildings Preservation No Response B5 Trust Community Energy Plus No Response B6 Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Local No Response B7 Enterprise Partnership Cornwall Chamber of Commerce No Response B8 & Industry National Trust No Response B9 Cornwall Housing No Response B10 Westcountry Housing Association No Response B11 Coastline Housing No Response B12 Devon and Cornwall Housing No Response B13 Association National Farmers Union in the SW No Response B14 Cornwall Wildlife Trust No Response B15 Duchy of Cornwall No Response B16 Devon & Cornwall Rail No Response B17 Partnership team FGW No Response B18 First Devon and Cornwall (First No Response B19 Group PLC Buses) Plymouth Citybus No Response B20 University Hospitals, Trust No Response B21 Trustees of Port View Estate c/o Para 9.15 Mrs Sarah Adkins • As paragraph 9.15 recites, the character and appearance of the Port View Estate has been developed and retained as a result of adherence to the Deed of Covenant of 1855, the relevant parts of which stipulate only a single building on each plot and not breaching the building lines, continue to apply to all allotments under property law. As the Characterisation Report of 2005 found, the resultant green ring that runs through the gardens between Higher Port View and Lower Port View (and includes the land below the Port View Surgery and St Barnabas Hospital) has an important function not only within the character area but as an important part of the setting of the more densely developed town. Suggested modification: Reference to there only being one building/dwelling per defined "allotment" B22[1]
41/ Policy H5 B22[2] • In paragraph 9.16 reference should also be made to the St Barnabas Hospital, which forms part of the Estate and is subject to the Deed of Covenant 1855. There is a typo in criterion iii, which should say "It avoids..." rather than "It voids". The words "and setting of Saltash" should be added at the end of the criterion. 53/ para 10.38 • Support
51 - 51/ Para 10.22 and Policy ENV4 • Support the local listing of St Barnabus Hospital, which contributes greatly to the character and appearance of B22[3] the Port View Estate of which it forms part.
65/ Para 13.8 • Strongly support retention of the building that is St Barnabus Hospital and for its use as a community hospital B22[4] together with the next-door GP Surgery. Both properties are within the Port View Estate and, constructed along the building line of Higher Port View with open spaces (used for car parking and green space) below
them, contribute both the the character and appearance of the Port View Estate and to the green ring running between Higher Port View and Lower Port View. Any new development would be required to respect the building line and not lead to new buildings within the green ring. All enabling development would be required
to comply with the provisions of Policies ENV1 (which is noted in 13.7) and if residential development with H5
too.
Suggested modification: Cross reference to H5 re any residential development under HWB 3 Criterion 2 ii. Reference
in 13.7 and 13.8 to the same restrictions on development as in the justification to H5.
B22[5] P65 - 66/ Para 13/9 - 13.10
• The Port View Surgery is located within the Port View Estate and subject to the same Deed of Covenant of
1855 as all other allotments. Retention of the Surgery is strongly supported. Any new development must be within the existing building line and must not compromise the green ring that runs the entire length of the Port View Estate between the gardens of Higher Port View and Lower Port View.
43/ Para 10.3 Policy ENV1 B22[6] • The historic Character Areas are important in protecting the character and appearance of the areas in the public interest. The criteria are appropriate tools for achieving the intention of the policy.
CPRE North Pill and Middle Pill B23 • Oppose - As a trustee of CPRE East Cornwall we are extremely concerned at these two new developments for a number of reasons. Firstly, we thought that the A38 was the boundary or limit of development to the North of the town and secondly these developments entirely lack the infrastructure to support them. And Thirdly, they seriously impinge on an AONB where certain creatures have their natural habitat and will inevitably suffer from close building operations and human habitation with all its attendant environmental detrimental consequences...eg Kingfishers and wading birds in or close to Saltmill Creek. Our precious Tamar and the wildlife of it must not be endangered any longer.. Enough is enough and CPRE Cornwall will do everything in it’s power to oppose this scheme. Yours, Mark Pasterfield CPRE Cornwall
CHINA FLEET CLUB • Support with Modifications - The Town Council, in particular Cllr Yates should be commended for their efforts in B24[1] putting together such a thorough and detailed plan that has had to be amended due to several amends on national/county policy during its lifetime. The plan does have very difficult and often conflicting objectives from protecting the local economy, jobs, environment whilst building new housing. The China Fleet Trust are still of the opinion that Broadmoor Farm can easily deliver all of the towns housing needs until 2030 and the inclusion of the two B24[2] fields in Pill for 85 houses in unnecessarily cautious and pre-emptive but do recognise that this has been considered and consulted upon. The plan does refer to North Pill and Middle Pill separately and throughout and we believe this could cause unnecessary confusion in the future as only two fields have been identified for the secondary development and it should be clarified if this sits in North OR Middle Pill as this is the plot of land firmly identified in the Allocations DPD and considered by the Inspector and there is no official plan (other than the developers) to extend beyond this. We would ask that the plan is amended to clearly reflect what has been proposed and consulted upon in the Pill area. We do worry about the inclusion of infill housing etc in adjoining plots of land as this could lead to "mission creep" and has the potential to extend the planned sites well beyond their original remit and into green areas B24[3] and AOBs. Although the DPD gives mention to mitigation measures from any housing development (Pill) being to the China Fleet being agreed the NP does not reflect the importance of such mitigation and the potential adverse affect should this not properly addressed and we believe given the NP clear objectives that it should clearly highlight this requirement especially given recent experiences in the town with some recent new developments giving rise to B24[4] considerable disruption on the local highways and residents. 1. Reference to NPPF para 182. "Planning policies and decisions should ensure that new development can be integrated effectively with existing businesses and community facilities (such as places of worship, pubs, music venues and sports clubs). Existing businesses and facilities should not B24[5] have unreasonable restrictions placed on them as a result of development permitted after they were established. Where the operation of an existing business or community facility could have a significant adverse effect on new development (including changes of use) in its vicinity, the applicant (or ‘agent of change’) should be required to provide suitable mitigation before the development has been completed". To demand that no development is permitted at Pill unless and until suitable mitigation is in place to ensure no significant adverse effect on the CFC, Although para 182 suggests mitigation prior to completion of development, in the particular case of the CFC it is during construction that the greatest threat to the business will take place. In particular, policy should require that there are strict controls over the phasing of development, the timing of the opening of access roads within the new areas, completion of parts before development starts on other parts to avoid piece meal development, controls over the phasing and timing of the Pill developments to ensure that self builds do not take too long, and in particular that the development is not taken over by a major house builder: the focus must be on self builds. Further, there should be no housing development along the boundary with the China Fleet Club golf course to protect both occupants and the Club. Instead, the boundary should be identified as a landscape buffer within which the developer should be required to provide tree planting. 2. Figure 2 should seek to protect the operation of existing businesses and community facilities as well as focusing on new ones. 3. Development in Pill should be required to contribute to education and other infrastructure provision in the same way as Broadmoor. 4. Land within Pill should be identified as Open Space and protected from development to reduce the undoubted harm to the character and appearance of the countryside
Saltash Environmental Action Project 5 • The Green Infrastructure for Growth plan has now been implemented and the text should reflect this. B25[1]
LE12 • Policy LE12 Intention. Text has gone missing from the explanation of the intention of policy LE12. B25[2]
Figure 32 • While the figure showing the new ‘transition zone’ or gateway to the bottom of Fore St is only indicative, I am B25[3] concerned that the plan appears not to be based on two important principles: a) hierarchy of road usage (pedestrian, cyclist, first) and b) preservation of trees. Figure 32 shows a) replacement of pedestrian area with additional road surface (bus lane); as well as demolition of what I think are the only cycle racks in the lower Fore Street area. b) removal of several mature rowan trees. In addition, the trees at that ‘transition zone’ help to reduce the noise from the bridge - which becomes particularly noticeable during outdoor events such as May Fair. This is a good argument for more trees in the transition zone. In a wider point on this section, it is disappointing that the whole discussion of the future of Fore St appears to be based on managing ‘traffic’, when it should be focussed on managing ‘users’ particularly pedestrians and cyclists, as stated as the Plan’s own priority, see EM1. p23
The Vision for Saltash, and other sections as noted B25[4] • The principle of Tree and hedgerow planting The Plan is clear in its aim that Saltash should be sustainable. It is now absolutely clear from good quality research that trees make a unique and vital contribution to sustainability in many ways. Trees provide shade in hot weather and shelter against wind; trees filter out air pollution leading to healthier environment; trees improve the attractiveness of the environment; trees absorb rainwater and help reduce flooding; and trees sequester carbon to help limit climate change. This important B25[5] principle is tucked away in p 69 Figure 27 The Value of Open Space. It is reflected in: P 55 GRN 2 Trees, Cornish hedges and hedgerows, and P 32.Create and support sustainable neighbourhoods Figure 10 under ‘environment’. But the Plan should make more specific recommendations for planting of trees and/or hedgerows both in the Vision, and wherever appropriate throughout the document. I have suggested some below, and the Steering Group may be able to identify others. P 19 The Vision for Saltash I suggest an extra bullet-point such as: - Tree and hedgerow planting should be encouraged throughout Saltash for their vital contribution to sustainability. • P 26 Figure 7 Improving the public realm: reinvigorate the … attention to pavement surfaces 'and planting of B25[6] more trees'. • P 35. Revitalise the Waterfront The Plan should recognise the contribution of existing trees on Jubilee Green B25[7] and include 'a desire to increase the planting of appropriate trees in all available spaces, ensuring no detriment to views or use of spaces during public events'. • P 39 Policy H1, item iv. It includes provision for enhanced or additional community spaces and facilities B25[8] 'including planting of additional trees'. • P 44 policy ENV 3 General design principles: add 'v. includes planting of new trees and/or hedgerows' P 55 B25[9] policy GRN 1 item 2 Generally new development proposals will be supported where … Add: 'v. include planting B25[10] of new trees and/or hedgerows' /end of comments CYCLE.UK Make a concerted effort to make the provision for cyclist on all roads within the Saltash area. More 20mph areas B26 within the built up areas near schools etc. What happened to the proposed cyclist/walkway to Callington?
Appendix C Pre-submission consultation (Regulation 14) Consultee Comments and Reference Look-Up: Individuals The table below sets out the individual comments receive from members of the community during the Pre-Submission consultation. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Improved and sustainable connectivity Submitted for consideration C1[1] • I have focused my response to a suggestion to improve the reliability, comfort and flow of the bus services within the town. It is clearly desirable to reduce the number of car journeys within C1[2] • I am sure that this would have a significant contribution to safety and the town for multiple persons, and whilst some car use will be hard to affect shopping journeys to Fore Street can be encouraged by a encourage residents to use the bus to travel to the town centre rather faster smoother and safer bus network. Removing parked cars than their car. from Callington Road, Oaklands Drive, St Stephens Road and other • The Green boulevard would clearly benefit from parking restrictions to key bus routes will clearly contribute to this. Some additional improve the flow of traffic and promote road safety. parking could be provided on some routes where there is ample version areas to alleviate the impact on residents. Suggested improvements: to encourage use of public transport and provide a safer environment for bus users pedestrians and car users I propose that all main bus routes are made subject to parking restrictions this will allow busses to run smoothly without starting/stopping which will help to reduce noise impact and make journeys more comfortable. Priority route for this is Callington Road adjacent to Longstone Park between fire station and Kimberley Stadium, Oaklands Drive and Yellow Tor Road Housing. C2 • We do need more houses I am 64 and have been on the council list for 7 years I am at the moment 30 in the shortlist the restrictions on council property is so hard I can not bid on any areas in Cornwall if I wish to I get one bid per week I have not been able to bid on a one bedroom property in weeks as there are not any Cornwall Council tell me although I work have to until I am 66 I have to bid on one bedroom property there are not any in Saltash and if they do come up you have to be pension credit need or there is some other rule in place so you tell me there there is no need for more housing in Saltash I feel people who own there property have a lot to say but do not understand other people’s needs. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up
North and Middle Pill • I say absolutely NO thank you to this development. C3 • I am so very disappointed that the beautiful outlook that we ALL love and enjoy is to be taken away by the proposed housing to be placed at north pill and middle pill. Saltash overlooks a beautiful green landscape that will be turned in to concrete suburb. The reason we love saltash is for the green outlook next to the water with lush green trees - this is why we moved here 16 years ago - the beautiful views. Now our house overlooks houses that weren't there when we bought our house. Now we can't even enjoy our garden due to the traffic noise that come from cars and motorbikes excelling out of the tunnel continually at 70 miles per hour - the noise pollution is terrible. With more housing, further development on the scale proposed things will only get worse. I'm very sad that we are spoiling beautiful Cornwall due to the greed of developers. I would not buy my property again knowing what has already been done to spoil the views by removing the green space and needless to say if all the development goes ahead in the green sites I would not be attracted to live in saltash - which is a shame as it has such a lovely community spirit at present. I have also seen a massive decline in the current state of our communal garden areas/parks, state of repair of roads etc- the council can't cope with what they have now - more traffic, more people again things will only get worse. Housing C4 • I say NO to any further new homes development in Saltash North and Middle Pill C5 • With regard to the proposed development at Middle Pill I am concerned that this development will have a considerable negative impact on the amenity of the residents of Saltash. Loss of green space close to the urban area of Saltash and the river Tamar must be avoided as there is sufficient land suitable for development on the periphery of the town that will not impact so dramatically on the visual,leisure and logistical amenity of Saltash residents. Pressure of traffic on the North Road/Ferry Road junction at peak times is already over capacity with traffic turning into North Road from Saltmill and the China Fleet Club blocking eastbound (waterside) traffic on Ferry Road/North Road. It is difficult to see what improvements could be made to this junction to Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up cope with traffic from an additional 85 homes using the Salt Mill road. Salt Mill/Pill is one of few green spaces left for the enjoyment of Saltash residents and visitors. Our council must resist the comercial pressures of urban development in order to protect and maintain the valued amenity of this area. • The proposed development at Middle Pill does not provide for any additional infrastructure. This will put more pressure on already stretched services such as schools and health centres. Urban development of this area will most definitley not be in the interests of the residents of Saltash. ENV1 • The 2005 CSUS calls for garden developments within the Saltash The CSUS recommendation for avoiding further garden C6[1] Character Areas to be avoided and explains why. Whilst Cornwall developments within the character areas of Saltash be included Council's officials appear to regularly disregard this CSUS within the SNP to give that recommendation more weight. recommendation. it should be included within the SNP as the SNP will carry more weight than the CSUS and such a statement within the SNP would help maintain the character of the town. • The CSUS recommends that an Article 4 direction be issued in respect In summary the CSUS recommendation to protect Saltash's walls C6[2] of the many old walls that survive throughout the town and there are must be included within the SNP and extended as a requirement an impressive number. I believe that protection for such walls needs to for all new developments, in order to protect the town's character. be included within the SNP too as walking around the town one realises how much the surviving walls contribute to the town. I would also extend the design features/pattern book for new developments to Whilst in recent years the planning process has substantially include the requirement of walls, rather than fences at the front of all ignored this proposal it must be included within the new houses and on any aspect of the property that has a boundary with Neighbourhood Plan as the approved plan will carry legal weight in a public path or road. the planning process. By including the CSUS recommendation in • In 2005 the CSUS proposed garden developments be avoided in the the SNP the residents of Saltash will be enabled to assert our own character areas of Saltash. (see CSUS character area map 3) influence on future planning applications within the character LEI2 areas of the town. • I suggest that the copse and quay at Forder which has for many years C6[3] been used without permission, be added to the Local Green Area The copse and quay at Forder which has for many years been used Register. This area is known as Forder Village Green and is already part without permission, be added to the Local Green Area Register to of the Forder Conservation Area. I understand that after more than 10 enhance the protection of an area that gives much pleasure to years of waiting Cornwall Council have arranged that on 10th-13th many people. December a public inquiry will take place to establish whether the green can be awarded village green status. Regardless of the outcome Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up of that inquiry adding this area to the Local Green Area register would enhance the protection of an area that gives much pleasure to many people. • I'm not sure whether LE12 is the appropriate paragraph for this comment but it is well documented that in recent years school playing The sport fields at both Saltash.net and Bishop Cornish schools are C6[4] fields have been sold off in many areas. We in Saltash should do protected by the Neighbourhood Plan against future change of everything we can to prevent this happening to our schools. I propose use, (Including any part of those sports facilities owned by therefore that the sport fields at both Saltash.net and Bishop Cornish Cornwall Council schools are protected by the Neighbourhood Plan against future change of use, (Including any part of those sports facilities owned by Cornwall Council. I'm not sure which part of the Neighbourhood Plan can be used for such purpose, but we in Saltash need to protect these community assets for future generations and the SNP must do all it can to afford that protection. Conservation Area • Both the CSUS & the neighbourhood plan propose extending the current Saltash conservation areas into parts of the 4 character areas of Use Local Listing to protect buildings that otherwise ought to be in C6[5] Saltash. The CSUS is now over a decade old & there's no indication that Conservation Area this proposal for extending the conservation areas will happen anytime soon. This means that some significant properties in the proposed conservation areas could be demolished without any approval or prior discussion. By their very nature of being terraces the terraces of houses within the proposed conservation areas are less at risk than detached properties, particularly those detached properties standing in larger grounds. Whilst I realise demolition doesn't guarantee a future approval to develop, it does alter the circumstances and it does potentially harm the character of the character area. I propose therefore that such local detached properties be given local listing status as I believe that would ensure demolition could not take place without prior discussion. There are 5 such properties that would fall into that that category close to my house and the owners of these properties may well not approve of my suggestion; 127, 147 & 149 Old Ferry Road, Tamar View Nursing Home on Curtler's Corner, and finally 118/120 North Road. The principle of giving such properties local listing status strikes me as being a good one, although I realise that any suggestion of a particular property may not stand up to scrutiny. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up
------Conservation Area, further views • Further to my email of 22nd July about the proposal to extend the conservation area originally contained within the CSUS and which is now also included in the draft SNP, and my request that any extended
conservation area include the area bordered by North Road, Home Park
Road and The Tamar, which was excluded from the CSUS proposal.
1. I have done some further research into the history of the area C6[6] between and surrounding Home Park Road and Curtler's Corner at the top of Old Ferry Road. That research gives further evidence that this area should be included in the proposed extension to the conservation area. In general terms the area is significant to the history of Saltash in respect of the market garden history and contains many houses of architectural
interest, with many walls that have survived well over 150
years. The character of this area contributes significantly to the town, being at the entrance to one of the main approaches to The Waterside. 2. The 1859 map of the town indicates market gardening was concentrated in this area, north of what is now North
Road/New Road running to the river ie the area surrounding
Old Ferry Road, Pounds Park, South Pill and Middle Pill. The
market garden industry is important to both the history and development of Saltash. Some of the original market garden houses, outbuildings and walls from pre-1859 (map in Saltash Heritage Museum) still exist and should all be protected. The surviving buildings, outbuildings and walls all contribute not
only to the character of the town but also to what is arguably
the main route to The Waterside. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up 3. This area contains eight of the oldest surviving properties in Saltash, all of which predate 1859 (map of Saltash held in the Saltash Heritage Museum.) , along with three significant
Victorian terraces that total a further 27 houses. ( see
attachment listing and brief description of these properties). All of these properties are designated as other significant buildings" in the CSUS and 33 of the 35 are built on "historic plots". All are deserving of being afforded the protection of conservation area (and local listing) status, particularly as they are grouped in such a small tightly confined area, and yet this
area is the only part of the 1907 urban extent (2005 CSUS figure
5) that isn't included within the proposed extended conservation area. 4. This area warrants inclusion for the following reasons; i. it contributes to the character of the town and significantly is on the major entrance to the historic
Waterfront area ( ironically, a lot of which has already
been destroyed).
ii. 35 properties that are of historic significance to the town, 8 of which predate 1859 and all of which predate 1902 lie within this area. All 35 were described as "other significant buildings" in the CSUS, and I doubt there are many other areas of Saltash with a similar
density.
iii. it was at the hub of the market garden in the 19th
century and retains some of the few remaining walls and outbuildings in Saltash that relate to that important era of the town's development and history. The market garden industry also contributed to the flourishing station and railway.
iv. the open nature of the area with its many old stone
walls, kerbs and even an area of 19th century paving Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up (possibly the only such example in Saltash) and large gardens with houses set back from the road must be preserved.
5. In view of the above I hope that you will agree the area
between Home Park Road and the top of Old Ferry Road, from North Road to the Tamar, should be included within the proposed extended conservation area. There is simply no justification for this being the only part of the 1907 urban extent (CSUS fig 5) to be excluded from the proposed extended conservation area and I request that exclusion be rectified in
the final SNP please.
6. On a separate matter that is intrinsically linked to the conservation area, I also wish to highlight the importance of preserving the town's walls and outbuildings which are important to the character and history of Saltash; their significance can easily be overlooked, and indeed in recent
years are being incrementally removed. The CSUS considers the
walls and outbuildings so important that it recommends the
following (twice!!); 7. "The walls and outbuildings should be protected against alteration and demolition by an Article 4 direction" (CSUS page C6[7] 5, repeated page 70). my understanding is that an Article 4 direction can only apply to conservation areas. (plus in specific
rare circumstances to a specific locally listed building under
threat)
8. Whilst I know not whether this recommendation in the CSUS was enacted I somehow doubt it. This CSUS recommendation must be included within the SNP and more importantly acted upon (I'm assuming, almost certainly correctly, that it hasn't been so far!), as failure to do so is leading to an incremental
destruction of this asset.
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up 9. I would add to this Article 4 direction that all original granite kerbs and gutters be protected too as these add to the character of the town and slowly but surely are being removed.
10. And finally, to quote Historic England.....
1) "LPAs are under a positive legal duty to assess their area and review it from time to time to consider whether areas are suitable for designation or to remain designated" and
2) "Designation of a conservation area gives broader protection than the listing of individual buildings." 11. I realise that it is Cornwall Council, not Saltash Town Council, that is the LPA but in 2005 Cornwall Council published its
assessment within the CSUS. In 2019 the draft SNP is repeating
the CSUS recommendations. However it is all very well making these assessments and making the recommendations but the important part is that the LPA, Cornwall Council, implement the recommendations. Fourteen years on, and rising, the 2005 recommendations haven't been acted upon by Cornwall
Council and that failure has resulted in the incremental
reduction of the character areas of our town; these recommendations must be implemented by Cornwall Council in this case without further delay.
------Support with modifications Para 10.31. • I approve of the proposal to extend the conservation area but believe the proposed extension should be enlarged from Home Park Road to Cutler’s corner encompassing old Ferry Road I have already emailed my suggestions on this but have attached a copy of that email here with C6[6] continued Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • 2 I believe the for the conservation area should be extended slightly up Fairmead Road and partly along Longlands Lane
C6[5] Continued Policy ENV 4 • I strongly approve of the proposal to introduce a local listing register but suggest the following modifications (I have already emailed my suggestions and attach hardcopy here with) 1. It is imperative to include within the S NP a very precise process and timetable for adding assets to the list 2. The local listing register must include the full area covered by the SNP 3. The criteria for inclusion on the list appear too high as candidates that were rejected should appear on the list 4. I have spoken to 1 of the authors of the 2005 CS you and in their view those assets included as historic plots and other significant buildings should be the starting point for any candidates list. 5. I would propose automatic inclusion for any building that predates the 1859 map of Saltash. 6. My detailed but incomplete suggestions here with 7. I propose that the list should include properties that would benefit from restoration
------Page 52, para 10.31 of the SNP.
• As the SNP states, back in 2005 the CSUS recommended that the conservation area be extended. Unfortunately nothing has so far happened on this so in February this year I contacted CC Historic Environment to request that proposal be enacted and I have copied them in on this email. I am currently in correspondence with CC who I Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up am advised are considering this; I hope that is an accurate summary of CC's current position. • I have the following recommendations that I seek to be considered for inclusion in the SNP: 1. The SNP should demand the 2005 CSUS proposal to extend the conservation area be enacted, but with the following amendments/improvements 2. a further extension of the conservation area beyond that already proposed in the CSUS 2005 so that the Conservation Area covers the Historic Core of Saltash as per Map ENV1 Page 46 fig 18 of the SNP. At the very least the conservation area should extend to the top of Old Ferry Road, back along North Road to the bridge, and should include Westbourne Terrace too. 3. the core area itself (and as a consequence the conservation area) should be extended to include the Lander Road, Newman Road, River View Terrace Estate. This estate is now nearly 100 years old, was the first council estate in Saltash and was built as part of the "Homes Fit For Heroes" campaign following WW1. The recent reputation of the estate is improving, but its reputation from say 20 years ago should not preclude it from being included within an extended conservation area; there must be no snobbery in this respect.
------
ATTACHMENT: Suggested extension to Conservation Area Historic properties in area bordered by Home Park Road/North Road/Tamar Pre 1859 buildings (all identified as “significant other buildings” in 2005 CSUS) 127 Old Ferry Road; An imposing detached building.. The original stone building remains substantially intact although a dormer has been added to the roof, Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up along with a side conservatory and replacement windows. Some of the original market garden outbuildings remain. 132 Old Ferry Road; complete with original stone boundary walls with many external and internal features surviving. The partial rear view of the building attached gives a better flavour of the building than the view from Old Ferry Road. This house has a fascinating history too; an ex mayor of Saltash lived there; a shop at the front of the house sold ice creams to those queuing to board the ferry.
147 Old Ferry Road; a substantial house architecturally interesting built circa 1850 and substantially unaltered externally and internally. The original stone boundary walls exist intact at front and rear. An eye catching building, arguably one of the most impressive and unaltered in Saltash this house contributes hugely to the character of the immediate vicinity and town. Currently the home to Cottons Taxis.
149 Old Ferry Road; a substantial house architecturally interesting to both the immediate vicinity and town. Built 1853 and substantially unaltered either externally or internally. Once the home of the vet in Saltash. Original stone kerbstones to the front
175 Old Ferry Road, now Tamar House Nursing Home; although altered and extended the original house is clearly visible as are many of the original stone boundary walls. Once owned by the Curtler family after whom Curtler's corner is named, and the owner of Tamar House (The Box family) built the late Victorian terraces at 159-171 Old Ferry Road and 122-134 North Road.
118 and 120 North Road; the 1859 map shows these houses as Church Park Cottages and the home of a market garden with a well in the gardens. The original stone and brick boundary walls, all dating from the 19th century still remain. When viewed from the rear rather than from North Road the significant structure of the properties can be better appreciated. I've been told that the front of these two houses was originally what is now perceived as being the rear, and not to North Road. Original stone kerbstones to the rear on Old Ferry Road.
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up 116 North Road. Shown on the 1859 map as Slade Park Cottage and whilst externally few of the original features are visible it is believed that the original structure remains intact underneath. At one time Slade Park Tea Rooms operated on this site. Having included this building in this list I can understand that in its current configuration eyebrows may be raised and I understand that. The purpose of including this building is the alterations that are now viewed may be cosmetic and at some stage reversible.
Victorian Terraces ( all identified as “other significant buildings” in 2005 CSUS)
Westbourne Terrace. Built pre 1894 apparently to house naval officers from the dockyard. Retains a stone wall that runs along the full length of the road to the river. An ancient footpath to the river still exists at the foot of the road. The road retains the original granite kerb along its full length, and the original granite pavement still exists along the frontage of the top 6 houses; probably the only area of Saltash that still has the pavement from this era (pre 1894). Whilst the original cobbles are no longer to view they remain intact under the recent tarmac covering. This is an un-adopted road I believe.
122-134 North Road. A terrace of seven late Victorian Houses on an area then known as Church Park. Built by the Box family who then owned Tamar House.
159-171 Old Ferry Road. Another terrace of seven late Victorian Houses , completed pre 1901 on an area then known as Church Park. Also built by the Box family who then owned Tamar House. Original granite kerbstones to the front. Original service alley to the rear is still in use.
------
I recently visited the SNP exhibition at the library and discussed with the SNP representative my previous email to you about local listings. It was suggested to me that it would be helpful if I could expand my previous proposed local list and to include a brief justification for each. I have now done that: please see attached Word document. Whilst I have concentrated on the area closest to where I live in Old Ferry Road, I have also included some other assets from Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up other areas of Saltash, although I've not included descriptions for those other areas.
There are nearly one hundred buildings and assets that fall within the area covered by the SNP that have already been awarded national listed building status by Historic England. That figure is unlikely to increase significantly in the foreseeable future as for a number of years Historic England have processed only applications for assets that are under immediate threat of demolition or significant alteration. Historic England's limit on the applications that are processed for the national register only serves to enhance the need to have an extensive local listing register. It would be reasonable to assume that the local register may include a greater number of properties than the national register due to the lower criteria one might anticipate and that the higher up the listing scale the fewer qualifying assets. ie more properties at the lower levels of the scale than at the top, a pyramid.
I have discussed the local listing register with one of the CSUS's authors and specifically CSUS page 37 that recommends all "historic other buildings" be awarded local listing status, and CSUS fig 5 that maps "other significant buildings" of the 1907 urban area. I'm told the intention of fig 5 in listing all " other significant buildings" is for those buildings to form the basis of a candidates list for the local listing register and that there should perhaps be a reason for rejecting any such building from being placed on the list. I have copied Nick Cahill of Cornwall Council in case my understanding of this is not precisely correct. That would be a total of some 350+ buildings, all within the 1907 urban area (CSUS fig 5). To include 350 buildings may be impractical and unnecessary but whilst the draft SNP proposal to place 16 properties on the local listing register is a welcome start it does not go anywhere near far enough. The local listing register should also include assets outside the 1907 urban area that are within the boundaries of the SNP. and I have included some such buildings in my attached list.
The older buildings in Saltash that have survived this far need as much protection as can be afforded not only against demolition, but also incremental harm to their character by alteration. Whilst I understand the SNP proposes an extension to the conservation area it is possible that such an extension to the Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up conservation area may not be implemented quickly. If that is the reality, and the 14 years that have passed since a similar recommendation in the CSUS indicates that may well be the case, the importance of including as many buildings and assets as possible on the local list becomes significantly more important than it may otherwise be.
Some of the original candidates for inclusion on the list that failed to make the cut should, in my view , have been included eg all Port View Villas, Dunheved House and Tamar House. I suspect that some of the buildings already on Historic England's national list may well have failed to make the local list as the bar appears to have been set remarkably high for local listings!! Perhaps there should at the very least be an presumption of inclusion on the local list for any building that appears on the 1859 map of Saltash held in the Saltash Heritage Museum, even though the CSUS tends towards a presumption for any pre 1907 asset. My view is that so far it appears that the criteria for inclusion in the local listing register are too tough and that perhaps the current aesthetic value is being given too much emphasis over rarity, historical value and potential for sympathetic restoration.
Properties should be assessed not only on their current cosmetic appearance, but also on their potential for sympathetic future restoration and their historic past too. Inappropriate render, pebble dashing and roofing materials are not necessarily permanent, and neither is badly designed double glazing. Inclusion on the local list doesn't guarantee a future sympathetic restoration, but it does at least hold out the hope and makes it more likely as it prevents further degradation; this is an important role for the local listing register to perform. I was in Lostwithiel earlier this week, after I'd drafted this paragraph in fact, and I attach photos of two buildings that just one year ago were covered in render. That render has now been removed (one in the last month ) to reveal magnificent original stone walls. A third building in the town is currently undergoing a similar restoration. These photos demonstrate that older buildings can be recovered with a sympathetic restoration and the local listing register must include such buildings in Saltash, regardless of their current appearance. I doubt that any of the three buildings would have been judged as suitable for local listing in Saltash, and yet these three buildings are now wonderful assets for Lostwithiel and we in saltash should learn that lesson. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up
The SNP proposes that the list should be added to in the future and that must be the case. It is however imperative that a precise process for adding to the list be included within the SNP in order to enable and ensure this happens, and at this stage the draft SNP does not include that. Perhaps for example there could be an STC sub-committee established precisely for this purpose, and that committee should sit once every quarter to consider any assets put forward for consideration. This sub-committee should in my view be open to the public who should be encouraged to put forward proposals for consideration and indeed talk at the sub-committee meeting to explain their suggestion(s). Any candidates selected for the list could be put before full council for approval and on receipt of that approval be included on the register.
I have emailed you separately with my comments on the conservation area; it is the combination of local listing and conservation area status that offers the maximum level of protection and it is that level of protection that the SNP should be seeking for all the historic buildings in the SNP. The extended conservation area and a substantial increase in the number of assets included in the local register would mean mean that we in Saltash have a greater influence on the future development of the town and that is what we should be aiming for.
The draft SNP is already a fantastic document that makes a huge contribution to the future of Saltash. I hope that my suggestions in respect of the local listing register and the extended conservation area will be seen as a positive contribution, will be accepted and be included in the final SNP put to public vote. I realise that to compile a significantly larger local listing register will take considerable time so I am willing to become involved in that process if that would be of assistance to you.
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up
suggested “local listings”, August 2019. This is an incomplete list, based primarily on the parts of Saltash that I know best from my 35 years of residence. I have included brief descriptions of those Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up properties closest to the area in which I live, but not for those further away. Where possible I’ve not included properties that I know to be listed by Historic England. I believe that all the assets on this list, with the exception of Saltash.net, are all over 100 years old, and many significantly older than that. As this is an incomplete list it is imperative that a detailed mechanism is added to the SNP to enable the local list to be added to on a regular basis by a predefined process. Old Ferry Road/North Road area
This is the area in which I live and consequently I know this area well. It contains many ancient original walls that the CSUS highlighted as being worthy of Article 4 protection and where possible I’ve highlighted those in my description. It includes many of the remaining pre 1900 houses of Saltash too, and the market garden industry that was significant to the development of Saltash lies within this area with some outbuildings, worthy of protection, remaining.
-remnants of old quarry and Victorian retaining wall,Old Ferry Road, behind Daws. This area is cited in the CSUS
- the cobbled area to the rear of The Wheatsheaf. The only cobbled area left in Saltash from that era in that style.(only other cobbled area is to rear of Guildhall, but is flint)
-Ash Wharf House, Ashtor Wharf and boathouses. Page 4 of CSUS highlights the significance of this building and states that the old boathouse on Ashtor Wharf should be restored for community use. The building pre-dates 1859 and has been poorly restored according to the CSUS. That should not however prevent its listing as the building needs to be protected to hopefully allow a future more sympathetic restoration with the pebble dash render removed. The aspect facing the river gives a better guide to the significance of this building and what a future restoration may achieve. The house,(including the boathouses) and The Wharf itself should be afforded local listing as apart from their age they have a significance to the history of the town and Ashtor Wharf is the onlt one of the town’s wharfs that still exists. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up
-106 Old Ferry Road (Tamar Banks). A detached building of architectural interest and merit of stone construction that appears on the 1859 map as Eyw(?) Cottage. The plot that lies on the bank of The Tamar and incorporates some substantial original stone boundary walls to the front and an impressive stone arched gateway, all of which must be protected. Designated a significant other building in the CSUS (fig 5)
-Garage and front garden wall, 4 Brunel View. These are very old stone built structures, appear to relate to the market garden industry and must be protected.
-127 Old Ferry Road & outbuildings; A detached building that appears on the 1859 map as part of the market garden industry and importantly includes some old market garden outhouses and walls, all of which must be protected. Whilst the windows are not original, a dormer has been added to the roof and there is a side conservatory, there are apparently still some original internal features. This building is of significance to the history of Saltash in that it is one of the relatively few buildings that survive from the market garden era. Designated a significant other building & historic plot in CSUS (fig 5).
-132 Old Ferry Road and outbuildings. A substantial detached Victorian property, that according to the previous owner was built circa 1820/50. Shown as part of a market garden area of Saltash on the 1859 map, with original 19th century boundary stone walls to front and rear, which should be protected The front and sides of the house have been rendered but the stone rear of the building remains in original condition. From personal knowledge as recently as four years ago the building still retains significant original internal features. Designated a significant other building in CSUS (fig 5). A well is shown on the 1859 map. The property was originally known as Pounds Park House, changing name to Lower Pounds Park House when the Pounds Park estate was built in the 1960s. This house has a fascinating history too; an ex mayor of Saltash lived there; a shop at the front of the house sold ice creams to those queuing to board the ferry and apparently the Saltash Pigeon Club used to meet there..
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up -147 Old Ferry Road. A substantial detached property of architectural interest dating from circa 1850. This house is arguably one of the most impressive in Saltash and has retained all of its original external, including an impressive boundary wall at front and sides which must be protected, and many internal features too. Originally known as Essa Cottage now home to Cottons taxis. Designated significant other building & historic plot in CSUS (fig 5)
-149 Old Ferry Road. An impressive detached house built in 1853 with all its external features and many internal features still intact. Once the home of the vet in Saltash. . Designated significant other building & historic plot in CSUS (fig 5)
-Tamar House Nursing Home, 175 Old Ferry Road. A detached stone building of some interest dating from pre 1859. Whilst on the SNP's candidates list for local listing somewhat surprisingly it wasn't recommended for inclusion on the register, I suspect because it has an unattractive flat roof extension and ugly dormer. The original building remains substantially intact externally as do most of the original stone boundary walls, which must be protected. It's position at the entrance to Old Ferry Road, one of the major routes to The Waterside, has a significant influence on the character of the area and should be retained. Designated a significant other building & historic plot in CSUS (fig 5). Whilst this building has already been considered for inclusion on the list and been rejected, my view is that decision should be reconsidered. This would protect against future incremental decline, would allow for a more sympathetic future restoration and the building as it stands is in any case worthy of listing.
-118-120 North Road. A pair of houses with significant gardens to the rear that appear on the 1859 map as Church Park Cottages. The 1859 map shows the rear gardens were market gardens and that a well was present within the those gardens. There are a few fruit trees in the garden that may well have survived from that era. The stone boundary walls at front and rear and one rear side of the property are of significant age, certainly no later than mid 19th century, possibly earlier, and additionally there is an attractive Victorian redbrick wall that runs along one side of the property from front to back that is of some interest too dating from no later than 1900; all must be protected. The site is shown as a historic plot and significant other building in the CSUS(fig 5). The Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up rear of the house better reflects the imposing nature of the building than the view from North Road. I believe that the front of the building may have originally been considered to be from Old Ferry Road, and not North Road.
-116 North Road. Shown in the 1859 map as Slade Park Cottage which I believe was once a tea rooms. Described as by CSUS fig 5 as “historic plot” and “other significant building”. There are no obvious original exterior features when viewed from the road but there are suggestions that some/much of the original structure has been cosmetically hidden, including an old tree, and still forms the basic structure, although I have been unable to verify this. I hesitate to include this on my list, but have done so as it is rumoured to be one of the oldest buildings in the town and a local listing would offer some protection and hopefully enable a sympathetic restoration at some stage in the future. Further research would be needed to establish precise age but certainly pre 1859..
-76 North Road (Mill Lane Cottage. Appears on 1894 map. Shown on CSUS as other significant building.
-Marlborough House, 15 Home Park Road. An impressive detached house standing in its own grounds, built in 1888, appearing to retain many original external features with the original stone boundary wall and outbuildings, all of which must be protected. Shown in the CSUS as significant other building and historic plot.
-the original granite pavement to the front of 1-6 Westbourne Terrace, the original granite kerbstones that run the length of the road, the ancient stone wall that runs the length of Westbourne Terrace to the river the cobbles that lie beneath the tarmaced road, and the ancient river wall that runs from the alley at the foot of Westbourne Terrace to Riverview Road. All shown on CSUS fig 5 as “historic plot”
Pill There is a very good case for including this whole area in the extended conservation area as it is of great significance to the farming and market garden industry history of Saltash and contains many buildings of merit and significance to the history and character of the town. Even those that are Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up derelict are worthy of listing as they are integral to the area and by listing these buildings the opportunity for restoration is preserved. Along with many unaltered roads, pathways, walls and hedgerows that are worthy of conservation.
- Pill Farm, farmhouse, outbuildings and barns PL12 -Shute Cottage, Saltmill, PL12 6LG -Mill Park House, Pill Lane,Middle Pill, PL12 6LQ -Old Root House, Pill Lane,Middle Pill PL12 6LQ -Cliff Cottage, Pill Lane, North Pill, PL12 6LJ (pre-1894) - North Park House, Pill Lane,North Pill Pl12 6LJ. - Methodist Chapel, Pill Lane; a restored corrugated barn, Pill Lane, North Pill, PL12 6LJ. This is a unique building and simply musy be listed. It contains a mural of The last supper on the apex of an internal wall. Now converted to a workshop. An extraordinary building. - Beaumont Terrace, Pill lane . 19th century terrace built for workers on local farms and market gardens . - China Fleet Farmhouse and barn.Rumours that these are listed by HE, but I can find no evidence. - Cockles Farmhouse, barns and outbuildings in Pill Lane. The Mill is listed by HE. - Tamar Park farmhouse, outbuildings and barns, Pill Lane
Burraton Coombe A grouping of buildings that almost certainly all predate 1850 and probably much earlier. Some have been well maintained & restored, others are more dilapidated. Furzeleigh, The Almshouses, and the Tannery Wall have all been listed by Historic England but I believe some additional buildings warrant local listing and indeed that The Forder Conservation area should be extended to include areas in the bottom of Fairmead Road and Longlands Lane that aren’t currently included.
-Lynher House, Fairmead Road - Tannery Court; boundary walls already listed by HE - 1 Burdock Cottage, Longlands Lane and the unidentified building adjoining it. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up - Holly Tree Cottage, Longlands Lane Of significant age. Once used as the quarry captain's house. - Tor Hill Cottage. Of significant age, adjoining Holly Tree Cottage. - Oakland's House, Longlands Lane - Magpies Cottage, Longlands Lane -Tamar Lyn, Longlands Lane - Hope Cottage, Longlands Lane -Avalon Cottage, Longlands lane
Fairmead Road
-16 Fairmead Road - Thorn Farm - properties in Thorn Lane /Prospect Lane including Elm Cottages. - Lampton House - Terendak out building converted to garage - Chapel Cottage - Fairmead Cottage
Nb there are other worthy buildings in this area
Forder - A long established Conservation area with several properties listed by Historic England (eg The Mill, Railway Viaduct and Rose Cottage), there are many properties that would benefit from and warrant local listing. Some of these properties date back almost 500 years, but this is an incomplete list. - Forder Villa - Scanal Close - Lime Kiln Cottage - Geraldine Terrace and outbuilding. - 3 & 4 Riverside Cottages with the terrace alongside. - The Boathouse - The Moorings Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up - The Barn - the old Methodist Chapel, now a private residence
Wearde Quay. An area that has three Historic England listings (Civil War Battery, Quay Terrace, limekiln frontage) there are other buildings and structures that warrant local listing; -The Quay - Boathouse alongside The Quay ( already restored) - Cliff Cottage - Lime Kiln Boathouse (part listed by Historic England) - Wearde Quay Road overbridge. - Remains of Wearde Halt railway “station”
Carkeel. A grouping of pre 1850 buildings split by the road to Callington but most beautifully maintained/restored in good original condition. Some buildings have been listed by Historic England ( one of Carkeel Barns, Eales Farm and barn to NW,) but other buildings in the area are worthy of local listing; -Tinkhams Farmhouse -Carkeel Barns; one is listed by Historic England already but the others are worthy of local listing -Southdown Cottage.
Ince Castle The main building is listed by Historic England but the following are known to me and warrant local listing; - Barn Cottage (converted) - Stable Cottage (converted) - Shell House.??)
Terraces I would start with the following but there are no doubt many others; -Brunel Terrace opposite Brunel and Jubilee Greens Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up -Westbourne Terrace with pavement, road, walls, ancient footpath to the river, ancient river wall adjoining the alley, and 2 lengths of original cast iron railings (+1 original gate!) - 159-171 Old Ferry Road - Elwell Road - two or three terraces on St Stephens Road - the terrace on St Stephens Hill, opposite The Cecil - terraces on Home Park Road - Coombe Road with many surviving glass canopied verandas at front - Brookdown Terrace, with many original glass canopied verandas at front and a rare surviving original layout of gardens on opposite side of road - Brookdown Villas
Port View Estate and Essa Road - all the detached and semi detached houses that predate 1907 but particularly no 1 - the boundary wall and any other outbuildings and walls from pre 1907
Miscellaneous others - Saltash.net school building (and playing fields if possible), Wearde Road. This is a 2nd half of 20th century building that is an attractive example of its kind and worthy of a listing in my view. - the cobbled stone area to the rear of The Guildhall which is the only surviving example of flint cobbles in the town, almost certainly dating back several centuries. - Dunheved House. Pre 1859. Previously rejected but should be reconsidered. - Boisdale House, North Road. - Collingwood Cottage, 1 Station Road. And boundary walls - 9 St Stephens Road. Pre 1859. One of the oldest properties in Saltash although looking a bit tired. The protection of a local listing would encourage a future sympathetic restoration. - Wearde Farm, Wearde Road, PL12 4AS; the mid 18th century house and 1 barn is already grade 2 listed with Historic England, but I believe some barns and other farm buildings may be worthy of local listing if only to encourage a future sympathetic restoration.. -The Cecil public house, St Stephens Hill, PL12 4AR. Built circa 1902. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up -8 and 10 St Stephens Road; Malvern House Nursing home, a Victorian building converted to nursing home over 30 years ago with Victorian features retained. Wonderful original Victorian walls to the front which should be protected. Designated as significant other buildings on site of historical interest in CSUS (fig 5) - 13 Culver Road; a well maintained detached property in a prominent position and next to 15 Culver Road which is listed by HE - The Crooked Inn, Trematon Cross and other related buildings
Trematon, Trehan and Notter There are many notable buildings in these areas, and here are some examples;
• Notter Bridge pub • Butterwell Batns, Notter • Tredown fatm, Elmgate. One barn already listed by HE • Lower Trevollard farm, trematon; North House, South House and Cider House have all been restored but there may well be other buildings worthy of local listing
Traffic Action should be taken immediately to elevate these traffic black C7 • I would like to know what action the town council are taking to stop the spots in Saltash traffic chaos at Carkeel roundabout and Gilston Road. • Not having traffic lights on the Saltash side of Carkeel roundabout is not only dangerous but totally unacceptable for the Saltash residents • Now with the chaos on Gilston Road turning right to Carkeel roundabout is an accident waiting to happen.
Page 7, Objective 10. 1. Carry out a thorough assessment of need to assess gaps in C8 Meeting the demand for leisure facilities ‘support new and protect existing service whilst complying with the whole gambit of legislation and allotments’ (LEI5) policy that is available and pertinent i.e. allotments act 1922 2. Better use of section 106 agreements for provision/development of sites 3. Use surplus land as temporary allotments rather than mothballing it 4. Ensure allotment management is linked to other councils strategies e Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up 5. Ensure surplus land is put to alternative uses (community gardens) 6. Regularly consult with users developing an allotment charter 7. Recommend planning policy recognises demand 8. Install a compensation system 9. Recognise disabled allotmenteers have different needs 10. Provide sites that have been tested for chemicals that would endanger life if ingested 11. Advertise provision of allotments et cetera POLICY CON2 Policy CON2 has to be the defining policy statement that ensures C9 • I am referring to the inadequacy of Policy CON2 and the glaring lack of that ALL developers of future developments within Saltash are any credible traffic management plan for New Road/North Road – CON subject to rigorous conditions within the planning process that tie 2 must be amended to ensure that at the planning stage developers are them to traffic management plans for their planned development that ensures zero/minimal traffic increases in NR/NR and forced to provide traffic management plans for proposed development Callington Road/Burraton Cross area. that ensues zero/minimal increases in traffic in New Road/North Road: In summary- NR/NR should not be designated as a Distributor Route and the residents of those roads must be protected from
existing and future increases in traffic by enforced traffic • I oppose the Saltash Neighbourhood Development Plan (SNDP) as management plans for any future development within Policy CON2 drafted because there are no plans for the adequate management of increased traffic growth in the New Road/North Road (NR/NR) and Burraton Cross areas. • Saltash Town Council (STC) has recent history of not being able to properly supervise planning applications from a traffic management standpoint. The recent traffic debacle at the newly opened Carkeel
Gateway site is evidence of this.
• Policy CON4 partially, but not adequately, deals with traffic at Burraton Cross • Policy Tc1 deals with development at Carkeel but has no plan for dealing with the additional traffic generated. • Policy CON2 designates NR/NR as a Distributor Route.
• NR/NR are classified as B Roads, it is a residential area and so should
not be classed as a Distributor Route but only be classified as an
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up emergency by-pass for when the Saltash Tunnel is closed. This designation must be challenged and should be removed from the SNDP. • Policy CON2 does not adequately protect the residents of NR/NR and as
drafted would be a dereliction of duty by sTc towards the residents of
those roads in terms of increased noise pollution and reduced air quality. • NR/NR faces 3 significant threats from increased traffic - none of which are dealt with in CON2 or the SNDP as a whole. 1. Threat 1 - existing - is the increase in traffic in NR/NR from the badly designed exit from the newly opened Carkeel Gateway. NR/NR is now used as a "rat run" by HGV that turn left out of Gilston Road rather than trying to cross the traffic to get back to Carkeel roundabout. 2. Threat 2 - identified by STC in the SNDP - is extra traffic from Broadmoor (Treledan) using NR/NR as a route to avoid Carkeel Roundabout. 3. .Threat 3 - traffic from additional dwellings planned at Middle Pill/North Pill which, unless there is proper traffic management, will exit onto NR/NR. • These 3 existing/planned threats will significantly impinge on the quality of life for the residents of NR/NR and Callington Road in the Burraton Cross area. • lt is the duty of STC to ensure maximum protection for the residents of NR/NR from these threats through the SNDP and specifically Policy CON2. • Policy CON2 as drafted does not do that. • Thus, for the SNDP to be a credible plan for safeguarding the interests of NR/NR residents Policy CON2 must be re-written.
POLICY CON 2 Policy CON 2 needs to ensure that at the planning stage any C10 developer must be able to show and prove that the planned development has traffic management schemes built in that Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • There is no reference in the Saltash neighbourhood development plan ensures that no traffic from the development increases traffic for traffic management for the proposed development of 85 homes at flows on new Road/North Road. Middle Pill • Policy CON 2 attempts but fails to deal with extra traffic onto New Road/North Road from Broadmoor. • Policy CON2 is not robust enough to achieve that and so must be amended to also include traffic being directed away from New Road/North Road emanating from Middle Pill • Any developments in Middle Pill must exit away from the North Road/Old Ferry Road/Granville Terrace Junction
1. Pedestrianize fore Street take out speed bumps to football C11[1] ground C11[2] 2. move it and make that area the main car park for visitors to C11[3] Saltash 3. Fore Street cafes restaurants that are open in the evenings for C11[4] the public to use 4. plan a route so that occupants of Broadmoor can walk or cycle C11[5] on designated traffic free routes to town centre 5 infrastructure to be in place before housing commences on C11[6] Broadmoor that is A388 Crossroads to become a around about. 6. St Barnabas Hospital to be updated and fully operational as a C11[7] cottage hospital surgery schools in place on Broadmoor 7 cable car to take public to and from Fore Street to the waterfront C11[8] development this would be a great attraction 8 bus route to be reorganized and rerouted so the public are dropped off at main car park at the bottom of Fore Street prior to Cl11[9] journey to Plymouth 9 Broadmoor to be as environmental as is possible with Walkways C11[10] and parks and trees now 10 imagination to be used by developers on house design and build C11[11] at Broadmoor (not the standard box types closed) 11 Main roundabout to have gantry signs above the road (not on the road edges) as it is now. - - C12 Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • Green Boulevard I suggest that to improve the appearance of this route, the C13 • I was particularly disappointed to hear from Open Reach that they facilities companies using overhead wires (Open Reach and plane to replace overhead copper telephone wires with overhead fibre Western Power) be requested to put their wires underground optic cables in the next few years in-spite of there being underground ducting carrying other company's fibre optic cable in the immediate vicinity
• Waterfont • A solution to the lack of easy access for the public might be to use C14[1] • My wife and I both feel that the waterfront is a special part of Saltash. the Saltash Hopper, or similar, as a public bus running on a circular C14[2] It is sad that a developer is happy to play games over the lack of route between Fore Street, the railway station and the waterfront. development of the old public house/restaurant adjacent to the Saltash A nominal charge could be made for using it. It could be timed to coincide with train arrivals for example. sailing club. It is an eye sore and we feel strongly it would be best if it
were restored as a restaurant or cafe, and not as a block of flats. It has been shown in many places that vibrant water frontages require sufficient amenities, in the shape of places to eat for example, to attract people.
• The Whole Plan C15 • I couldn't be more pleased with all of your intentions.
• Connectivity C16 • No mention is given of bus services in Saltash. We have a good bus service which could be better if timetabling was better & better integrated with rail services both in Saltash & Plymouth.
Connectivity C17 • Rush hour in Fore st is appalling..Too many Buses all following the same route...Cyclists using Fore st?? What’s wrong with using the parallel roads and not creating a traffic jam.. The speed humps are not pedestrian crossings so why do people assume they are.. Finally the free car parking on either side of Fore st should be chargeable and the car parks free on weekends ..
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • We have all learned OVER PAST THREE YEARS about UNDEMOCRATIC C18 REFERENDUMS NO THANK YOU. VOTE FOR THE BREXIT PARTY
• Beach areas near the old stone quay, the beach and moorings in front of the I would like the neighbourhood plan to include improvements to C19 Union Inn. In addition also to the area under the bridge with beach moorings our beach areas near the old stone quay, the beach and moorings and also to the left of the Brunel/Jubilee Green. in front of the Union Inn. In addition also to the area under the • bridge with beach moorings and also to the left of the • At the moment these areas are covered with abandoned boats, many Brunel/Jubilee Green of which have been there for years and years. The Old Stone Pier has three boats along one side which mean that recreational boat owners Regulation and management of existing moorings, beach and pier areas are unable to come along side. Although some of the wrecks on the
right side were removed for the Regatta more junk boats will no doubt arrive again. The moorings in front of the Union are haphazard and the beach has broken and discarded tenders on it. The area to the left of the Green and alongside the wall has abandoned boats and that makes the area look a mess. If the Council made this a priority then regulation and this single clean up would turn our waterfront area into a 'picture postcard' seaside town. Neatly arranged boats and moorings, and the removal of neglected vessels. The only place I know in Plymouth where you can moor your boat for free is Saltash......
• Objective 10: Meet the growing demand for leisure facilities The road outside Lidle (Gilston rd) just requires two things to C20[1] • If we are to promote future athletes and work independently from drastically improve the traffic: 1) Educate (re-educate/revise), Plymouth, we need an all weather running track. Currently I have to use drivers on their road position, especially when approaching a the football pitches at Warfelton as a make shift running track. Salt mill junction. If cars turning right onto Callington road (towards the Carkeel roundabout), moved right across to the centre of the road is great for football/hockey etc, but not running. We have a great little (not encroaching over the white lines), cars turning left would be running club, however for track sessions they have to go to Brickfields, able pass on the inside, thus alleviating the bottle. neck. 2) Widen Plymouth. We have a great football club with a stadium, a rugby club that 50m stretch of the road making it two lanes. There are with pitches, but nothing for running. My comments are only directed bollards on the pavement presumably there to stop cars parking - at general running, but I guess we should consider 'track and field'. by widening the road slightly to two lanes, that bottle neck would flow much better at busy times. There would still be plenty of • Objective 11: Encourage improved and sustainable connectivity footpath for pedestrians. 3) Speaking as a new Firefighter at Saltash, we need to stop calling for the A38 between Saltash and C20[2] Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • We must educate people about over reliance on their cars. Too many Treulfoot roundabout becoming a dual carriageway, and start people drive as 'auto pilot', rather than allowing a little more time to educating/reeducating/revise drivers on how to drive correctly. walk, cycle. The reason for building the new facilities at the Carkeel Almost all the accidents have been caused by poor driving, not the road. roundabout are questionable, however, the lack of forethought to cope
with the extra traffic is down right laughable. I can only assume nobody involved in the project, actually live locally and therefore have now moved on, with their pockets full, and no need to look back at the traffic chaos. My point is in regard to the new planned building project/s - lets ensure the planning starts in reverse - not profit first, but correct access for the amount of traffic now, and lets predict further ahead too. Why are there traffic lights on the main roundabout? Would the traffic not flow better allowing the roundabout to function as designed?
St Barnabas C21[1] • It is vital that St Barnabus is utilised as much as possible and that new GP and health buildings are allowed.
Housing • We must provide quality truly affordable homes for young people & C21]2] families and help them to finance the purchase.
Connectivity Lower speed limit on stretch of A38 between slip road from Saltash C22[1] • Already Carkeel development traffic impacting village of Trematon and to beyond Crooked Inn/Broadmoor Farm Junctions Fairmead Road. Increased traffic using back roads, no signage warning drivers of families/walkers/cyclists/runners/horse riders also using this road. Increased traffic on A38 makes exiting onto A38 very difficult. Traffic moving too quickly at the entry and exit junctions for Trematon to make right turns safe. Lack of warning signage within Trematon (eg horse/family warning triangles) and on A38 mean that drivers are unaware of the vulnerability of residents and those with leisure interests in the area. C22[2] • 'Green Boulevard' would really enhance Saltash. Current footpaths and C22[3] bridleways are VERY poorly linked in Saltash and surrounding areas. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Cyclists, walkers and those with mobility issues find paths away from main road difficult and walking/cycling/riding the main road route is unattractive. Routes off the main road are not wheelchair/bike/horse friendly (for example blocked by metal barriers). Safe and pleasant linking of routes other than for drivers would be essential for access to the town and a green boulevard for people who do not live close to the town centre. • Social, recreational and cultural, inclusivity and community safety all mentioned in evidence, response should address this further through its commitment to the attractive, accessible, safe and practical pledge (see earlier comments re: linking public rights of way). Looking forward from an environmental and community perspective increased 'neighbourhoods' require suitable access for everyone not just drivers. Development and infill will increasingly restrict social, recreational and cultural, inclusivity and community safety without a strategy and commitment to improve poorly linked/maintained/lost rights of way. • Objective 10 does show any commitment by the TC to enhance play C22[4] and green spaces around Saltash. The phrases 'safeguard playspaces which have become dilapidated and 'preserve dilapidated playspaces' show no commitment to meeting the growing demand for leisure facilities or meeting environmental objectives. • Proposed economic and housing developments should not be viewed C22[5] by the TC as exclusive to the environment and leisure. These areas could all be linked properly by a TC committed to preserving and enhancing Saltash's character. Saltash could be a terrific green ambassador with its FANTASTIC backdrop and heritage improved alongside proposed development. Enhanced recreational and green spaces would be a great start rather than preserving them in their dilapidated state. See also earlier comments re: PROWs Parking for shopping and enjoyment of Saltash should be altered to C22[6] encourage people to enjoy the town and proposed improvements.
Green spaces and playspaces should be linked in order to meet C22[7] objectives 3 (SN2) and all of objective 7. Recreational spaces should be linked where possible by accessible 'green corridors'
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up with proposed tree planting. Objectives 2, 3, 4, 7 and 10 should be considered concurrently.
• Housing Think about brown field sites and use them first. Also look at C23 • There has been an explosion of housing at several sites near to Saltash. buildings, houses, bungalows already built but left empty for years Many of the houses are unsold. Local authorities may well build new on end. Do some purchasing of those instead of allowing them to housing, new dental and doctors surgeries, new schools, etc., but if our sit merely gaining monetary value for which ever company or whoever the person owning them. I pass several on a weekly basis surgeries which are already up and running in Saltash can't attract which have been empty for years. Then think about this trend of doctors and dentists to fill empty positions, very little good comes from people in cities buying "second" homes and pricing locals out of building more just for them to stand empty too. It puts more unwanted the market. pressure on the few services we have in Saltash. As far as providing homes for families and schools, that all hinges on the availability of jobs and the services required to get people to and from their place of work. Transport which runs at times people need to travel. These super ideas about cycle paths pose another problem; Saltash is made up of hills, so best of luck getting people to cycle to work. This isn't Holland. Then we come to the type of architecture so often used in Cornish developments, "ugly" being the word needed here and incredibly small little boxes. It also is a requirement to bulldoze the hell out of anything natural on the building site. Just look at the new housing estate on the outskirts of Tavistock, hedges, trees dug up and flattened. Local authorities will probably say they replant but it doesn't replace natural habitat and is invariably of little use or attraction to wildlife. Broadmoor farm has natural hedges and trees which will all go because of greed and the need to fill as much space as possible with small units. People moving to the Saltmill tip development moaned about having to buy new furniture because there original suites were too large to fit the buildings which were too small. Next comes the problem of traffic Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up congestion. The new roundabout and lights are already overburdened especially at certain times of day and the new development of McDonalds Nd Costa coffee have added to it, let alone the summer congestion. You really need to do some hard thinking about the quality of the proposals and not just about numbers plucked out of the air.
• Waterfont Some form of public transport to and from the waterfront. Maybe C24 • I support the plans for revitalising the waterfront. The area has already some form of "on demand" service (perhaps accessed from been improved, and will hopefully look even more attractive when the Ashtorre Rock) as obviously not many people wish to visit in wet or empty public house is redeveloped, and the facilities at Ashtorre Rock cold weather and also for a reasonable price as not everyone can afford taxis. are well used. However, I feel that the area is very underused by
residents as it is very difficult to get to the waterfront and, more importantly, get back to the town centre unless one has access to a car. I would therefore welcome plans to improve access for people without cars.
• Waterfront • I would like to see the prices of non Saltash boat owners paying an C25[1] • When you say support and improve the appearance, and then go on to increased price, and for them to to pay a launching fee, which they say careful rules for waterfront development, in respect to, Heritage, have to do in Plymouth and also pay for parking of their cars and river biodiversity and mainly local interest for the residents, I hope you trailers, as quite often locals cannot park there vehicles and trailers in the boat park because of the free use of Plymouth and other mean all the residents of Saltash in this statement not just waterfront uses. This might help the illegal and dangerous parking on the road C25[2] residents, as we all use and enjoy the scene at the frontage of a very running along the waterfront due to overspill from the boatpark. important historical site. I would like to see the local people of Saltash This extra money could be used to subsidise Saltash water-sports given special treatment when they use the waterfront amenities such and their local users as moorings on the pier at Jubilee green, and the boat park there, with More secure facilities for the local people of Saltash to keep their C25[3] permanent free access to the slipways and car-parking. There seems to boats and water-sports equiptment on the waterfront, this would be a lot of berths and boat spaces going to Plymouth boat owners and reduce highway traffic/parking.
even the best berths going to people living in the Midlands, this is because they are much cheaper here in Saltash compared to the likes of Plymouth Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Town Centre • Towns that need to be a "destination" ie like Totnes/Tavistock, keep national shops to a minimum, we are close to Plymouth and all large C26[1] nationals are present there. We have to be different. There must be a focus to keep encouraging individuals businesses that are different, this will bring more visitors and residents using the town. Parking issues need to be addressed, I have seen excellent car parking in towns such at Whitney Oxfordshire, that have 1-2 hrs free. This means that people have enough time to shop, eat and go. No commuters or workers fill free spaces, this is highly monitored by patrol staff who register car regs. We have to look at Tavistock who only charge £2.50 to park all day! That is our competition. There is also competition from out of town shops now that have free parking, sorry but pressure needs to put on Cornwall Council re this if we are to see our high street survive. NO more take aways we have enough!! No gaming/gambling shops. Would be great to have a market like Tavistock do • Carkeel Roundabout and developments Please get the roads sorted out, do not agree to any further development in this area until this happens, locals are fed up with our town being gridlocked at peak C26[2] travel periods. Pressure needs to put on Highways England to sort this, hatched area on the roundabout would be great to allow free access for local traffic when the traffic flowing from Plymouth into Cornwall is choked. • Free public wifi works really well, we have seen this is the northern towns of Scotland which was super, it helped us find destinations we C26[3] were looking for, which cafe/restaurants to use in towns. • In this section there are bits about keeping our community safe and what would be good Maintenance of services we have ie tennis courts/ C26[4] parks/pools are really important- smart and clean- the parks have been uplifted by the new planting and seating, great! Using these spaces more often, I have experience of seeing a public park in Bristol being taken on and run by a group of "friends" who have enhanced the park and have regular concerts and fairs there and have introduced a cafe. In terms of safety I would like to add the following • There are motorbike racers speeding up and down from the tunnel to Carkeel and also along new road, especially at the weekends and late C26[5] Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up into the night. I hope that we do not have to wait until someone is killed to do anything about this?? A speed camera would be useful, especially as we have limited number of police now in the town, another sore point in the town! • Parking issues all around the town are becoming a headache and dangerous. Our town was not built for this amount of people and it is C26[6] showing in inconsiderate parking in sometimes dangerous positions, some more double yellow lines might help and speed restrictions. Park and ride facilities for Plymouth • Empty properties in the town falling apart ie top of fore street near the C26[7] Wesley and wheat sheaf need sorting they are eye sores and deeply upsetting. well done on getting to grips with the railway station! • We all love the waterside and want to protect and enhance this area of our town please can we support some accessible paths and walks along C26[8] the side the river front obviously some in place already, but the walls and paths are deteriorating rapidly. Could RSPB be asked to put on walks and guides for people? or someone similar- people can't afford the boat trips that are done. Please protect any development in this area no car parking charges - it will be a nightmare for the poor residents in this area • Please please please ensure road systems are put in place before any further development is done, at the moment it seems like there is just C26[9] more and more is being developed and road systems/paths/cycle paths are an after thought and are not considered at all. if people want to build houses fine but make sure they have to pay for the infrastructure to change roads to adapt them. for example is anything going to changed at the ferry road/china fleet rd junction with new housing going on there?, someone is going to get killed if it stays at it is! Consideration needs to taken into account for services too ie schools- have they got enough places GP practices in the town are struggling with their case loads at the moment without getting more patients. Dentists- the same That brings me onto St Barnabas Hospital- left to rot by the NHS property services- its basically an admin block now- so sad. A town of this size should have a minor injuries unit open 24/7 with X- C26[10] ray facilities or a walk in centre- I recently went down to Liskeard on a Sunday and they had no Xray on this day and had to go to Derriford. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up
• Protect and enhance the existing Public Rights of Way network (the 49 C27 Public Footpaths and Public Bridleways shown in Saltash's portion of the Definitive Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way (PRoW)). All 49 Saltash PRoW are currently in a very poor state and need considerable work to bring the to a usable and enjoyable condition. Some can't now be found, let alone used or enjoyed. They need clearing, Signposting where they leave 'metalled' road, and waymarked as necessary along the route to indicate the way. Crops are grown on the route of some PRoW, a Gate across the route of at least one PRoW is padlocked and chained shut: other obstructions on PRoW are not removed. (In spite of my many reports to the Highway Authority.). The route of PRoW over the ground do not follow the line shown on the Definitive Map & Statement (DM&S). The DM&S is not kept up-to-date and now has so many anomalies it can't now be trusted to be definitive. (yet is the only legal document showing where they are and there width etc. I look forward to what is said in the Saltash Neighbour Hood Plan actually being actioned: (but I won't hold my breath. The Saltash PRoW network is in a dreadful state, it can't be used and enjoyed. • Clear them, Signpost, Waymark and maintain all Saltash Public Rights of Way: this will encourage their use and enjoyment - which, in turn, will keep them clear and usable.
• The end of my garden meets the main road very near to the turn off from the C28 Saltash tunnel. The location is impacted massively with noise and pollution as a result of increased traffic coming off this junction (going to Plymouth and taking the left turning). The speed limit is supposed to be 30 along here but at night cars hit 40+mph. In other areas the speed limit is 20 in built up areas. The pathways are narrow and dangerous to walk along with small children. There are no traffic calming measures and there are no cameras. With an increase in population this junction could be used more and as a result impact on the noise levels at the end of my garden and other surrounding houses. Has this been measured? What is the impact on pollution on this area? Also this road is used Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up daily by chidren crossing to go to the Saltmill park and football facilities. This needs to be considered before there is an accident. Traffic calming, 20mph speed limit, zebra crossings/ traffic lights with a green man. Also a speed camera to catch the speeding cars.
• Access is a major issue for a number of residents in Saltash and if this can be C29[1] achieved I feel it would benefit Saltash enormously. Connecting it more to the town would open it to visitors. Better signage explaining the different ways to access the waterfront and C29[2] suitability for wheelchairs • Protection of community sites is vital for opportunity for community gatherings and allow the feeling of belonging and part of the town. It’s vital to have C29[3] increase community services for the future growth of the town especially C29[4] schools and health.
• I think it is an excellent decision to delay the building of the Broadmoor estate. I C30 feel that the two new housing estates built in the area relatively recently (Pilmere and Latchbrook) have had such an impact on the local environment and transport links that I don't feel that another massive housing estate should be built in the same area. I was devastated when I heard about the proposal for Broadmoor and I absolutely support the idea of smaller builds, conversions and extensions which have less impact. If massive, dominating estates like this are built every five years or so Saltash will lose it's unique charm and the environment will be decimated. That the Broadmoor estate isn't built.
• Would like to see more reference to facilities and services for children C31[1] and young people within Saltash. C31[2] • Would like to see reference to supporting communities to take on empty buildings/waste land/small plots of greenspace either formally through community asset transfer or just informally where it's handed over and communities/volunteers are given a chance to make improvements within a given time. Closer partnership working with communities
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up I really like the vision that has been created - Please could you consider the C32[1] addition of 'inclusive' to support an inclusive growth agenda? • Generally like the overall approach but would ask you consider adding a piece around 'inclusive growth': RSA commission definition: 'Enabling as C32[2] many people as possible to contribute to, and benefit from, economic growth' 2 dimensions: - Social: benefitting people across the labour market spectrum including groups that face particularly high barriers to high quality employment - Place: addressing inequalities in opportunity within an economic geography • I can't see anywhere in the plan a clear link to the health of local residents and permitted building development. There is a clear and C32[3] indisputable link between obesity and proximity of location of fast food restaurants. It seems crazy to me that we are putting so much effort into creating the right conditions for residents to be more active and then not simultaneously linking this to the food choices we make. I would like to see greater restrictions placed on the development and location of fast food outlets • Please could you give consideration to how services could play a stronger role alongside shopping improvements. We should be thinking C32[3] about a bigger role our town centres can play in servicing leisure activities as a whole, especially areas and services which encourage more people to get physically active. Suggest consideration to things like table tennis tables, petanque etc that can be enjoyed by the old and young alike and that would encourage more people to spend more time in the TC. • I would like to see a much stronger representation for the specific needs of wildlife I would like to see more about actual regeneration of C32[4] hedge/hedgerows rather than just maintain what we have I would like to see stronger policies around soil quality and enhancing it for sustainable agricultural growth I would like to see designated areas specifically for re-wilding. I would like to see more about enhancing the environment for wildlife within our built environment • The list of Key Strategic Open Spaces should include Coombe Valley. It is shown C33 on the map in Fig 28. include Coombe Valley in policy LE1 • Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • With regard to the Regeneration of the Town Centre, I suggest serious C34[1] consideration is given to a pedestrian only area in part of Fore Street. It will not be possible to build a vibrant cafe culture environment while traffic is using the street and there is limited car parking. • With regard to Revitalise the Waterfront - access needs improving and there C34[2] should be more emphasis on tourism development than in the current plan. With regard to Objective 5 - Saltash desperately needs more first time C34[3] buyer/single person housing both in rented and ownership market. The plan is not clear on this and does not put sufficient emphasis on the need for more housing. Please see above - more building of low cost, single person accommodation should be encouraged from large scale builders. •
• You mention plan is to restrict any further shopping at Carkeel - how C35[1] can you then justify development just opened at Gislton Road? Eg, McDonalds, Costa Coffee, etc, etc. This clearly takes business away from Town Centre and locally run businesses in favour of multinational companies. What is the point of trying to justify this by saying these businesses have given money to be put towards Town Centre when you C35[2] are killing it by allowing them to set up in the first place! • Also the ensuing traffic chaos has clearly not been thought through properly. All these vehicles coming out from Gilston Road is just ludicrous. Even if the road had been widened slightly to allow two cars to exit the road would help. It would mean cars turning left towards Saltash would not get stuck behind cars turning right towards the roundabout. A road linking development to Pilmere would also help and relieving pressure. • You specifically mention policy to protect trees. Have you been to the B & M carpark recently? All the trees, etc, by the carpark along the bridle C35[3] path, have been cut down. Who authorised this act of vandalism? Are new trees to be planted, even those thes will take decades to mature?
• Development in the Middle Pill area without substantial improvements to C36 vehicular access can only cause yet more congestion. With the increase in population from the future development of Broadmoor Farm (SLT-UE1) there is Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up bound to be me traffic through to the China Fleet. This will also impact the rural nature of the whole area. Not allow it • I fully understand the need for extra housing but this MUST be balanced against the effect on the local traffic and facilities. Provision new school places (a new school), GP access etc must be placed at the very top of the developers priorities and not left until the end. The revised layout at Carkeel roundabout is just about coping with current traffic demand; there is still congestion on a daily basis, made worse with the new retail park. I would like to see the junction between the western end of Liskeard Road and the A38 changed to a roundabout for starters. This would take some of the pressure off the Carkeel roundabout.
• Con4 out of date Most traffic runs N-S and constant queuing traffic is a C37[1] pollution problem . The other need which conflicts with the above is to make the junction safer for pedestrians and cyclists Lastly a need to persuade traffic from the industrial estates not to use New Rd as a rat run . Otherwise SNP very good thanks C37[2]
• Having lived in Carkeel for many years we would like to preserve the visual C38 amenity and outlook currently enjoyed by many long-standing residents. Development in these areas should be kept to a minimum otherwise the character of these villages will be lost for ever.
• TC2 An ideal way of regenerating the Town Centre is to introduce more car C39 parking but abolish car parking fees. Reasons With no time restrictions or cost this would be a huge bonus to shoppers/visitors to the town. Eventually the loss in revenue to the council by abolishing parking fees could be outweighed by the increase in revenue from the extra visitors coming to Saltash. People would stay longer, have another coffee and if we were lucky enough to get more restaurants to stay and enjoy their time rather than clock watch. I have lived in developed amazing cities in Africa and there have never been parking fees Carkeel and Waitrose area do not have parking fees More good restaurants and the waterfront developed
WF 1 C40[1] Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • v. Retain and if possible improve access to all existing amenities, boat launching and recovery facilities It is possible that when STC gains devolved powers to operate slipways, we may choose to close the Ashtorre slipway to motorised launches, but retain access for pedestrians, kayaks, dinghies etc. The thinking is to move all motorised launches to the Jubilee Green slipway to better manage vehicles and trailers, as well as implementing slipway launching charges. Could this contradict Policy v? Or could we argue that limiting and better managing access at one slipway helps overall management and long term viability, as well as making the Ashtorre area safer and more accessible to pedestrians and other river users? • WW2 Landing Craft Gridiron is a scheduled monument, but lacks any interpretation C40[2] • Please Add Redevelop Boats Sheds at Ashrtorre Wharf Redevelop Boat C40[3] Shed under Royal Albert Bridge pier next to 'Just Be' • Is St Barnabus ever going to be fit for purpose? Would support reuse C40[4] for residential, if alternative accessible site was available and could be developed to provide Urgent Care and In Patient beds. Possibly to Community Campus at Warfelton. C40[5] • POLICY HWB 5 - PROTECTION OF IMPORTANT COMMUNITY FACILITIES Please add h Railway Station And possibly consider altering a Post Office To a Post Office and parcel pickup facility • STADIUM FOR SOUTH EAST CORNWALL A new Sports Stadium to C40[6] provide high quality world class assessable sporting facilities for football, rugby and athletics tec. The stadium could also provide a venue for entertainment such as concerts. This might also free up the current football ground to provide land for health and community facilities at Warfelton depending on where it was located, possibly on the Broadmoor site. - A new Sports Stadium to provide high quality world class assessable sporting facilities for football, rugby and athletics tec. The stadium could also provide a venue for entertainment such as concerts. This might also free up the current football ground to provide land for health and community facilities at Warfelton depending on where it was located, possibly on the Broadmoor site.
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • Additional housing is very necessary and probably only opposed by home C41 owners who fear lower valuations of their own property, a view not in the interest of the homeless or of the total community
The road into and out of the proposed development can not accommodate this C42 amount of traffic, it’s already busy and people park everywhere already, there’s no flow of traffic easily because of the bottle neck at the bottom. The two doctors surgeries serving and town and surrounding areas are already stretched and struggling. The high housing prices in and around Saltash make it difficult for people from the town to buy and own homes here, the last thing we need is more overpriced housing. We have no operating police station and very little police presence in the town as it is and a poor response time to any needed assistance, growing the town will just put this under more strain. It’s not easily accessible due to lack of bus routes and the last thing we need is more busses, there’s already too many that clog up fore street. The schools we have accommodate the town sufficiently, but year groups can become full meaning children from the town have to go to school elsewhere, more houses mean more children which means the schools will be under more stress. - Don’t build it •
As I am Living in the immediate vicinity of this proposed development site I can C43 see exactly how bad this will impact on the local area. It is bad enough already struggling with access to and from the estate with the limited no of residences already there plus visitors to China Fleet, Saltmill etc. To put another 85 propertied is going to make it a million times worse!! I struggle at least once a day to exit/enter the estate due to traffic this will not help!! - Either do t build it or you would need to consider building another access route bypassing the Old Ferry Road Junction. •
• I oppose the planning for 85 houses to be built on north and middle pill. Would suggest a maximum of 15 houses be allowed on a deduced C44 Firstly under paragraph 11:1 biodiversity protection and gain. I regularly site on north pill only, make the road fm the old ferry road no see birds of prey, deer, foxes and pheasants to name a few on this land parking to ease the congestion and widen the sharp left hand bend and I note that as per your plan the A38 corridor from the west though or there may well be a fatality or even better put the access road in to the Tamar tunnel is protected, so cannot even fathom why this from the carkeel roundabout near to waitrose Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up application would even be considered. I feel I also need to point out that the road infrastructure from New road to Saltmill is wholly inadequate now and will be intolerable with more housing and vehicles on the road. Residents of the road heading down to saltmill park on the road as they have no parking provisions, which narrows the road and causes a bottleneck at the junction with saltmill close. Vehicles Coming up the hill, end up having to drive on the wrong side of the road due to all the parked cars, this then causes problems with vehicle coming the other way. At the bottom of the hill there is a sharp left hand bend and the road narrows. This is obvious when looking at the property on the corner and they have had to put up boards to protect their property from vehicles. Due to the bend it is sometimes necessary to drive slightly over the middle of the road and there have been some near misses. More vehicles on this road will see a marked increase in RTAs and even damage to the persons property. Further along the road there is another sharp left hand bend which also has the same problems although the road is slightly wider here. The road going down to saltmill is quite narrow and given there are properties on both sides there is no scope for the road to be widened. Also the junction at the top of the hill that leads on to old ferry road and new road needs to be brought into the mix. As it is difficult to turn right out of old ferry road, traffic tends to build up on the road to saltmill. As I have said earlier the residents park on the road and therefore they can be queued up in the middle of the road which then blocks vehicles trying to get down the hill to China fleet. This road is totally unsuitable as an access road for further planning of 85 houses let alone the amount of traffic that use it to gain entry to the China fleet complex already. Let alone the large hubs etc that will need to use this road for building the said housing. And lastly I want to reiterate the damage to the environment and the destruction of wildlife habitat which is prevalent in the UK at the moment • • The designated areas of Middle and North Pill will on increase the traffic along Improve the road structure before building the houses. C45 North Rd and other smaller routes as commuters fight for access, as experienced since the new roundabout at Carkeel was built. The traffic pollution (noise and fumes) has increased markedly over the last 10 years and Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up this will only exacerbate the problems. The area to the North of present Saltash provides the lungs of the town.
n relation to SLT-H1, I have great concerns regarding road access and The towns infrastructure needs to be improved considerably C46 congestion. As a regular user of China Fleet I already experience difficulties BEFORE any new developments are begun. In my experience accessing and exiting Glanville Terrace onto Old Ferry Road and New Road. This Saltash is already struggling will only get much worse with the extra vehicular use associated with an extra 85 houses. Regarding SLT-UE1 and SLT-H1 - Over 1000 homes will bring, I would estimate, at least 2000 additional vehicles, and congestion issues on the Tamar Bridge will be markedly worse - especially at peak times - and I cannot see how the bridge can be improved sufficiently to alleviate this problem. Saltash has two Doctors surgeries and in my experience, both are already under tremendous strain with the existing population (around 16,500 according to your statistics). This pressure will obviously increase significantly with the addition of these extra homes unless plans are in place to greatly improve existing facilities in the town. We have recently lost our Police Station. Are plans afoot to have this reinstated? It is rare to see any Police Officers in the town and I hear from residents, and read regularly on social media, of concerns about increases in crime and anti-social behaviour. There will also be a big increase in pressure on existing schools and pre-schools. You speak of encouraging visitors and tourists to the town, and in my opinion the key is to make Saltash look inviting to holidaymakers travelling past and heading over the bridge (from either direction) and encouraging them to stop and enjoy the facilities of The Gateway To Cornwall. For this to happen the approach needs to look inviting. A huge housing estate or a waterfront housing development does not, in my opinion, give a very welcoming first impression.
• I have great concerns regarding road access and congestion for all these I have been unable to find any information concerning C47 proposed additional homes in Saltash. Over 1000 new homes could potentially improvements in local infrastructure, ie. Doctors, dentists, schools bring an additional 2000 vehicles or more to our area, which would only add to and the policing of the town, in any of your literature. This must be the congestion on an already congested Tamar Bridge and tunnel. I also have addressed before any new developments are commenced, or concerns over road access to the proposed SLT-H1 development which, in my Saltash would be unable to cope. opinion, is already a dangerous and congested junction, giving poor access to the China Fleet Club road. Saltash is presented as The Gateway To Cornwall, and first impressions count. These new housing developments would not give a very welcoming impression to holidaymakers and travellers heading in or out of Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Cornwall through Saltash. We want to encourage visitors to stop in our lovely riverside town and in my opinion over-development would have a negative impact on tourism. The two existing doctors surgeries in Saltash are already under strain. I experience considerable difficulty whenever I attempt to make a doctors appointment and I have been on the waiting list for a NHS Dentist in Saltash for nearly three years. Without additional facilities, or a vast improvement to existing ones, I can only see the situation getting worse. The increase in population brought about by the building of all these new homes would have a huge impact on the health and well-being of existing Saltash residents.
• Oppose - Loss of green belt and access Not to proceed with development C48
• I object to the development proposal for Middle Pill. And North Pill. L Loss of Don’t do it C49 green space and access. There is all ready to much speading traffic.
Page 5 revitalise the waterfront I support some of this objective, but have the C50[1] following opinion: The green area of the waterfront with the pontoon is lovely, used by families and dog owners, visitors and residents with a gorgeous view of the Tamar Bridge and estuary and could perhaps be made a little more attractive with more trees and shrubs, a pop up mobile coffee, snack bar, similar to those on the Barbican waterfront perhaps to draw people there. However, turn the corner and you are faced with unattractive dated flats, an ugly community hall and a pub which doesn't really look inviting to visitors, with no outdoor appeal to make the most of its location. If we are aiming to draw in visitors and residents of Saltash and the surrounding area to the waterfront area this surely all has to change? Just Be is a success because even though there is room for improvement it makes the most of a small space offering an inviting indoor ambience, good food and hospitality but the outside space lets it down looking out through railings onto a road and cars. Visit any waterside town and you will see how much we lack. A beautiful cosy pub/cafe/bistro with an outside garden area, trees, subtle lighting positioned to make the most of the amazing views that are there, positioned with parking behind it and a new attractive glass fronted community hall with communal Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up gardens /allotments would be my vision. I know the water creates an issue with flooding etc, and have to confess I am not experienced as to whether these ideas are even feasible but I do strongly feel we need to CHANGE its character rather than respect it, and create a new character for the waterfront. - There needs to be an hours free parking in all car parks to compete with the C50[2] retail parks. The town needs to look more attractive. More attractive looking shop frontages, more support to independent businesses rather than chain shops, more trees and greenery, consideration of changing the road to prioritise pedestrians and have a better and easier street parking layout. I know this all costs money, but it does really need a massive revamp to attract visitors. - • I have received leaflet advising plan for 85 homes to be built middle Pill and 100 Cancel north and middle pill housing plans C51 north pill? Whilst I can’t find content to view in plan, I would oppose this as it would interfere with the beautiful countryside views we hold and enjoy from our property, as it will impact for many other saltash residents. With the large proposed broad moor development I feel further builds unnecessary. Access presumably would be from new road which already struggles at times.
• New housing at North Pill - whilst Highways England have confirmed True consideration of the impact of proposed housing C52[1] they consider 85 dwellings acceptable based on current evidence developments. available there is no proposal for how the additional traffic would be accommodated. It's a narrow lane past Saltmill in a residential area, the reality is that it cannot cope with the additional traffic created by 85 houses. The fields which the development would be built on provide a vista for many for many people in Saltash which would be lost. The area whilst being close to Saltash town centre is home to countryside wildlife which would be displaced/lost. • Waterside - development of Waterside, this is the greatest asset that Saltash has to enjoy and share. C52[2] • Sustainable connectivity - Saltash and its residents would benefit from improved foot/cycle links which encourage non-car trips. An example, C52[3] since McDonald's opened at Carkeel the increased foot traffic from Saltash is noticable.
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up I don't think there should be any more building on green land in and around No more housing developments C53[1] Saltash. The traffic is often congested around the town, parking in residential roads is overcrowded, the health centres are overloaded, the schools are full. Saltash is NOT an urban area, it is a country town and as such further expansion should be stopped. It would be okay to allow a few big houses to be turned into flats, so long as off-road parking is included as part of the design, but more housing estates here would be wrong. Many people who live in Saltash work in Plymouth. Let the city house its own workers, not push them over here
• Saltash is losing a large proportion of its green areas - so many gardens are being paved, gravelled or covered in decking and plastic grass sheets. The stupid "Cornish Cross" development destroyed a colony of pipstrelle and soprano pipistrelle bats, very few bats are seen around the northern part of the town now, where only 15 years ago there were hundreds. Saltash is a haven for hedgehogs, there are more hedgehogs in the town than almost anywhere else in Cornwall. But too many cats run loose overnight, killing thousands of small mammals and fledgling birds. Where is the thought for wild creatures in your plan? We should be encouraging areas of wild greenery (not turning them into faux orchards) Let's have a meadow area on the waterfront instead of all that mown grass. It's not just the trees we need, but the wild plants and flowers. Every park should have a large area of wildness, including Burraton, Longstone and the schools' grounds. In addition we should have a local ordinance forbidding cats to be outside between dusk and dawn, and a limit of two cats or less per household. No development which doesn't include grass, trees and wild meadowland should be approved.
• It is horrible to walk along Callington Road and the B3271 between Fore Street and Waitrose, not just because there are so few trees (though there are few trees) but because there is so much traffic. It stinks and roars, especially around Burraton Cross where the pavements are narrow and the traffic lights cause cars to idle, pumping out exhaust fumes. It's also very difficult to cross the roads at the lights. Why are there no pedestrian controls for the lights? Urban design and green planting won't help this develop into a pedestrian route if you don't cut the traffic, widen the pavements, make better road crossings and put in proper cycle lanes.
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up
• The waterside and town centre plans and ideals are good and we need to make Consider traffic flow and parking issues. Provide cheap long-term use of unoccupied buildings and we need new homes BUT it is not easy to get a parking for the town. dentist, doctor and schools are full. We need to consider all these things when C54[1] we make planning decisions. Parking is a real problem not only in the main C54[2] street but in the surrounding streets. Often people cant park outside their own C54[3] houses. We are living in an age when most homes have at least 2 vehicles and C54[4] traffic flow is a problem. Any development in Pill area would cause real problems for traffic and would spoil what is wonderful countryside.
• There is no plan to help make the current housing stock more self-sustainable. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality by C55 In 2013 only 3% of properties with solid walls in UK had wall insulation. This supporting the addition where appropriate of insulation and solar could be included as an extra policy ENV 9 or included under a new Objective panels to the current housing stock. This can be achieved by 12 Meet Challenges of Climate Change setting an example with council buildings and providing information and encouraging local projects.
• I am not convinced of the need for more houses if the carkeel site is developed. Major widening, but how? C56 If this site is necessary then my objection is to the road access from North Rd. This is already a fairly busy junction and I have had a few near misses when turning into Old Ferry Rd with traffic coming from China fleet/Pilgrim pitch. This road is much too narrow to support more traffic without widening, and that doesn't look possible without knocking down a house or two or taking gardens. Any increase in traffic on the road to China Fleet without substantial widening would be very dangerous. I have not seen any plans to tell if this would happen. I often walk this road and there is about 200 yards with no pavement and it is not wide enough for 2 cars to pass any pedestrians.
• I oppose the intention to build up to 1000 new homes covering Broadmoor Reduce number of planned homes by at least a third. Restore older C57 Farm, Middle Pill, North Pill and other potential sites in Saltash and outskirts of building or knock them down to rebuild on existing sites. Green Saltash. I object largely on environmental grounds, in an age when we are being field sites should not be built on. told of proven evidence identified by scientific bodies that we are rushing toward a climate meltdown, building more homes seems at best highly irresponsible. Building new homes will have a huge impact including traffic increase, raised co2 emissions, waste increase, increased use of gas, water, electric and loss of habitat putting rare and already fragile eco-systems at risk of extinction. We are being encouraged to 're-wild' but that is pretty hard to do Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up when there is no land left to plant on. I have lived in Cornwall all my life and I know there are 100's of homes that are left unoccupied for most of the year due to second home buyers trying to make a quick pound through letting holiday homes. I am also aware of how affordable homes are quickly snapped up by developers to resell at a huge profit. I also know of houses that are left to rot as more money can be made out of homes built with cheap materials opposed to restoring older properties. The only people who stand to benefit are the developers. This level of greed and disrespect of our countryside has to stop,
• I do not believe that there is the number of local jobs available to sustain any Reopen St Barnabus C58 further demand for housing above the 1000 homes due to be built on Broadmoor Farm. Indeed I do not believe that even these homes are needed or are sustainable by local services. It is impossible to get an appointment with doctors or dentists in Saltash, and any minor injuries have to be dealt with at Derriford A&E. Our roads are overloaded and any jobs for the new homes will need to come from over the bridge, adding further strain on the existing network and bridge. I do not believe any assurances from developers that they will provide solutions to these problems.
• We were informed by Saltash Town Council that the development of Scrap the plan. Build Broadmoor, measure the impact and then C59 Broadmoor Farm would meet the housing needs of Saltash for the next 25 determine if Saltash needs and can support additional housing and years, why has this changed? The proximity of our town to the river and the if so then research where that housing would be best placed. swathe of green belt is what makes the gateway to Cornwall a much visited place and a breath of fresh air to neighbouring Plymouth. Do we really need to change the very thing that makes Saltash one of the most desirable postcodes in the UK? Since the opening of the new retail area at Carkeel residents are already experiencing the effects of traffic congestion, but in an area that is predominately light industrial perhaps the effect on the residents wasn't rated as highly as the inrease of revenue to the town. The movement of traffic around the proposed site, at peak times, is already difficult due to a combination two junctions and a slip from the A38. Imagine the effect of two new estates. Can the Town Council really justify the environmental sacrifice and the disruption to residents for a small development which would benefit few?
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • I oppose to any development around the North Pill/Middle Pill are for housing The junction from North Road to Old Ferry Road/North Pill needs C60 unless there is better access links. Already, the access to Saltmill and the China improvement now whether any further development is made in Fleet club is difficult and sometimes dangerous. There is not enough parking for that area. Also need more GPs in centres already here or a new Saltmill when they have events/well supported football matches and roads are health centre with a walk in centre like Liskeard/Cumberland blocked. The road by Saltmill is liable to flooding and can be impassable when centre. we've had very heavy downpours. Also the junction from Saltmill/Old Ferry Road onto North Road is dangerous. This needs to be addressed - maybe a mini roundabout or traffic lights - without adding to the traffic. I have witnessed many near misses on that junction! Also, wherever any new housing goes, Saltash is struggling with it's services, in particular Health care. Both practices don't have appointments available for 4-6 weeks unless it's an emergency. The schools are full. Where are these new residents going to go?
• The proposed development of 85 homes at North Pill does not consider Do not consider building these houses C61 the isolation and subsequent poor access to the site. Access to the site from New Road is via Glanville Terrace and Saltmill Lane (already busy with traffic to and from the China Fleet Club) and Pill lane. The names of these roads clearly indicate their inability to deal with sustained heavy traffic which would be the result of this development. Departure from the site requires final exit at the three way junction of New Road, Glanville Terrace and Old Ferry Road. This junction is already fed by traffic from a high density accommodation area and at peak times is overloaded. The central bollards are frequently damaged which would indicate that this junction is already at saturation. 85 new homes at North Pill would, with the most conservative calculation mean an increase of around 170 vehicles and many of these would be used for "school delivery" and result in a subsequent further increase in peak time traffic. • • Plan Page/Paragraph38/9.1 A thorough inspection of the site were these houses are being built C62 • I live next to a site which in all is having three houses built on it, whilst by an independent person(s). A full explanation as to why trees not opposed to these houses being built, I am very unhappy that were were taken down that should of not been touched. two houses being built next to each other are taking shape, the green land next to the houses (west bank on planning application) has had destruction caused and this was plainly needless to occur. Saltash Council originally sanctioned this development and then a Senior Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Planning Officer at Cornwall Council rubber stamped the build. My points are as follows: 1. Consistent working outside of the allotted timings of 0800 - 1800, predominately starting before the 0800 start time and consistent working on a Sunday, all be it not on the two houses, but the one being built further up. 2. No dust protection measures in place. 3. Not leaving the three metre gap between tree line (what is left of it) and were the building site commences. 4. According to the Planning Application little effect would be felt by surrounding homes in this area. This is absolute rubbish, we are living on a daily basis of consistent noise and this is totally unacceptable. The first three points that the sanctioned Planning Application(PA) stated, there fore the person(s) responsible from start to finish in granting the PA should hang there heads in shame. Point number four is from me and believe me when I say this is a horrible area to live in and will be so for approximately one year, this is totally unacceptable. The Senior Planning Officer at Cornwall Council really should sit up and take notice of this, as should every single Saltash Town Councillor, as enough is enough. My comments are about the three houses being built, however a lot of destruction has been caused to green land for the sake of three houses and some of the banking behind the first house being erected of the two at the bottom has had land fall away, this is a possible disaster waiting to happen, will Saltash Town Councillors and Cornwall Council then sit up and do something, once something goes wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There was only one access granted for this site, why on the 3rd June 2019 when work gathered pace on this development was access obtained through chopped down trees for approximately ten days? I raised an Enforcement Order and was told it takes nine to twelve weeks to be investigated, with no checks being carried out to see what is being done on site (unannounced would be preferable), then more and more damage will be created. • I cannot support any of the plan put forward by Saltash Town Council for the simple reason that you don't listen to peoples voices, only to the fact that you are allowing houses to be built anywhere they can be in Saltash and the destruction being caused is pretty much irreversible. If the Broadmoor Farm development goes ahead, then this should of been the only place to build in the Saltash area, with little impact of Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up hard working, tax paying (Council Tax, another joke by Saltash Town Council, 54% increase, for what??????) people. • I oppose what is being proposed if there are not stronger checks to be carried out, preferably unannounced by members of Saltash Town Council and Cornwall Council.
• We do not require more houses taking away more of our green land, it will be As I have just said get main government to control the population C63 all concrete in another 50 years. The population is the problem, it needs immigrants and our own !!! controlling or we will fall of the edge eventually, we are only a small Island. Regards from a very concerned resident.
• My objection is to the houses planned in North and Middle Pill. Building Push back against the requirement for 1200 houses by 2030. But, if C64 another one hundred houses in North and Middle Pill does not by any stretch of they have to be built, build them in far smaller amounts, on brown the imagination “protect and improve green spaces”. I t would also be a matter field sites if possible. Take the post war building of council houses of opinion that the building would create better linkages to existing as the model to go for regarding the sympathetic placing of neighbourhoods. If it is based on a number of just one hundred new houses, properties. They can then be built by smaller firms instead of the and assuming a car per household, it is supposed the linkage with the rest of usual big five. the town could be the traffic jams that are now becoming a common theme. Saltash seems to be becoming, if not already, just a satellite housing area for Plymouth, so the idea that the new houses would protect the character of the town is an extremely moot point. Has there ever been any statistical evidence that, apart from Council Tax, more money is spent in the actual town of Saltash after more houses are built? The Carkeel roundabout is, in the opinion of many, a disaster that actually encourages people from the town area to avoid the shopping areas thereabouts, particularly on weekends. Assuming a percentage of the vehicles from the projected new housing ingress and egress through that area, it can only get worse. It is easy to state that Saltash has a certain character but if houses are going to be constantly built then surely it is easier to admit that Saltash is just another Plymouth housing estate and merge with them, at least we would then get bigger bins!
• Having received a leaflet through the post from those opposed to development C65 of housing at North and Middle Pill I think it important that I show support for this development. I have children in the 20’s struggling to get on the housing ladder. More housing of all types is required in order to keep up with demand. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up These NIMBY’s must consider these needs of all the community. These are fields that are not used by the community or the farmer, they appear to left fallow with no use. There is a good road to the China Fleet Club and demand of 180 houses and associated traffic is a small addition. Pedestrian access must be considered however. It seems an obvious choice for more houses. The green space at Saltmill and the waterfront offer opportunity for families, whereas this area does not at present offer public access and could definitely be put to better use
• Have lived in Saltash for over 50 years and worked in a local bank for 20 plus C66 years and NEVER has building more houses increased the footflow in the town (most of the residents have cars and travel to super markets where the parking is FREE!) The Cornish hedges have been decimated -you only have to look at Pillmere ,which once had hedges,deer,foxes,pheasants,badgers (w hat biodiversity?) There was a hedge !?!that has now disappeared next to my property.We have had a kingfisher,a heron,eels,frogs and newts in our natural pond but now are lucky to see one or two newts! New development has never respected the factors that made Saltash a special town.More building will put us on a par with large cities like Birmingham!The view coming across the bridge will be of buildings and more buildings.Gone will be the green fields of Cornwall,not protecting the green foreground or background of our town. Parking in the town needs to be free or ,like Plympton ,Plymstock and Ivybridge, free for the first two hours. It seems to me that any green space,big or small, is given over to builders.Soon there will be nothing ‘green ‘ left in Saltash. I strongly feel that over the years the Council and Planners have ruined the town and the once lovely community feel it had. Building more and more houses will do nothing to support local businesses or help our young people.
• Para 9.2 Reject. C67
• I oppose this plan. as saltash is not big to have more houses built. they wont be none at all. as I oppose this plan whole heartedly. C68 for local people. as they wont be council houses. this means that we lose yet more green area. the traffic situation in and around saltash is horrendous as it so doesn't need what could be potentially anything up 300 to 400 cars in the area on a permanent basis. the road from the purposed site is not built for this amount of traffic and would make it dangerous for those living in the saltmill Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up and waterside area to get out. we don't have the facilities for more families either. our two doctor surgeries struggle as it with their patients having to wait weeks for an appointment. our schools are full. we have no police station and a small fire station. there is not the public parking for the extra cars that this development would bring in. we are also over the recommended eu pollution levels as it is, without adding to this. we have empty flats and houses sitting why not use them for local people. surely the priority should be for local people only. we have an influx of people from the area getting homes first. surely, ruining our green fields will also disamate the wild life that the people of saltash talk about. surely the 1000 odd houses being built at boardmoor should suffice. although I can see that causing problems too. no we don't need these houses. no we don't need the air pollution getting worse. no we don't need the extra vehicles on the road. no we just don't need this. I for one strongly oppose this plan. there is no need to destroy what is saltash, a small friendly town on the edge of the tamar. the gateway to cornwall. spend the money on our shopping area in fore street. make it more affordable in rent/rates so locals can actually afford to have a business there. help the locals you have, not bring houses in to a town that cant cope. we are losing shop after shop. use the money and focus on what people need a good street with a wide varity of shops. spend it on parks for children.
• Oppose C69
• 6. REGENERATE THE TOWN CENTRE, AND MANAGE GROWTH OF “OUT OF C70[1] TOWN” SHOPPING Restoring the historic fabric I support all points under the C70[2] restoration of historic fabric but with consideration given to these comments. C70[3] As a resident of Cornwall for 45 years and Saltash 4 years, I find Saltash tries too C70[4] hard, over emphasises the brunel history and with the many sculpture nods to C70[5] history or memorium Saltash does not come across as a ‘thriving community, C70[6] with lots of drive and ambition’ as mentioned in the foreword. I would support the restoration of shopfronts and a consistent design but Saltash needs to be carving out a modern vision and stop regurgitating the past. The history of Saltash has a very important place to be respected but it is not the future, it is the past. Improving the Public Realm I have not noticed the pavement surfaces to be a problem. Lighting also appears to be sufficient. I get concerned when I read “reflect the character and individuality of Saltash” when suggesting Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up improved furniture. This is an ambiguous description I can’t support or oppose because ‘what does that mean’. I oppose landscaping of car-parks for a good first impression. I have taken ‘landscaping’ to mean flowerbeds. A car-park needs to be accessible as a car-park for a first impression. If the car-park is not good enough, the aesthetics will not compensate. I support the rationalisation of signage and removal of unnecessary clutter. I do hope this section applies to the verge next to the bridge A38 slipway coming up and onto Fore Street. I oppose ‘gateways’ at either end of Fore Street. I do not find they add quality to an area and I was not aware that traffic speeds are an issue due to Fore Street congestion. I do support a review of vehicle movement and car parking management. The current situation does not provide a welcoming environment. I pass through Fore Street daily and on most days I negotiate my way around taxis, buses and a speed hump used as an unofficial zebra crossing. I plan everyday to stop and go to a shop, use the post office, use the bakery or nip in the petshop, only to abandon any plan and continue home or to work passing through Fore Street without stopping. Enhancing the Town Centre ‘Offer The booming trade in Saltash of charity shops and hairdressers tells me the people of Saltash love a bargain but even more, great hair. With this being the mainstay of independent trading in Saltash, do we need a limit applied to respect healthy competition but also protect those independent traders? All it is going to take is one national high street salon to open and the local traders/stylists businesses will be over just like independent traders that went before them. I feel to make greater use of upper storeys may require some thought along with the restoration of shop fronts.
• development of middle pilland north Pill in Saltash - I am extremely concerned Build on the outskirts of Saltash and adjoining areas C71 about losing our beautiful countryside and our wildlife to development of this area. The increased traffic in our area is already a problem and we suffer with the heavy traffic once the traffic builds up we are gridlocked. Also the additional pressure to our local facilities which are already under strain, development should be on the outskirts of Saltash and the adjoining areas, not more in Saltash we are already packing in like rats for goodness sake.
• I see there is a proposed plan on and around Middle Pill, starting with 85 Do not allow anyone to start or keep on making a profit from just C72 dwellings which I am totally against. Firstly the junction on to New Road that exploiting all our hard earned local services and amenities. Unless will lead to it is just an accident about to happen as it just gets clogged up with they have paid in or are paying in for that privilege. And only allow Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up traffic from the China fleet and the slip road from A38 and local traffic. And those things that in some way are going to improve all our qualities then there is the problem of the Old Ferry Road where just as you enter or exit of life and not just deteriorate them ever more it from that Junction off New Road or leading to it, you always have to stop as it is only wide enough for single line traffic to pass as there is the parked cars on both sides of it. Which means that many a time that junction is just clogged up. Also without more local amenities being provided, like those that were promised with other sites like Pilmere, like Schools, Doctor surgeries and open spaces which never materialized, it will just put more and more pressure on our all ready over burdened community services. And just look at the problems we all have to face now with all the log jammed traffic with all the new development around Carkill round about. Let alone with all the future massive amount of new construction that is being proposed.
• Broadmoor- The road lay out is horrendous , you can't see what's coming up We need another school , and drs surgery . Re open the minor C73 the hill , it's a really fast and busy road . Our schools and drs aren't enough for injuries . Change the road layout the residents as it is . We have no minor illness or injury unit anymore .
leaflet through my door C74 • We already have plans for 1000+ new houses in Saltash. It is totally out of keeping to build even more totally boring residences. Most new homes are now built very close together and almost on the edge of the pavement and have absolutely no character whatsoever. WE DO NOT NEED ANY MORE OF THESE HOUSES IN SALTASH
• Policy SLT-H1This site has been considered in many occasions and has been I cannot see how any access improvement can be implemented C75 rejected on access grounds. I cannot see how this fundamental barrier to without enormous demolition and cost. development can be overcome. Thus before ANY further consideration takes place can someone explain how this longstanding problem is to be overcome.
• SLT-H1There will already be too many new houses after the broadmoor farm No further building in the Pill area C76 developments Poor access through Saltmill with a blind corner and through a housing estate. Why can a housing development be acceptable when a hotel at the China Fleet club was turned down because of access problems? As there is limited employment in Saltash this will increase the amount of traffic at the Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Carkeel roundabout (which can not cope at the moment) and on the tamar bridge.
• The roads can’t handle the traffic coming through as it it. They are too small C77 and not equipped for the amount of houses and people that will be here. The junction leading to new road is awful. Traffic at rush hours is awful, just blockages everywhere. Our little town can’t handle the amount of people already, our doctors are hard to see as it is. Jobs are harder to find, the high street is desolate with shops going out of business because of all the new retail places. Just really saddened by the way Saltash is going. The wildlife near China fleet and saltmill will be affected, the glorious views
• Chapter 4. The Vision for Saltash I support the overall vision, objectives, special C78[1] strategy and underpinning policies of the document including the definition of the development boundary but believe there should be a specific chapter on Climate Change. It is recognised that relevant policies are spread throughout the document so it might be a matter of summarising NPPF and CLP Policies and cross-referencing to existing policies. • Chapter 7. Create and Support Sustainable Neighbourhoods I support the policy C78[2] SN2 –Neighbourhood shops and facilities. • Chapter 9. Ensure a Balanced Range of Quality New Housing. I support policies C78[3] H1 to H6 in full as the means of delivering the balanced range of quality new housing. The landowners are willing and aspire to provide additional development land over the plan period. C78[4] • Chapter 11. Protect & Enhance the Natural Environment. I support policies GRN1 to GRN4. Figure 22 needs to be modified to take account of the Cornwall SLT –H1 site allocation. C78[5] • Chapter 12. Manage the Rural Areas of the Parish in a Sympathetic Manner. I support policies RUR1 to RUR3 but wonder whether policies on Renewable Energy generation as a Climate Change solution need to be considered in more detail.
• North Pill and Middle Pill. Building in these areas will not only destroy a lovely C79 view but also create chaos on the roads. Why build on this area when it is proposed to build 1000 new homes at Broadmoor Farm. There is limited Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up employment in Saltash already, schools, doctors surgeries and dentist are fulll to bursting.
• In general I support the whole of the plan C80
Page 38 paragraphs 9.2, 9.3 (ref Policy SLT-H1) ; Page 75 paragraphs 15.8,15.9 Back to the drawing board and think these things through properly C81 (ref Policy CON2) ; Page 33 paragraphs 7.3, 7.4 (ref Policy SN1 – conjunction with SLT-UE1) • It is hard to see how the North Pill site can be considered sustainable and how it will be addressed for additional traffic (particularly with respect to CON2). Current traffic access is barely sufficient for existing residents (and China Fleet Club patrons) and has particular ‘pinch’ point where Glanville Terrace links to North Road at the Old Ferry Road intersection. Additional traffic passing through this intersection will pose significant risk of accident to oncoming traffic, pedestrians and cyclists. Increased traffic from this intersection to Salt Mill will almost certainly cause issues with general access and parking for existing residents (especially at Cutlers Corner) – another accident waiting to happen Recent experience with the retail development on the old Sanderson’s site has shown that little consideration is given to increased traffic flow on existing roads – even though some solutions could easily be implemented Page 33 makes an oblique reference to SLT-UE1 and mentions “…likely to include small shops etc….” and “…restricts the nature of the proposed retail provision etc..” If experience gained from the (now old) Pillmere development is anything to go by, this is a ‘heads up’ that such an ephemeral provision is likely to be the first casualty of any overspend (which, nowadays is a certainty) and the existing residents will have to share their already inadequate GP, Dental and retail services with an additional 1200 households, and that that sharing will add even more congestion to the town and it’s proposed ‘Green Boulevard’. How can a policy use definitive intentions to provide 1200 additional homes, yet get away with wishy washy lip-service when it comes to the supporting infrastructure?
Page 38 paragraphs 9.2, 9.3 (ref Policy SLT-H1) ; Page 75 paragraphs 15.8,15.9 What is proposed appears unworkable. The only improvement I C82 (ref Policy CON2) ; Page 33 paragraphs 7.3, 7.4 (ref Policy SN1 – conjunction can suggest overall is to rework the whole plan so it addresses with SLT-UE1) infrastructure with the same imperative as the alleged need for Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • It is hard to see how the North Pill site can be considered sustainable and how additional housing (which is likely to put its usual, untenable it will be addressed for additional traffic (particularly with respect to CON2). definition on what is 'Affordable') Current traffic access is barely sufficient for existing residents (and China Fleet Club patrons) and has particular ‘pinch’ point where Glanville Terrace links to North Road at the Old Ferry Road intersection. Additional traffic passing through this intersection will pose significant risk of accident to oncoming traffic, pedestrians and cyclists. Increased traffic from this intersection to Salt Mill will almost certainly cause issues with general access and parking for existing residents (especially at Cutlers Corner) – another accident waiting to happen Recent experience with the retail development on the old Sanderson’s site has shown that little consideration is given to increased traffic flow on existing roads – even though some solutions could easily be implemented Page 33 makes an oblique reference to SLT-UE1 and mentions “…likely to include small shops etc….” and “…restricts the nature of the proposed retail provision etc..” If experience gained from the (now old) Pillmere development is anything to go by, this is a ‘heads up’ that such an ephemeral provision is likely to be the first casualty of any overspend (which, nowadays is a certainty) and the existing residents will have to share their already inadequate GP, Dental and retail services with an additional 1200 households, and that that sharing will add even more congestion to the town and it’s proposed ‘Green Boulevard’. How can a policy use definitive intentions to provide 1200 additional homes, yet get away with wishy washy lip-service when it comes to the supporting infrastructure?
• pg 12, Policy SLT-H1. There is a lot of traffic exiting Granville Terrace daily e.g. Build in the fields behind the recycling centre- 50°25'21.5"N C83 before 9am when people leave for work who live in this area or come from the 4°13'41.0"W China Fleet. The cars struggle to join North Road when there are queues from the Tamar Bridge. Also along Granville Terrace there is only enough space for one car to pass at times and so if there is a queue of people going in or out then there is going to be problems. Also at the end of Saltmill Creek there is a bird watching zone. What impact will all of the building have on the birds in this area.
Pages 19, 20, 26, 32 C84[1] Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • The intention stated in 4.1 is enviable and something to be proud of. Figure 12 suggests it is what those surveyed really want. It fits in perfectly with the current ecological and political backdrop- our government and local council have declared a climate emergency and how we adapt to that in order to survive the next century is a matter of escalating discourse. It would be worth adding a statement that the vision will be achieved by developing the town in a way that enables people to transition to more local living and achieve carbon neutrality in the same period. This is highly likely to be mandated fairly soon, better to start thinking early. • C84[2] • The green corridor in section 4 is an admirable proposition and would greatly enhance the town for all residents and visitors. Sufficient planting would also absorb large amounts of run-off, provide shade in summer and clear the air. It would also allow primary age children to safely walk to school away from major routes. The changes to the road necessary to make it safe for pedestrians and cyclists are significant. I cycle and walk along it regularly and it is most unpleasant. Would you consider a statement that the creation of the corridor would include measures to reduce car traffic to access only-or at least slow it dramatically, add a dedicated lane for cycling/walking and provide proper public transport links to connect the neighbourhoods to the town and reduce short car trips? It is miles from Fore Street to Carkeel, even further to Treledan, and the idea that people will walk all the way to the waterfront rather than drive to Fore Street (or just join the A38 and cross the bridge) seems like fantasy. They will probably take a bus or cycle if they are able to, however. • C84[3] • Thank you for adding the statement about improving facilities for locking up cycles and having a sit down. To my knowledge there is currently nowhere to lock up a bike on Fore Street. • C84[5] • Section 6 possibly needs some newer research. We are now aware that large shopping centres and high streets dominated by national chains are in precipitous decline, particularly as many of the key players move online. Additionally, a Saltash sized branch of a national chain can't easily compete with Drake Circus. Many of the most successful businesses currently established on Fore Street are independent and proud of it, which may partly explain why the street still feels comparatively alive. Success is now about being a Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up destination and a social hub. Please consider changing the statement in Fig 7 to drop the words 'national high street shops'. Small, local and unusual businesses make our high street a destination and allow people to develop community. • • In section 7, there is no mention of the link between the environmental elements described in Figure 10 and the land use. Many of the human scale factors described in 'design' point to the need for shared green spaces, reduction of local emissions and reduced traffic. A statement enshrining these aims and confirming that the new development will aim to limit car use and provide alternatives, ensure adequate insulation and limit the installation of natural gas in homes, and observe a moratorium on removal of important wildlife habitats will go a long way to making the new development more livable.
Leaflet re Middle Pill and North Pill - This development proposal will be None in this area C85 detrimental to the environment and lead to the overpopulation of Saltash. We need Green Fields and spaces for our health and this area is ideal. In addition it is in my view totally unsuitable for the additional traffic that will follow which would also have an adverse effect on health
• all parts - What ever the proposals or decisions are made anything involving the Plant trees at the top and bottom of Fore street to create a C86[1] future plan of Saltash each and every item must have a sustainability and enclosed relaxed environment and this would in my view would C86[2] maintenance factor. So lets say something as simple as a litter bin. It will be calm traffic down. Improve Bus time table or some way of C86[3] emptied/maintained/replaced for how many years? Likewise a seat/bench. controlling the number of buses entering Fore Street. Stop any cleaning/maintenance/replacement for how many years. We do not wish to vehicle parking on Fore Street pavements or double parking waste money only to find 2 years later you cant afford the upkeep of the benches so they have to be removed? A good example was the public toilets.
"if you are concerned about the increase in traffic..." show us more detail on the road plans, so when it comes to the C87 • During rush hours a simple 10 minute bus journey can extend to over half an issue of traffic we can truly see where the areas of congestion are hour long. Adding 200 odd new houses will only worsen the issue unless the most likely to happen. roads/bridge are also changed in order to accomidate the larger number of people moving around in Saltash and into Devon. I feel that if you continued with this plan then the enterence to Saltash from the bridge and the exit from Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up saltash onto the bridge would turn into Forestreet during peak rush hour times. We already see so much traffic from the mess that is the industrail estate and surrounding shops so i dont think its viable to attempt to recreate the same thing in a more concentrated housing estate.
• Housing - Building more houses up by China Fleet is ridiculous. Access is Leave the green fields well alone. If more houses need to be built C88 extremely limited, no pavements and the corner by the entrance to saltmill is pursue Broadmoor as a larger area and provide the appropriate extremely hazardous already. The road is not fit for purpose to support more infrastructure. Stop squashing in more houses increasing pressure cars and the already congested and challenging junction with New Rd will be points and increasing traffic - everyone in the new houses nr China made more dangerous. Losing more green fields within an already densely fleet will drive...there’s no pavements or bus route there so populated area cannot make any logical sense in terms of our health and absolutely no greener transport options - you’re wilfully increasing mental well-being. This is not thought through. If we must build more houses carbon pollution with no positive solution. then presumably Broadmoor is the obvious option for increasing housing as infrastructure can be built in, access can be made easily available and further facilities provided. Squashing in more houses in every available green space within the Saltash boundary flies in the face of preserving Saltash’s green spaces.
P13 & P22 Remove the development status of land adjacent to Saltmill. C89 • Any new housing proposal adjacent to Saltmill (area SLT-H1) should be strongly resisted for the following reasons:- 1. Vehicular access from North Road to Granville Terrace is extremely poor with restricted access down the road due to on road parking. Traffic to The China Fleet Club is already heavy at peak times with delivery vehicles and private cars often having to wait for passing places. Additionally, the recently opened Caravan and Motorhome Park at the top of Saltmill Hill requires unobstructed access for vehicles towing caravans. 2.Any new development on the approach to the China Fleet Country Club will adversely affect one of Saltash’s main employers as clients may not view the club as a quiet retreat having passed a housing development instead of the current green fields. Plus additional traffic will deter business clients from booking the venue for meetings, weddings etc. 3. Sufficient land has already been allocated for additional housing at Broadmoor which will have minimal impact to traffic flows and local business 4. The proposed development at Saltmill would be visible from a large art of existing private dwellings detracting from the open green space ambitions mentioned in the proposed development Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up plan. In summary I strongly oppose any new housing development adjacent to Saltmill for the above reasons.
• Roads will not take the extra traffic Still awaiting more doctors from the Don't build the houses are not required. C90[1] Pillmere build Still awaiting more school places again from the Pillmere build. C90[2] Both school and doctors were promised but never arrived. The town cannot take the disruption. More pollution for river and land. This is an area of outstanding beauty being made ugly. Saltash town is dying due to loss of banks and large edge of town stores. The total character of Saltash has changed already for the worse. There are no jobs available so why think a few thousand more people will help this situation! Put new housing in Liskeard. They give Saltash new housing and no facilities. Ridiculous! • Waterside - More money going out to surveying companies coming up with silly ideas that will not happen.
Policy SLT-H1 No further expansion is necessary the town is at capacity and we C91 • I oppose for the following reasons: 1. The proposed development site is next to need to retain green space for future generations. a major road and would not be healthy for high density living. 2. Loss of green space in opposition to environmental needs. 3. Saltash does not have the infrastructure to support the additional population. Education, health, transport or policing support. North Pill • If this land is developed: 1. It will only be available to people who can afford waterside properties. 2. Remove wild life from an area of outstanding natural beauty at time when we need to preserve these areas and protect them from development now and in the future.
4. Overall Vision, Page 19. I would suggest that there will still be a waterfront but exactly C92[1] Section 4. Page 19. You have given the town ten years to become an enviable where it is, will be determined by world events. However, the C92[1a] riverside location which is sustainable and greener with a reinvigorated town people of Saltash can lead the way by changing the way they live centre and waterfront. This will be done following the principles of sustainable i.e. net zero lives. Can you include a reference to ensuring that all development, ensuring that we do not harm future generations. This is also of the objectives you list in section four are based on people living roughly the same amount of time the world has to get global carbon emissions in a way that is substantially different to the way we live now, Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up under control, according to the IPCC. If the global carbon budget is not reduced within ten years, in order to limit global warming to below in line with global targets to reach net zero by 2050, sea level rise will likely put 1.5degrees? With regard to waterside locations, I suggest that all the waterfront and Saltmill Park at a greater risk of regular flooding or even new developments float and rise and fall with the tides. I would long-term submersion. As Saltmill is a re-claimed landfill site, it is very not recommend investing in flood defences as I do not believe that important to keep it above the waterline. If this is not achievable, the contents the overall cost will be outweighed by social, economic or of the old landfill will have to be removed or made safe as it will have the environmental benefits. capacity leach large quantities of toxins into the Tamar. 4. Vision, Page 20 Section 4. Page 20. In 4.5 you talk about enhancing the backbone of the town by creating a green boulevard. This could be a wonderful and pleasant ‘green Understand that inevitably, due to the size of the urban extension, lung’ through the town but to make it safe for pedestrians and cyclists there Carkeel is now the new centre of Saltash. You may have to adjust C92[2] ought to be a speed limit of 20mph that is thoroughly enforced. In fact, ideally, your policy to reflect the fact that Saltash now has a waterfront, an C92[3] the whole town would be subject to a 20mph limit. The vegetation needs to be old quarter, and a new quarter. Each will appeal to different C92[4] considerable to create a cooling space and opportunity to cleanse the air from people with different needs/interests. If you are staying at a C92[5] toxic emissions. It can also lock in carbon and limit the impact of heavy rainfall. budget hotel during the week, you might just want to go to a However, it is not clear how this will bring the existing town and the urban restaurant at Carkeel. If you are a tourist, you might prefer to visit extension together. Treledan will still be a fair leg-stretch from Fore Street. I the town centre and waterfront. If you live in Saltash you want to note that Saltash is to be designated a Hedgehog Friendly Town and this could go where you can get your shopping without going over the bridge provide a clue to how the green boulevard can improve things for people and but if you drive you don't want to have to pay to park. Think about for wildlife. Lots of Hedgehogs are run over on Callington Road each year as it and make the right alterations now. Make the town centre they cross between the network of private gardens that they use as refuges. accessible by cheap or even free alternatives to so that it can The green corridor could also be a wildlife super-highway but it will not be fair survive. on small mammals, amphibians, birds, and insects to provide resources but make it too dangerous to frequent. Ideally private car use will drop substantially in the next few years in line with ambitions to limit carbon emissions but The idea of setting design styles to 'fit in' is probably not suitable in perhaps it is time to consider even buses as a problem? Callington Road is a a warming world. What is more important is to set standards of C92[6] busy, noisy, and polluted road and the congestion caused by the mix of buses, living that will help us get to net zero carbon and keep global lorries delivering to businesses, and cars, makes it very pedestrian and cyclist warming below 1.5 degrees so that people can live safely and un-friendly. Perhaps it is now time to consider putting in something really remain well and unaffected by heatwaves, droughts, floods, and useful like a tram, down the centre of the Green Boulevard, route buses around fires. the town to a hub and cycle park at Carkeel, and ban delivery trucks at certain times of the day? We need to think big to get this right. Sorry but assuming Apply planning policy correctly by acknowledging that any property business as usual means more cars, more trucks, and more noise. That means in flood zone one (which is all not in 2 or 3) which is also in a CDA C92[7] more danger for pedestrians and cyclists, and wildlife, and a high number of must show a flood risk plan for every development, no matter how stresses on individuals that we know can be detrimental to health. Whereas small, even if it would normally be done under permitted spending time in nature, listening to nature, breathing clean air, getting a little development. The accompanying water management plan should Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up exercise, and socialising on pleasant public transport, is good for the show how things will be improved for people living downstream, environment and good for people. A second tram or funicular could go down not how things will stay the same. lower fore street and make the waterfront accessible for all abilities. A tram could also attract visitors to Fore Street which would be good for the local economy. Section 5. Page 23 We need to reduce our consumption of resources down from 2.7 planets to just C92[8] the one we have. Growth and productivity in the future should be contained within a circular economy. Therefore, any policy should proactively encourage the re-use and recycling of existing resources, and production of goods that can be broken down into their constituent parts and refurbished, re-used, or put back into the economy without high energy inputs to cleanse and re-formulate. If some thought could be put towards the types of business that Saltash would like to encourage that will kick-start a local, circular economy in Cornwall, it will be beneficial in both the short and long term.
Policy EM1, page 23. The road user hierarchy is definitely in the right order. A tram or similar bus on a set track, servicing the green boulevard, would be very beneficial and create an opportunity for a sensitively lit, safe path through the C92[9] centre of the town, without the hindrance of a lot of dangerous, fast-flowing, toxin emitting vehicles.
It would be very helpful in the short-term if free parking was available for vehicles at parking hubs around the town, to keep them off Fore Street, and C92[10] bring air pollution down in that area. Then, at an appropriate time, switch to free public transport within the town, while parking spaces are ‘greened’. This should eventually drag people out of their cars, which is something that needs to happen. Rather like moths to a flame, people are drawn to warmly lit areas.
One way of drawing people to the central areas is to observe a dark sky policy C92[11] in other areas, making the central area appear more attractive. Becoming a dark sky town is in line with Cornwall Council’s climate emergency plans. Whilst acknowledging that main routes need to be well lit, unnecessary light pollution is bad for people and wildlife. It will be better to keep the majority of the town dark after midnight or perhaps 11pm. Treledan could have a much-reduced C92[12] provision of outdoor lighting that will be extremely beneficial to wildlife and Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up people who need to get to sleep. A good amount of secure cycle storage will be needed, as well as facilities to charge up E-cycle batteries and Electric Cars. Make the cycle storage as beautiful as it is practical and make sure it is cited in areas where bicycle owners feel they are safe to leave what will be quite expensive forms of personal transport. Likewise, don’t put electric car charging points in out-of-the-way places where drivers are afraid to charge up after dark.
Section 6. page 26 There is clear evidence available now that large shopping centres are in decline C92[13] and ‘clone towns’ full of national chain shops are similarly afflicted. High Streets not in decline tend to have a very large array of independent shops. It does not make sense to suggest that more ‘national high street shops, cafes and restaurants’ will be good for Saltash. Please try to encourage distinctively local shops to thrive in Fore Street otherwise there will be no reason for local people, or visitors, to come here. The environmental scheme in Fore Street does need to be changed. Currently traffic is slow moving as people move in and out of parking spaces, holding up other drivers, and negotiate the traffic calming measures. Research shows that a large proportion of every journey is just spent driving around looking for a place to park. This equates to fossil fuels burned C92[14] unnecessarily and adds to the carbon budget. If parking was well signed, and free for the first hour, much more of Fore Street could be landscaped and turned into seating areas or places for small market stalls. It would also cut pollution and noise. A properly policed 20mph limit across the town would reduce the need for speed humps. Following Home Zone principles in Fore Street where drivers have to be aware because there are no set spaces for driving, parking, walking, or sitting, could be beneficial. It works very well in other parts of Europe. The restoration of old shop fronts sounds like a nice idea but to keep within the planet’s carrying capacity, it may not be wise to attempt restorations that use a lot of extra resources. Planting will be necessary in Fore Street for cooling. Make provision for plenty. 6.3, page 27. The 2015 study referred to is quite out of date and retailing in general has C92[15] altered considerably in the past five years. 6.4 Out-of-town retail is often done C92[16] online (out of country). The traffic taking advantage of the strategic road network is therefore not just visiting Carkeel but moving right across the town as many more goods are delivered directly to customers’ homes. 6.5 Focusing Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up on a circular economy will begin to limit the scope for out-of-town retail. Focusing on sustainable living will also make some of the goods available redundant. It might be worth considering how businesses at Carkeel can focus C92[17] on repairing and refurbishing goods rather than retailing new things. 6.6 The new ‘Saltash Gateway’ designation at Carkeel is extremely ugly and it is very difficult to see how it can be improved. At the same time, it will clearly identify Saltash as being separate from Treledan. More obviously, and very worryingly, Carkeel is, by location, probably the new heart of the town. Try making it a transport hub from where the historic centre can be reached. And dare I say it, stop calling it the Saltash Gateway, it is as mad a designation as a one-stop- shop. These things may have sounded ‘sexy’ in a Council Officer’s report ten years ago but they sound daft now.
Section 7. page 32 The meaning of sustainable has much greater importance than simply the provision of ‘services’ to a community. The building of what amounts to a new C92[18] village at the Broadmoor site (now to be called Treledan) will seal up and irreparably damage another area of green, open space, with valuable carbon sequestering soil. Things like ‘clean and visible playspaces’ are virtually sterile environments. Where once young people played in the countryside, now every aspect of their lives is controlled and monitored but this has an environmental footprint beyond which the world can afford and a deleterious impact on physical and mental health. The declared climate emergency requires us to change. Churning up soils and adding even more concrete to open spaces, making places ‘visible’ means a low amount of vegetation and a lot of hard, sealed areas. We now know that these approaches will make it even harder for us to tackle climate change globally and we will undoubtedly be driving more vulnerable species away. I would suggest that the buffer between development and the protected woodlands on the site should be tripled, a moratorium on removing trees observed, and a more modest building style, with a very limited road structure should be considered. The protected woodland is at risk of becoming a dead or dying island in a sea of concrete. The protected species within it will inevitably go into decline. Other possibilities for areas like Treledan might be to include a covenant on all new developments banning domestic cats (sorry cat lovers) an open garden policy where fences and walls are banned and people can socialise right outside their own homes, whilst allowing wildlife to Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up thrive and move freely around the area. Remember, the list of species under threat is considerable: hazel dormice, slow worms, toads, bats, warblers and waders, ferns, lichens, mosses, hornbeams, invertebrates too numerous to mention, etc. etc,. The list is long, time is running out. More development may mean more losses and no time to recover, unless a new and more sensitive approach is taken, and growth and development are completely reimagined. You refer to NPPF 2018 and the need to “guard against the unnecessary loss of valued facilities and services, particularly where this would reduce the community’s ability to meet its day-to-day needs.” Well wholesale loss of species and natural landscapes will do just that. Expand with caution and think outside the box about how we can manage with what we already have, before it is too late. Policys SN1 and SN2 Your list of human scale attributes leans towards areas that are traffic free C92[19] (pleasant to smell, easy to hear people speaking, temperate. The top answer to the question “What facilities would make my neighbourhood a better place to live?” is Environmental Improvements. Don’t forget that the rest of Saltash is badly in need of greening and a reduction in traffic noise and pollution. 7.4 Neighbourhood centres are very important, but they don’t just have to be bricks and mortar. Policy SN2 sounds good for the town but the inclusion of the words ‘safe and clean’ implies a degree of sterility that may not be environmentally beneficial. No more lighting or paving for the sake of cleanliness and safety. We need to drive down inequality and poverty, reduce crime, improve health, and make Saltash a safe place without the need for hard surfaces and lights.
Policy 9. H2. Getting the right mix of housing will be important. I note only 1.2% of survey C92[20] respondents said their neighbourhood would be improved by having more housing. There is provision for self-builds on sites over 50 homes (Treledan I presume) which allows for some flexibility, but this if often more attractive to wealthy people wanting their dream home than people with limited budgets. The Tiny House movement is gaining traction in the UK. Tiny houses are generally built on trailers. They can be wheeled into place and have a very small footprint. This may be one way to get a lot of affordable dwellings in place in a very short space of time, with very little impact on the land. They are ‘off grid’ Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up requiring little or no infrastructure. Tiny house owners like to establish in communities of like-minded people with other tiny homes. Young people currently struggling to pay high rents should be consulted on whether they would be interested in building tiny homes if sites were made available for them. It would be a good way of reducing the ever-widening gap between rich and poor, and those with homes and those who cannot see that they will ever own their own home. Landlords will only invest the minimum in their properties while there is a steady stream of young people to exploit. If more young people can provide their own homes then this will force landlords to either up-grade their properties to better, more sustainable standards, or sell them on, bringing house prices down and freeing up opportunities for older people to down-size etc. age 40, policy H3: When allowing conversions of existing buildings there needs to be greater C92[21] emphasis placed on where and how occupants of divided properties will wash and dry clothing and store organic waste. Too many people live in converted flats that are damp and have poor air circulation. This is because not enough attention has been paid to providing adequate insulation and ventilation. In winter, occupants wash and dry clothing indoors on radiators, whilst keeping air vents closed to retain warmth. This leads to a build-up of mould spores and generally creates a very unhealthy environment. Not having direct access to waste and compost facilities at ground level is also a problem. This can drive up instances of fly-tipping of domestic waste. If splitting larger dwellings down into flats/maisonettes is going to be encouraged, is there a way of specifically mandating those involved in the conversion to build-in adequate measures to prevent these things from happening? We need to conserve energy and stop using fossil fuels.Providing tumble driers that are both costly to run, need adequate ventilation, and use a lot of energy, is not the answer. Mechanical heat recovery and ventilation could be suitable. Also air-source heat pumps. But good passive ventilation will be very important alongside an appropriate drying space and an accessible place for refuse bins, recycling bins, and compost bins. Drying spaces do not necessarily need to be outside on the ground, they could be on rooftops. The Council should consider providing advice to occupants on the importance of altering lifestyles in a way that is suitable for living in a multi-occupancy building. Relying on building regulations will not be enough. Keeping cool in a warming world will become increasingly Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up difficult in the bulk of our existing housing stock, particularly those with loft conversions and over-sized conservatories. Special consideration should be applied to bringing forth policies that ensure our existing dwelling spaces are healthy and comfortable to live in, even during a heatwave. Guidelines on external shuttering may be worth considering. Policy H4. If housing density is to be increased to keep pace with demand for C92[22] dwellings, at the same time as our need to reforest and protect nature, I suggest that building upwards rather than outwards may be the only way to achieve both objectives. If building higher conflicts with design policies and style guides, we will inadvertently be designing out nature, and we cannot afford to do this. My observations of H4 so far, are potentially in conflict with some of the ideas of scale and ‘dwarfing’ of existing buildings, and opinions on the local vernacular and distinctiveness of an area. However, this draft plan has been five years in the making and a lot has changed, not least the climate. Lots of sub-division of plots has already occurred. To make best use of the land we have already altered this will undoubtedly continue. However, to demand specific styles may be difficult if we are to priorities finding ways of living within the carrying capacity of the Earth. The Council should be mindful of that when trying to apply policies H5 and H6. Policy 11. Page 54. Policy GRN1. Habitat loss is driving down biodiversity. In combination of climate change and toxic loads in air, water and soil, it is driving a mass extinction C92[23] event. I would venture to suggest that in light of this, protection and enhancement ‘where possible’ of biodiversity opportunities, is not sufficient. Protection is vitally important and biodiverse areas should not be traded down by payments or inferior alternatives. We should add but never simply substitute. We have to consider the idea that we should not anticipate an expansion of our urban footprint into areas where there is a chance of nature springing back. Though I think that providing bat boxes is a great step forward in new developments, it is not sufficient to put up a few boxes and bee bricks, and dig a few ponds, and simply expect wildlife to come. Litter, pollution, inappropriate lighting, hard surfaces etc. are all within the gift of homeowners to spread around their properties and there will be very little the Council can do about this unless restrictive covenants are placed on new developments. If the sanitisation and covering of land is to continue with payments in lieu given for some other, unknown ‘green reserve’ site elsewhere, we will be continuing to Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up do business as usual favouring people and profit over everything else. The idea that one can pay money towards something that needs to be protected indicates a level of human intervention. It may be better to charge a clean-up levy that will last the duration of the plan. It will take at least ten years for us to remove all of the plastics that have been discarded into hedgerows and onto verges and mudflats. As we clean up, we also need to have effective mechanisms in place to stop people from adding to the load. Money to fund the clean-up and anti-littering enforcement would be very welcome I am sure. The NPPF discusses the impact of light pollution and the cumulative effects of pollution in general and the need to defend special protection areas. Saltash is surrounded by areas that are on paper protected and conserved but there is nothing in this plan that seeks to alter the way we live and grow, to maintain these vital resources. If we don’t change the way we live in the areas we have already developed, new communities will simply follow our lead. This plan talks about biodiversity as if it is something separate to us whereas we are part of nature and cannot live without it. This is not just about bats and bees but all amphibians, reptiles, mammals, invertebrates, fish, birds, plants, etc. we have to show that it is bigger and more important than we are. Though it is important to sketch out green corridor sites to allow other creatures a chance to connect with other habit refuges, that maintains the division between us and all other forms of life. It would be far better if the whole town were open to more than just people. This requires the softening of hard surfaces, the greening of all available spaces, turning off the lights, substantially limiting our use of toxic substances, eradicating littering and dumping of human waste, and a change of heart amongst members of the community who seek to exclude nature because they have come to know wild plants, insects, small mammals, herring gulls, molluscs, pollinator flies, and all manner of species as weeds or pests. I am realistic about this. We still need to get around and for that we need some hard surfaces but there is much that we do not need and an awful lot of habits we need to change. Something that clearly is an us and them situation is our ability to degrade and litter at will. There is no indication of the provision of waste services and litter bins in this part of the plan but keeping our waste out of the environment is critical. GRN2. A 15-metre buffer between a new development and an ancient woodland is simply not large enough. Replacing a 150 year old tree with three saplings is no C92[24] Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up substitute at all as we cannot wait the 80 to 100 years it takes to get the biodiverse community that once colonised the old tree, back. Planting new trees is important but your policy does not say where the trees will be planted. Will they be in Saltash or somewhere else? We know that one way to sequester carbon is to build new homes with timber. Would it not be better to plant three native trees per dwelling, close to that dwelling, and then additionally pay for several others in plantation to match the number used to build the dwelling? This could drive reforestation and give new dwellings a cooling defence against inevitable global warming. • GRN3. Suggests that the general character of the countryside will be maintained and protected. The problem is that I do not see how this can be achieved effectively C92[25] where there are so few people available to enforce policies. If someone chops a hedgerow tree down, some people grumble but there are no consequences for the actors. Even when it is a criminal offence. No one officially hears of it and very rarely is anyone reported to an enforcing authority. Even when the enforcing authorities are contacted, they prefer to write letters asking individuals not to do similar again, but they rarely issue fines or demand remediation. How will the grand ambitions in this plan be supported effectively? One way is to be explicit with people on what is right and what is wrong, so that individuals can be more confident in confronting activities that go against this plan. Another is to remind landowners of their responsibilities, the existence of this plan, and your intention to act on it. Then the public should have quick and simple access to a system that they can use to alert you to any activities that are detrimental to the aims of this plan, and be confident in using the system because they are able to see that you are willing and able to hold people to account for their actions. I do not read in this plan anything that tells me how the Town Council as a local Authority will be able to deliver it. For every statement you make, you should also show the people and the processes that will be deployed to communicate, deliver and enforce where appropriate. What is the extent of your organisation? How substantially will it need to grow to make this happen? Which partnerships will it nurture to ensure full enforcement of environmental and wildlife protection laws? The people of Saltash need to be fully aware of who is responsible for which parts of the plan. It is not enough to contact a Councillor and hope something will be done. GRN4. Page 56. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up This policy explains that the entire western catchment for the Latchbrook Leat C92[26] is a Critical Drainage area. It should be explicit in this plan that all development proposals, from the largest to the smallest i.e. a housing estate down to a garage or kitchen extension, in the critical drainage area, require a site specific flood risk assessment and a water management plan that shows how the management of water will reduce flood risk downstream. Time and again the Council is waving through applications that do not achieve this standard yet it is explicit in the NPPF. Adopting SUDS locally would be very beneficial. However, the offer of things like ponds for water attenuation needs to be considered alongside the benefit of simply leaving land to re-wild, or perhaps creating larger networks of swales, and minimal impact developments on piles rather than traditional strip foundations. The Council should maintain a register of hard surfaces created through permitted development extensions and alterations to driveways, and regularly calculate the increased flooding potential caused by the cumulative impact of multiple alterations to the built environment. Delivery Plan 16. This is not a plan, it is simply a discussion about the derisory amounts that C92[27] could be paid to ‘the community’ in lieu of loss of natural habitat and then a table containing details of all the planning committees etc. that will be consulted on plans. There is no mention of enforcement of policies or rectification when things are going wrong. The page on monitoring is similarly light on detail and clearly an afterthought. What point is there in knowing things aren’t working when damage has already been done? Active surveillance should be ongoing. Enforcement is key. If this policy once agreed just sits on the shelf and is forgotten by most people in and around the town, who do not feel empowered to challenge developments and behaviours, then the five years you have spent on this will have been totally wasted.
12/Figure 3 Remove Policy SLT-H1 North Pill. C93 • Figure 3: DPD SITE ALLOCATIONS AND SAFEGUARDING POLICIES FOR SALTASH Supported apart from: Policy SLT-H1 North Pill Access to this area is currently difficult due to narrow road width, difficult bends, residents parking and is the only means of access to the China Fleet Country Club. Additional housing would Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up make this route completely unsustainable. STRONGLY OBJECT to additional housing here!
Page 12 Figure 3 Rejection of Policy SLT-H1 North Pill C94 • Figure 3: DPD SITE ALLOCATIONS AND SAFEGUARDING POLICIES FOR SALTASH Supported apart from: Policy SLT-H1 North Pill Access to this area is currently difficult due to narrow road width, awkward bends, existing residents' parking and it is the only access route to the China Fleet Country Club. The increased volume of traffic caused by additional housing would make this route completely unsustainable. I STRONGLY OBJECT to additional housing here.
Objective 4 - Revitalise the Waterfront • Has any thought been given to installing a lift from the Road bridge C95 • Access to the waterfront from Fore Street is problematic. Has any thought been to Ferry Road. This would allow pedestrians and wheelchair / given to installing a lift from the Road bridge to Ferry Road. This would allow pushchair users to gain easy access to the lower areas. This would pedestrians and wheelchair / pushchair users to gain easy access to the lower encourage more use and with improved leisure/food outlets would areas. This would encourage more use and with improved leisure/food outlets increase interest in the history etc. As a glass construction views up would increase interest in the history etc. As a glass construction views up and and down the river would be maintained. down the river would be maintained.
all pages Scrap the plans for Broadmore Farm and Pill developments to 25%. C96 • With regard to recent planning outcomes, any consultation appears to be Consider ways to reduce volume of traffic on the bridge and not tokenistic - large planning applications seem to go ahead with little increase it. Focus on plans to imporve the town centre and amendments/rejection based on the views and suggested plan amendment of Watrfront local residents. The Neighbourhood Plan gives little regard to the likely increase on the 40k daily vehicles already crossing the Tamar Bridge which will be an inevitable outcome in respect of the current plans for the Broadmore Farm and Pill developments that, on this scale, will bring not only social but also environments issues that do not support objectives 5,6,7,8 & 9. The plan highlights many points regarding a positive devlopment of the town centre - yet recent retail developments at Carkeel demonstrate a clear disregard for what is highlighted in the plan to date. Carkeel roundabout and its approaches are now completely congested throughout much of the day/evening. As a motor cyclist, I no longer use this roundabout because of the volume of traffic created by this ill-conceived retail development. There are many positives written into the plan and it has been carefully worded with positive and persuasive vocabulary - the major planned residential development will override this conveyed positivity. I Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up am confident that this consultation is of little value and the responses received will be ignored by Cornwall Council, developers and planning officials - under the guise of 'affordable housing', they will continue to implement ill-conceived, unpopular and socially/environmentally disasterous outcomes for the people of this lovely but rapidly changing and declining town.
Leaflet Page3 Objective 1 A thorough review of traffic usage and flow and appropriate C97[1] • Reference EM2 / EM3 It is essential that access to the business park around improvements to recycling plant. E. g One way system in industrial Waitrose including the Council recycling centre is improved dramatically for estate and better ease of access. Adequate facility on site to C97[2] both safe flow of traffic and safety of pedestrians. The current recycling facilitate and promote usage. arrangements are inadequate for the purpose. Increased development in Saltash will result in increased usage causing even more congestion and risk than at present.
Page5. Objective 4 • Ensure that empty buildings are not left to decay impacting negatively on the C97[3] environment. New development of housing should be sympathetic to the character of the area and pay regards to the needs of current residents. At present the area does not encourage the Development that the plan seeks to encourage and promote. Objective 11 Connectivity Page 8 • Concern that the impact of additional housing in the Middle Pill and North Pill C97[4] area will negatively impact the following 1 The rural environment of Saltash and green space near Salt Mill Creek. 2 Traffic flow in the whole area including to the China Fleet Club 3 Impact on the leisure and recreation of the China Fleet Club, a vital source of local employment. 4 Affect the current housing areas by increasing traffic on an already override road with difficult access.
• Oppose - Lack of green spaces Community spaces linked to well being and Build green houses Eco buildings at least C98 outside environment Infrastructure worries Traffic congestion Pollution/environmental damage permanent
8 objective11 Prioritise pedestrian and residents health and safety By EFFECTIVE C99[1] • Concerns over increased traffic on North Road Currently suffers from alternate measures especially speed cameras with ENFORCEMENT and C99[2] traffic jams. 3 between 28/7 and 3/8 alone. Or speeding traffic. Health and SIGNAGE. TRAFFIC REDUCTION eg PARK AND RIDE,DIFFERENTIAL safety of residents already threatened by pollution and traffic using the road as Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up a rat run refusing to stop at zebra or pelican crossings. Accidents have occurred TOLLS on bridge,BETTER PUBLIC TRANSPORT SAFE PEDESTRIAN to my neighbours and their pets and I have had many near misses myself. This AND CYCLE ROUTES. will be exacerbated by proposed developments and the promised peace and tranquillity will be denied and further compromised to residents in this area. I have flagged up these issues to many officials on many occasions but they have been ignored.
all pages Retain more green sites and reduce the size of any residential C100 Loss of the amount of green field sites through over-development which will development and listen and act on local viewpoints instead of create further congestion to already congested roads in and around the town • steam-rollering ahead regardless how will the traffic flow across the Tamar Bridge (already estimated at in excess of 40k per day) cope with the increased volume of traffic that the proposed Broadmore Farm and Pill developments will bring • consultation is usually tokenistic and valid objections often overruled and planning through to development goes ahead • The plans to enhance the town centre and Waterfront areas are unlikely to be realised; the current negative impact to the town from recent retail development at Carkeel reflects the inability of town and county planning officers and strategists to look further ahead in terms of heritage preservation aligned with development that reflects integrity that is mindful of social and environmental impacts especially in view of the climate change agenda.
9.2 C101 • 'Treledan and North Pill have been identified as the most suitable locations for the required development in the Allocations DPD. ' I object to developing this land for new housing. The access to and from North Pill is already under considerable strain, the junction at the top of Old Ferry Road / New road is a difficult one to negotiate, traffic queueing on the junction causes congestion. When the tunnel is closed this makes access to New Road very difficult. Adding a considerable number of houses to this green area will undoubtedly cause many more problems. I am also concerned about the increase in pollution increased traffic will bring, especially as there are two major sports facilities in the immediate vicinity. This will impact negatively on the health and wellbeing of all who use these facilities, many of who are children and young people. The Saltash plan aims to diminish pollution and increase green spaces, however the planned new buildings are in direct contradiction to this. I would also like to Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up know the reason for not going ahead with the Broadmoor Farm Site previously identified as suitable land for housing?
Broad moor farm Don't build in the first place C102 • I very strongly oppose the development for eighty five new homes to be built on broad moor farm and possibly one thousand more. The reasons for my opposing the development are as follows... Our countryside is being ripped to pieces enough in the southwest and especially Cornwall, wildlife are losing their habitat in huge amounts and I am shocked to think Caradon council are prepared to destroy an area of outstanding beauty for MONEY! This is what it comes down to. On one hand you are Planting to try and help wildlife at Saltmill and Longstone Park and then on the other you are prepared to destroy it, how contradictive! There simply is no room for the added traffic in the area of the China Fleet and Saltmill, it will cause utter chaos on those roads not to mention the extra pollution. We moved to Saltash from Plymouth to escape city life and now it seems that Cardaon council are happy to link Saltash to the hustle and bustle of Plymouth. I am asking you to re-consider and be more thoughtful of wildlife, nature and the residents of Middle Pill and North Pill, also the next generation of children. Please keep Saltash different to the rest of the councils that are prepared to jeopardise our children's and grandchildren's future.
Page 4 / Objective 2: Regenerate the Town Centre C103[1] • I am impressed with the diversity of subjects and the detail in each area of the Development Plan and commend all those who have contributed to it. It's wonderful to know that our local Council and related bodies are working so hard for us all. With regard to the bullet points relating to Objective 2: Regenerate the Town Centre, I notice that the second aim is to "draw visitors C103[2] from Carkeel to the town centre", a very laudable intention. I applaud the C103[3] inventive idea of a "Green Boulevard" linking to the town centre but appreciate that such an innovative development is an example of "blue-sky thinking" at the C103[4] moment. People do need to know that the centre of Saltash is not far away, though, and many people stopping at the shops in Carkeel will not be fully aware of what the Town Centre has to offer, so I wonder if more visual material would help, eg. (a) some large display of photographs of the Town Centre might be mounted on a suitably-placed board at Carkeel, showing a simple route to the centre and location of the town's car parks and/or (b) some interesting and Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up attractive leaflets (including a few promotional vouchers from supportive retailers?) might be distributed to shoppers at Carkeel on a regular or occasional basis, especially at times of the year when special events are due to take place in Saltash. Also (c) Banners for the special events which feature in the calendar for Saltash, such as the Christmas festivities, May Fair and the Regatta, could be displayed at Carkeel to inform and invite visitors who do not know Saltash well. (Attractive banners already draw such interest at the top of the slip-road from the Bridge but are not so easily seen by those who head into the tunnel and are completely missed by those who travel in the other direction towards Plymouth.) Also under Objective 2, I note that a response to C103[5] "expanding the range of uses in the town centre" is the "promotion of more active uses of upper floors". This is an excellent idea, where suitable use can be made, as it would be a crying shame if there is wasted space in our town centre. Thankyou for the opportunity to comment.
sections 6, 8, 10, 11, 13 and 14. I am happy with the plan, overall. C104[1] • The whole plan is a fantastic idea to move the town into the future. We need to C104[2] look towards building a sustainable future for the town whilst not forgetting the C104[3] history and natural environment. The town centre needs to encourage more businesses, both local and national chains as well. It is better than most towns but it can be even more appealing. Whilst encouraging people to shop within the town, there is also room for businesses to thrive on the outskirts of the town, Carkeel as an example. The waterside definitely needs a huge upgrade. There is so much beauty down there but parts of it look completely rundown C104[4] and quite frankly, an embarrassment to the town. My son rows for Caradon Gig Club and when I go to the events down on the waterfront, I always think it could look so much better than it does. The run down buildings MUST be sorted. The historic buildngs and the history of the town should not be forgotten and the natural environment is extremely important as well. If the C104[5] town is to move forward, there needs to be adequate community services, so C104[6] this is another important feature of the plan. Leisure facilities are also important and there needs to be more opportunities for people to access them.
• Support all parts of the Plan. C105
SLT-H1 , SLT-UE1 See comments above, main concern is impact on the A38 C106 Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • I would like to object to the Saltash Plan for the following reasons. Firstly I am a regular visitor to this area for holidays, so whilst it may seem irrelevant for me to comment I strongly feel that the views of people not close to the problem can be the most useful. Area SLT-H1 - From the outline of the plan it appears that the housing will be built around Pill Lane and Salt Mill roads. The current junction between North Road, Old ferry road, and Glanville Terrace, which is close to the slip road from the A38 going towards Saltash, is in my view a dangerous junction. There is traffic coming from four different directions one of which means that a vehicle is on a steep slope whilst waiting at the junction. It is difficult to see how this junction can be improved without knocking down some of the current houses which defeats the object of building the new homes. In addition I would also comment on the fact that there is already a considerable amount of traffic using this junction, introducing a large number of extra vehicles from the new housing development would increase the problems and dangers at the junction. In addition the area near the Saltmill Park there is on one side, a set of football pitches and a sports area (Pilgram Pitch and Pavilion) and on the other side the changing rooms - currently there are two ‘pinch’ points due to houses, which slow the traffic down to make this a safe crossing place, with the housing development and the increase of traffic these ‘pinch points’ will become potential accident spots, and a dangerous place to cross especially for the young people using these facilities. Area SLT- UE1 - It would appear that the proposal is for a large number of houses to be built but no local shops on the estate. If the expectation is that the increase in residents will increase the footfall in Saltash town centre, how likely is that when parking is limited and is pay at machine. It is more likely that the new residents will be drawn to ‘out of town’ shops currently at Carkeel roundabout, or go directly into Plymouth. A more general point is that the local plan includes walk/cycle routes, this is good, but most people will still require private transport (Car). My question would be how many parking spaces will there be at each house, from experience of new build estates local to me there is a garage and space for one car, the new home owners quickly convert the garage into an extra room/storage space, this results in residents parking half on and half off the pavement (the road is not wide enough for a car to park fully on the road without blocking the road), there is little or no space for visitors to park. On another point will there be a clause in the contracts to prevent developers snapping up quite a number of the new houses then renting them out. Where Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up developers have been allowed to do this it defeats the object of building affordable houses for people to buy. Further observation - the proposed area for building the houses is an area of natural beauty which will be decimated by building such a large number of houses. The huge increase in traffic generated by the development is a massive concern for roads which already see a large number of accidents some of which a extremely serious causing serious injuries and in some cases death.
• Oppose C107 • Difficult to see how the North Pill site can be considered sustainable and how it will cope with additional traffic (with respect to CON2) it hardly sufficient for existing residents and users of China Fleet Club. It will be an accident waiting to happen.
• Oppose AVOID BUILDING IN THIS AREA - THE EFFECTS WILL BE NEGATIVE C108 • THERE ARE HABITAT AND BIODIVERSITY CORRIDORS WHICH RUN TO THE ENVIRONMENT. THROUGH NORTH AND MIDDLE PILL AND THE AREA PLANNED FOR BUILDINGS IS OUTSIDE THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES SO THE BUILDING SHOULD NOT GO AHEAD PAGE 68 LEI 1TO5 • WE MUST PROTECT THE AREAS FOR SPORT, LEISURE AND RECREATION IN SALTASH. FOR EXAMPLE, WE NEED TO PROTECT SALTMILL AND THE AREA AROUND THE CHINA FLEET CLUB. BUILDING WILL HAVE A NEGATIVE EFFECT WHILE THE BUILDING IS GOING ON AND ALSO AFTERWARDS. WHY NOT USE THE LAND FOR ALLOTMENTS ? THIS WILL MAXIMISE BIODIVERSITY AND ENCOURAGE THE PEOPLE OF SALTASH TO ENGAGE WITH THE LOCAL ENVIRONMENT AND ENGAGE IN SPORTS FOR HEALTHY WELL-BEING TOO. THE LAND IS CLEARLY OF GOOD QUALITY FOR PLANING. ALTERNATIVELY, COULD LAND BE GIVEN OVER TO THE LOCAL SCHOOLS TO DEVELOP AND EDUCATE LOCAL CHILDREN IN THE VALUE OF THE OUTDOORS - PLANTING, TENDING TO AND HARVESTING THEIR OWN CROPS PERHAPS? AN OUTDOOR CLASSROOM WOULD BE AMAZING. SOME ADDITIONAL WOODLAND IS ANOTHER OPTION - THIS COULD HELP COMBAT INCREASING POLLUTION AND REDUCE THE IMPACT OF ASTHMA. • PAGE 75 ROAD SAFETY POLICY CON2 Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • MASSIVE IMPLICATIONS OF INCREASED HOUSING AT MIDDLE / NORTH PILL - MAJOR ISSUES OF ACCESS JOINING NORTH ROAD - TRAFFIC CHAOS AND INVITING MORE ACCIDENTS ON AN ALREADY DIFFICULT JUNCTION FOR PEDESTRIANS TO CROSS. A LOT OF CONGECTION ON THE ROAD FROM CHINA FLEET TO NORTH ROAD ALSO.
H1 HOUSING PAGE 38-39 • DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED IN THE MIDDLE PILL / NORTH PILL AREA WILL INCUR MASSIVE ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO ACCESS / TRAFFIC / SERVICE INSTALLATION / ABILITY FOR RESIDENTS TO ACCESS THE MAIN TOWN FACILITIES - IT IS JUST TOO RURAL WITHOUT THE INFRASTRUCTRE NECESSARY TO SUSTAIN SUCH A DEVELOPMENT. THE ENVIRONMENT WOULD SUFFER MASSIVELY IN THIS AREA AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THIS BUILDING. WORRIES SHOULD ALSO BE HIGHLIGHTED REGARDING SIMILAR PROJECTS ELSEWHERE WHICH PROMISE 'SELF-BILD' AND 'SELF-COMPLETION' - AREAS PLANNED IN THIS WAY OFTEN GIVE WAY TO A MAJOR DEVELOPMENT OF TINY PLOTS, ENGINEERED BY THE LANDOWNER AND ARCHITECTS TO PRODUCE THE LARGEST NUMBER OF PLOTS IN A SMALL AREA - NOT CONDUCIVE TO MAINTAINING THE NATURAL BEAUTY OF THE LOCAL ENVIRONMENT BUT INSTEAD, PUTTING MASSIVE PRESSURES ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
• Oppose Better use of land i.e market gardens as the area was previously C109 • There are major limitations to this area especially with regard to used for, allotments for local people, (consider especially re primarily the main access and sewage and drainage. The area already Brexit???), solar panel farm-south facing land. experiences major problems with flooding especially at high tide/ periods of heavy rainfall. This situation is likely to be exacerbated by the proposed build and 'climate crisis'. This would have a huge detrimental effect on the main access to the build area, Saltmill Recreational Park and nearby existing dwellings. The main access to the area via 'Cutler's Corner' is already tortuous and would not cope with the anticipated heavy plant traffic required for the build and the subsequent commuter traffic once the new dwellings are inhabited. There would also be a detrimental effect on the China Fleet Country Club whilst the potential build takes place and once completed. This is one of the main employers for Saltash. The area is also an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and Countryside Character which Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up will be destroyed if the area is developed. The area also has Grade 11 agricultural land Environment GRN 1, GRN 2 and GRN 3 • Oppose • Woodlands, trees,hedges etc- we would be lost if these plans go ahead, having a huge negative impact on the local biodiversity. Countryside Character areas- the creek and wildlife would be under threat. The land is also fertile high grade agricultural land which would be destroyed. Sport,Leisure and Recreation facilities will be threatening Salt Mill Recreational Park and the China Fleet Country Club during building and afterwards. Loss of green space. Using the land for allotments, planting woodlands, alternative educational resources/ possible extension of the China Fleet Country Club? Environment- Policy GRN4 • Support • Drainage and Flooding- seriously needs to be taken into account for the Salt Mill area. The existing Combined Sewage Outlet is not fit for purpose . The area at Saltmill already regularly floods especially when there is a high tide and/or heavy rainfall. The flooding not only contains surface water, but raw sewage.( I have photographic evidence to prove this). This is not only a major health risk but severely affects the access to the proposed build area and the immediate dwellings. Since living in my cottage at Saltmill I have had personal correspondence with South West Water who have had to fit a Non Return Valve on the boundary to my property to try and minimise the existing flood risk. Whilst this appears effective in the short term I have grave concerns for the future, especially if the proposed build goes ahead coupled with worsening extremes of weather/ climate crisis. If the build goes ahead what measures will be put in place to mitigate this increased risk and who will be held to account when they fail? Road safety- Improved and Sustainable Connectivity. Policies CON 1-10 • Oppose • There is nothing covering access to planned building of houses at North Pill and access to the China Fleet Club. Figure 29 states that the considerations should run from pedestrian, to cycle, to public transport, to specialist vehicles(emergency vehicles,waste etc) then other motor traffic. Concerns over access for fire engines and ambulances would be of particular concern, not only during the build period but also once completed. Road safety page 74 Figure Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up 30- Improving safety- Cutlers Corner is not mentioned. This is already a tortuous junction. I have serious concerns about the lack of crossings for pedestrians around Cutlers Corner, the inadequacy of the pavement down Glanville Terrace and the complete lack of pathways/pavement onwards to the China Fleet Country Club- widening the road and providing footpaths is not going to be possible with the existing infrastructure. The only road in and out of the area also passes directly in front of the Saltmill Recreational Ground. At times of popular sporting events members of the public park alongside the road, hampering access and walkways, coupled with a high volume of pedestrians using the area, crossing the road, (again I have photographic evidence to prove this). The main, (and only), access road around Saltmill Recreational Ground also has 2 extremely difficult cambers in the road which cannot be rectified due to existing dwellings. This would hamper not only heavy plant materials whilst trying to build but would increase the risk of traffic incidences with higher volumes of proposed traffic once the builds are complete. There has already been several road traffic incidence in this exact area over the last few years. Road safety- Policy CON 2- mentions North Rd/New Rd (main distributor road) and any pre-apps & proposals for new development gaining access via North Rd would have to be seriously considered. The knock on effect of the traffic to the Tamar Bridge would be detrimental along with a worsening situation when the Saltash Tunnel is closed and traffic is diverted along North Road. Connectivity- Policies 7-10 all consider necessary services to the area including IT, transport,cycling etc- these are already either poor or not available
Planning -Page 12 Figure 3 Site allocations - Policy SLT-H1- North Pill 5.9 Drainage Access Allotments C110 hectares for approx. 85 dwellings Alternative use of land for the existing Saltash community i.e • Oppose allotments, woodlands, market gardens (as previously used for), • The site limitations does not allow to deliver a development to outdoor education centre acceptable standard . 1 The single access narrow and high gradient road is dangerous. 2 The tidal Saltmill Creek with the old combined surface water, sewage creates flooding. Access with emergency vehicles than will be limited. 3 The closeness of the A-38 with its noise and air pollution makes the proposed site unsuitable. 4 The effect on the China Fleet Cub and its employees will be need to be taken into account especially during the building work. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up The site limitations are not taken into account: 1. Sewage and Drainage already inadequate 2. Access is already dangerous and limited and difficult with no opportunity to improve. 3. Grade 2 agricultural land will be sacrificed and wildlife will damaged 4. Detrimental affect on China Fleet Country Club , (employees and customers), during building process. • Enviroment GRN-1, GRN2. GRN3 • Oppose • . Environment- Protect and Enhance the Natural environment- The Natural Environment Pol Biodiversity. SPA area covers the Lynher, Saltmill etc and this would include the area planned at North Pill woodlands, trees,hedges etc- we would be loosing these of plans go ahead. countryside character areas- the creek and wildlife would be under threat • No recognition of the existing heritage area or the value of the Grade 2 agricultural land. Loss of existing woodlands, trees and hedges would affect the biodiversity of the area as a whole. The Countryside Character will be lost forever. Permanent damage to existing wildlife. • Environment- Policy GRN4- Drainage and Flooding • Oppose • The existing Combined Sewage system is already inadequate with the area at Saltmill flooding on a regular basis ,especially when there is a high tide coupled with heavy rainfall. The area floods with not only rain water, but raw sewage. This an extreme health hazard not only to humans but the local wildlife and the only access road in and out of the area is completely impassable. The planned development with the increase the surface water that would need to be drained, coupled with Climate Crisis will exacerbate this problem potentially causing loss of life as well as irreparable damage to dwellings and infrastructure within the immediate area. South West Water have already installed a Non Return Valve to the edge of my property to protect it which is effective at present but I fear that this will not be suffice in the future. Road safety- Improved and Sustainable Connectivity. Policies CON 1-10 • Oppose • There is only one road in and out of the area. This access road is already extremely dangerous due to the gradient, adverse cambers and the junction at Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up the entrance to the site (Cutler's Corner). It also passes directly in front of the busy Saltmill Recreational Ground with large numbers of pedestrians having to cross an already busy road. Obviously with increased traffic not only when the initial building takes place but once the house are inhabited this risk will increase. The access road already gets blocked when there is a large sporting event held at the Recreational Ground. There is no public transport, public footpaths or cycling access with no opportunity to improve these facilities. The increased traffic flow through the area will have a negative impact on the junction with North Road, leading onto the Tamar Bridge and beyond, especially when the Saltash Tunnel is closed and the A38 traffic is diverted. There will also be on obvious increase in noise and air pollution . Emergency vehicles (blue lights) already have difficulty negotiating the access road and this could be fatal if access is impeded not only when the proposed build is taking place, but once new homes are established. The China Fleet Country Club will be hugely affected not only by local employees but also by local customers and tourists. Lost revenue will be colossal. Can the wider Saltash community afford to lose this valuable asset?
CON 1-10, Road Safety page 24, GRN2-4, Connectivity 7-10 Access in and out of the area should be looked at and improved C111[1] • Oppose prior to any development taking place, especially at Cutlers Corner. C111[2] • Whilst I support the Neighbourhood Plan’s overall aims and objectives, I cannot Plan should include footpaths/pavements from Glanville Terrace support the allocation of land at North Pill for 85 additional homes as there are up to the China Fleet Club. Drainage and sewage problem should fundamental issues which needs to be addressed prior to any building being be rectified before the building of any houses. carried out. My Reasons are set out below. Road safety page 74 - the area known as Cutlers Corner is not mentioned in the plan and how this will be addressed. I have serious concerns about the lack of crossings for pedestrians, the inadequacy of pavement around Glanville Terrace, the lack of any pathways and pavements leading to the China Fleet Country Club. Widening the road to incorporate footpaths might take away the character of the area, hedgerows and trees. GRN4 There is a serious issue of drainage and flooding around Salt Mill. The creek is tidal and often gets flooded during heavy rainfalls and raw sewage spilling out into the road. My concern is if 85 homes are built directly above that area this problem will get worse, and could have serious environmental issues to wildlife and the Tamar Estuary. Not to mention health implications to people living around Salt Mill but to those using the Recreational facilities. CON 1-10 There is nothing in the plan covering access to Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up planned building of houses at North Pill, access to the China Fleet Club. I have serious concerns about access of emergency and waste vehicles etc., getting in and out of the area during construction if the access is not addressed prior to building commencing. Access to North Road/New Road (double T junction) at Cutlers Corner would have to be given serious consideration prior to any development taking place. Connectivity - Policies 7-10 Necessary services to the area should be considered including IT, public transport, cycling as these are either poor or not available. We should ensure the rest of the areas are not identified for development and the remaining countryside character is not built on.
Page 6 Objective 7 I would suggest making use of government grants to rewild and C112 • Oppose reforest redundant fields As an environmentalist I would suggest there is a far better use of these fields. Rewilding and reforesting are simple solutions to carbon capture, increasing biodiversity and habitat areas for wildlife. If the science is to be believed we have been given just over 10 years to negate the worst effects of climate change. Our carbon budget is rapidly running out, so perhaps building more homes on an ideal spot for natural woodland isn't the best idea, let alone the terrible access and flood risk. This could be a chance for Saltash town to make a stand and really think about that next generation who will not forgive the justification of "we needed more houses" when there are already plenty of empty homes waiting to be modernised. • Page 5/Objective 5 The Plan should keep to the number of new houses it is felt Saltash C113[1] • Support with Modifications needs - if alternatives to the Broadmoor site have to be used, due • There are multiple references to the possible delays to the Broadmoor to delay, this should not increase the overall, eventual number of development and need for alternative sites, should this happen. If there new houses built in the town is large scale building on alternative sites, due to delay on the Broadmoor one, will the number of houses allowed on the Broadmoor development be curtailed to offset this? • Plan page 61/Paragraph 12.7 The villages of Trehan, Forder & Trematon C113[2] have boundaries set to preserve their rural nature. Saltash’s distinct villages are an important aspect of the town’s history and appeal, so it is important to preserve this. However, I am concerned that other of the town’s distinct villages have not been mentioned in this section - Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Burraton Coombe & Anthony Passage and the areas of Wearde Quay and Coombe - which could put them at risk by omission. Developers inability to develop in the named villages of Trehan, Forder and Trematon could push more rural development into the unnamed villages of Burraton Coombe and Anthony Passage.
Development at Middle Pill Pg 12, Pg 38, Pg 54, Pg 57, Pg 70, C113[3] • Oppose • For the above Pages in the Plan I oppose the development of 85 dwellings due to the area being one of the few spaces of green left in the community which is already in a perfect place to help fight Climate Change. The plan is not looking for the future of our existence living within the community long term but only planning for a short term 'band aid' and missing the point of making sure we use existing empty houses, redeveloping old and abandoned buildings, creating new homes in an area which has already been used with existing infrastructure and finding a site which is not such a key area to the community and nature. The area stated would be ideal to transform into a 'Climate Change' Environment Safe Zone which both the community and wildlife would benefit from. As an open green space we could promote rewilding, pathways for sequestration, create biodiversity, support local organic plant food production, planting trees for carbon capture and food. This will enable a new public space for the whole community to learn and experience nature by incorporate the existing Salt Mill Park into an area where there can be more natural play areas, bird and insect boxes, renewable energy sources can be installed, support cycle and running trails with wildlife corridors that are free and open around this proposed area of Saltash. This space can be full of 'green and clean' projects that I believe are more suited to the area, the community and would be paving the way for Saltash and Cornwall Council in creating a Environment Safe Zone which Cornwall Council has urged local councils to facilitate these green projects. Having been a space of Green Belt with no previous buildings, laying next to the Tamar River, located next to an already developed small public space for outside recreational use, having extremely limited road infrastructure for at least 85 more cars on the road - which it is more likely to be 170 cars due to home owners having 2 x cars per family this area is screaming to be saved from building development and this plan should be looked at moving elsewhere. Our time is running out to stand up and fight for change and make it Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up happen. With a Climate Crisis happening now we have to look to the future of our whole environment not 85 homes being built on green land which can be used for creating a beautiful space to promote mental wellbeing, health, wildlife, carbon capture and renewable energy! Looking at the bigger picture another development of houses being built is not going to help the situation we are all in with regards to more homes needed and climate change so I strongly oppose this until all empty houses are filled, old and disused buildings are rebuilt and places which have already got the infrastructure to develop on have been used. 'I want you to panic as if your houses are on fire' - Greta Thunberg spoke quite rightly that we can not wait for change, everyone of us needs to be the change, speak up for the right to have a future and to save what we have left. This is not a time to create new homes but to be looking at saving what we have already and making use of what we have already built and creating spaces where we can help the health of our community by developing natural spaces which can carbon catch and promote healthy living. I urge you to think about what this space could be created into for all beings rather than the few. What legacy are we leaving if there is no-one to leave it for.
SLT-H1 Leave it as it is, and farm responsibly, using all the ecological help C114 • Oppose that Government can supply. • I oppose this housing development, initially because of the huge increase in traffic of lorries and heavy plant in the construction phase, and then for the same reasons once the houses are completed, due to the following: Middle Pill (85 houses) will lead to the development of North Pill (another 100+ houses) The road at the point of Saltmill sports amenities car park, is crossed by many children, and the alignment of the road by the cottage is unsuitable with its sharp and narrow bend. The road from Saltmill along Glanville Terrace is too narrow. The junction of Glanville Terrace and Old Ferry Road has an extreme gradient, making it difficult for construction traffic, plus the damage caused, which then immediately joins New Road and incoming traffic. The A38 eastbound slip road, which also acts as a westbound slip road when the tunnel is closed (regularly), has it's junction only a few metres to the west. Added to this are the pedestrian routes. Overall this makes this area of the road system in Saltash very unsuitable for any increase in traffic over the current local, farm and China Fleet Country Club levels The loss of green, fertile farming land is also of concern as too much will be lost at Broadmoor. The gradual creep of Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up development, especially so close to the Tamar River will spoil the environment and put even more pressure on a fragile ecosystem.
• Oppose Abandon this scheme. C115 • I enjoy using Salt Mill nature reserve, the disruption will be horrendous. The access road is already dangerous so what will it be like with lorries and extra traffic. Surely the already proposed scheme at Carkeel is sufficient. Saltash infrastructure is already struggling,doctors appointments are hard to get, the NHS dentist is totally unavailable,until all these problems are sorted how can more houses be even considered. Saltash is a special place to live but with all this development, it is being ruined, once the land and nature is gone,it's gone for good. Just wake up and realise what you are doing and stop being so greedy.
GRN4 The area by Saltmill Creek is prone to tidal flooding causing C116[1] • Support with Modifications flooding on the road leading to The China Fleet, and the backing up • The area by Saltmill Creek is prone to tidal flooding causing flooding on of raw sewage. This needs to be addressed in GRN6 and taken into the road leading to The China Fleet, and the backing up of raw sewage. account in all planning decisions in the Pill area. This needs to be addressed in GRN6 and taken into account in all planning decisions in the Pill area. TC2 • Support with modifications • The decline of the retail sector on the high street in general terms but C116[2] in Saltash more specifically Fore Street, indicates that long term there will be less demand for retail shops in Fore Street. Priority should be given to change of use of shops & offices into housing in Fore Street and perhaps concentrating the shopping area in the lower part of Saltash and the smaller shopping courtyards and alleys (eg Keast Mews) GRN2 C116[3] • Support with modifications • The destruction of the habitat of wildlife, hedgerows, trees and plants must be avoided, in order to maintain the character of the town and to help avert the Climate Crisis. Further garden infill must be avoided at all costs as gardens provide essential wildlife corridors for endangered species and infill is an incremental destruction of the town's environment and character. I'm not sure whether the following is Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up covered within GRN2 or perhaps another category (H2 or H4 perhaps), but it is an important point...... In terms of The Climate Crisis there will be a need for more, not less, agricultural land and therefore Brownfield sites should be used for future housing developments, not agricultural land or garden infill. • H2 C116[4] • Support with modifications • I'm not sure whether this is the appropriate paragraph for consideration of the following, but second homes and holiday lets can be detrimental to a town. Whilst many areas in Cornwall no doubt suffer more than Saltash in this regard, the draft plan should perhaps empower the town to enable it to take action on the existing issue and a potential greater problem in the future. A register of second homes in Saltash, including the out of town areas, should be established. There should be an emphasis on bringing back such homes into first home status, thereby reducing the pressure on the housing sector in the town to build homes in green field areas. Second homes should be subject to significantly higher rates of council tax, not discounted rates and perhaps Saltash council can put such a proposal into effect.. There should also be a register of holiday lets, including AirBnB, and such lets should be subject to full business rates, not exemptions as I believe they currently are, as the exempt business rate is much abused in the holiday lettings sector.
6, Objective 7 Make environment friendly policy and plan with local greener C117[1] • Oppose group more carefully. Town has already transition town status but • This plan is not good enough about litter problem policy. We have been running town council does not support enough to this status. Town should for community litter pick since 2015. We picked up so many litters. But our have a great vision to become Eco town when Saltash town does not have enforcement officers and is too weak to solve problem that Enviornmental Action group setted up in 2007. Make Eco town can not help to stop littering, prevent dog mess and fly tipping. Also The town Saltash, Sustainable Saltash. council decided not to enforce or discourage the littering, include cigarette butts that is absolutely awful to hear. Even high street where is zone A to maintain by Biffa but at front of the pubs, bus stops and betting shops are awful to see so many cigarette butts. We picked up more than 500 butts on the high street one Friday morning for only one hour. These litters are not only block the drainage and causes flooding risk but also cigarette are poisoning our nature. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up We found so many litters in the hedgerows where these litters have blown away by winds. Town announced the town is hedgehog hero but how do you manage clean the hedges without planning and enforce policies? Town wardens are not cleaning up the hedges to protect hedgehogs home but what is the town do? 4, town centre C117[2] • Support with modifications • Empty Shop owner should decorate outside the shop to avoid showing ruined image of the Town centre. After a tenant left, if the owner can not find new tenant for 2 months, Town council should give notice to the owner to decorate the shop windows to make better image of the town. • Road Safety - Page 72. Improved and Sustainable Connectivity. Policies CON 1- The points above must be addressed before any proposed C118[1] 10. development takes place to exacerbate an already poor situation • Support with Modifications regarding the North/Middle Pill area. • While agreeing with the sentiments expressed generally about road safety, etc. there is nothing here to cover access to planned development at North Pill of 85 houses and access to the China Fleet Country Club. Figure 29 states that the considerations should run from pedestrian to cycle to public transport to specialist vehicles such as emergency vehicles then other motor traffic. As things stand, there is already motor congestion at Cutlers Corner and Glanville Terrace. There is also no proper provision for pedestrians. There are undersized and irregular footpaths or no footpaths at all past Salt Mill. Congestion is increased further when sports events are held at Salt Mill. Even without further development, construction traffic, etc., the provision of emergency vehicles to North and Middle Pill and the China Fleet Club is worrying. This needs to be addressed. Road Safety - Page 72 Improving Safety. • Support with modifications • Cutlers Corner, a notoriously ambiguous and congested junction, is not mentioned. There are no provisions for pedestrian crossings around or nearby this junction. The pavements down Glanville Terrace, adjoining this junction, are inadequate, too narrow in parts, and there is a complete lack of pathway provision beyond Salt Mill to the China Fleet boundary. Environment - Page 56 GRN4 - Drainage and Flooding C118[2]
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up • We already have problems with flooding at Salt Mill, especially following heavy rain combined with a high tide. As a consequence, vehicular access is affected, pedestrian access is affected and pollution occurs which enters the Tamar. Raw sewage has been a problem at times of flooding. We would like this to be addressed and are naturally concerned that the proposed development at North Pill could make things worse with extra run-off and increased demands on sewerage. GRN4 Para 11.8 talks about flooding at Forder, etc. but does not include the Salt Mill problem outlined above. Clearly, the plan needs amending to take account of the existing problems at Salt Mill. Environment - Page 57 Figure 21 • Habitat and Biodiversity corridors run through the North and Middle Pill area C118[3] where development is planned. The planned building lies outside the NP1 development boundary. Environment - Page 58 Figure 22 AONB & Countryside Character. North and Middle Pill lie in this area and outside the NP1 development boundary. It is so important to preserve green spaces and protect our environment. So, further development of our green areas of Saltash should be taken very seriously and prevented where possible. The North and Middle Pill area of Saltash should be protected.
• Oppose Why not add more houses to the site at Carkeel if they are really C119 • The proposed development in the Pill area of Saltash would have a detrimental needed. affect on the environment and visually to the Tamar valley and Gateway Cornwall as a whole. I believe it's supposed to be within the area of outstanding natural beauty and a green belt that would be lost forever. Cornwall conjures up images of beautiful scenery, but in reality it could become anything but. The first visitors and locals alike would see is houses. There would be an increase of traffic and pollution through a narrow access road to the sites. The junction at Tamar House between New Road and North Road to Saltmill will become a more dangerous junction.. In turn cause pollution for local residents. There would be extra pressure on an already congested Tamar Bridge. When there's an accident or incident in Saltash or the A38, the hold ups are considerable with more traffic adding to this at the junction of New Road -North Road. Obviously there would be pressure on local facilities such as doctors ,.ambulances, fire services, police, schools and local transport which would need addressing. With the large development going ahead at Carkeel, is it really necessary to spoil Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up more of our beatiful countryside to urban sprawl and becoming a part of Plymouth? Why not add more houses to this site if they are really needed? This green belt area is essential for the well being of residents and the environment, which includes wildlife . Once this is lost there's no going back. So please don't spoil the Tamar countryside. Where does it end?
Section 6 TC2 It would be good to see reference made to the key role that C120[1] • Support with Modifications festivals and events can play. Here is a link to the High Streets • The Plan is well organised and carefully considered. It is clear that a huge Report: amount of work and time has been invested. Discussions at the Saltash file:///C:/Users/hilary.frank/Documents/Cornwall%20Council/Econ C120[2] Chamber of Commerce and in the report by Cornwall Council's Vitality of High omy/Vitality%20of%20High%20Streets%20Inquiry%20Appendix%2 Streets Inquiry have highlighted the need to develop festivals and events. This 01%20version%203.0.pdf would have multiple benefits supporting several of the Objectives outlined in the Development Plan leaflet, including 'Secure a diverse and prosperous local economy', 'Regenerate the Town Centre' and 'Create and support sustainable neighbourhoods'. WF1 Makng the Most of Saltash Waterfront • Support with modifications C120[3] • Cornwall Council is making progress with investigating the viability of a water taxi service linking Plymouth, Mt Edgumbe, Torpoint and Saltash. The Economic Impact Assessment is now complete, with indications that the service could generate as much as £4 million in Saltash over 15 years. The introduction of a Water Taxi would impact the Waterfront as well as have implications for transport linking the Waterfront with the Railway Station and Town Centre.
policy H1 Clearly defined and publicly available criteria around the decision C121 • Oppose process as to when the additional capacity site would be required • "It accords with the DPD’s assessment ranking in terms of sustainability and suitability (based on criteria of location, access, impact and viability)" The impact of development and access to the north/middle pill site through current road infrastructure would not support the stated aims of the section. The current road infrastructure is at maximum capacity and to increase traffic would have a detrimental effect on the current users of the area. The current infrastructure, (regarding surface water, sewage, fresh water supply, power and refuse collection) would require extensive upgrade to accommodate additional loading leading to greater impact on the environment, and would only become Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up viable with a very large investment in housing stock adding further disruption and impact on the area. No reasonable explanation or timescale for the Broadmoor ("Treledan") delay or short fall in the building program has been given. At what point and under what specific criteria would the Broadmoor site be declared "behind schedule or inadequate"?
Page 38, Para.9.2 In order to protect the peninsula from further development we C122[1] • Support with Modifications would therefore propose that the Neighbourhood Plan includes a • Page 38, Para.9.2 As former residents of Middle Pill we opposed the late provision that restricts any development at North and Middle Pill additional site allocation of 85 homes at North Pill following the Inspector's to just the existing allocation of 85 homes at North Pill and that examination of the Local Plan. This was because we felt that insufficient planning applications for further large housing sites will not be C122[2] evidence was provided to justify the Inspector's conclusion that there was a supported. Leaflet P.5 Ensure a Balanced Range of Quality New concern over the deliverability of the target housing figure at the Treladan site Housing Please could any future communications/social media and that therefore an additional site should be provided to provide more with the residents of Saltash correct this imbalance of information? flexibility in delivering the overall housing target for Saltash. As active members of the North and Middle Pill Neighbourhood Association, we supported the view that North Pill should have been allocated as a Reserve site rather than an allocated one and that it should therefore only be brought forward for development if and when evidence of significant under-delivery of the 2030 target at Treladan could be identified through monitoring by Cornwall Council. Whilst we accept that the allocation has now been agreed, there remain significant issues with development on the site as evidenced by the conditions Cornwall Council have attached to any building on the site. We know that the North and Middle Pill Landowners Consortium has ambitions to increase the development of the North and Middle Pill peninsula even further to include more housing to the East of the site and believe that this would have a seriously detrimental effect on the rural character of the area and the viability of the China Fleet Club, the town's largest employer - we also know that this view is shared by many of the Saltash Town Councillors. • • Leaflet P.5 Ensure a Balanced Range of Quality New Housing We are extremely disappointed that this section makes no reference to the new site allocation of 85 homes at North Pill and that the vast majority of Saltash residents are therefore likely to be completely unaware that development on precious green land has been agreed by both Cornwall and the Town Council.
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up 38/9.2 As I understand it, the site at Broadmoor will fulfill the C123 • Oppose requirements for the allocated number of dwellings that it has • Section 9 outlines the plan for development in North Pill. Figure 22 sited later been stated Saltash needs to provide. I would urge to petition that on in the Saltash Neighbourhood and Development Plan (SNDP) clearly outlines if this is the case that no additional site should be developed. If it is the proposed site as being within GRN3 - Countryside Character area. As decided additional development still needs to take place I would highlighted by Figure 22 I also believe that the site is part of an important green suggest an alternative site be found, within the existing town area surrounding the town of Saltash which should be protected in order to boundaries. ensure the character of Saltash remains and to stop the spread of urban sprawl. The existing neighbourhood in North Pill suffers with barely adequate waste water services which will only be compounded with additional development. Access to North Pill is via a very narrow road, congested with residential parking. The volume of traffic on the road is already above normal due to increased number of people accessing both the China Fleet Country Club and Saltmill, especially during events at the Club or football matches at the pitches at Saltmill. There are two dangerous corners on the road which, through personal experience after many years of living in the area, I have witnessed near collisions between vehicles, pedestrians and young people on bikes, scooters and skateboards. I believe that adding to the volume of traffic on this road through developing the site at North Pill would be irresponsible and make the situation even more dangerous. At times of high rainfall the road alongside Saltmill and the car parking facilities floods. I believe that by developing the site suggested in the SNDP additional hard surfaces will undoubtedly be created, adding to the rainfall runoff and compounding the issue of flooding. Finally I believe the proposed development with fundamentally alter the character of the area. Traditionally North Pill was the site of two farms. Over time the two roads that serviced these farms have had a small number of dwellings built alongside them and the China Fleet has been developed. The area today feels very rural and, having grown up here, very separate from the town of Saltash. If the development goes ahead it will fundamentally change the character of the area; such a large number of homes built in the style of a housing estate is completely out of keeping with the existing landscape. As a whole • Support • I would like to take the opportunity to thank those who have put in the time and effort to put together the SNDP. Having worked in the field of Planning and Architecture I understand what is entailed in producing such a report. It is very Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up detailed and contains many positive ideas for the town. I look forward to seeing them come to fruition, especially the green corridor and the regeneration of the waterfront.
• Oppose Keep the areas around China Fleet as green field land. Plan new C124 • Concern over traffic on narrow roads from New /North Road to China Fleet. housing beyond Carkeel Roundabout Proposed new housing would be better planned for beyond the Carkeel Roundabout.
pg 12 Fig 3 SLT H1, pg13 Fig 4,pg 38 H1, pg 42 ENV areas, pg 54 GRN- all,pg 58 AONB Support with Modifications. On the whole the draft Saltash Neighbourhood C125[1] Development Plan is of a good standard. However, I have serious concerns over the allocated site at Middle Pill (referred to as North Pill in this draft). The areas of concern cover the road,cycle and pedestrian access to this site and onward from there into this "peninsula", the drainage, flooding and sewerage problems that already occur and are more likely to occur with the additional building, the requirement to maintain the hedges and trees that are in the area and ensuring that the further green fields within this countryside character area are not released for further development and are preserved for future generations. Looking at the plan under policy requirements for the land identified at Middle Pill then item d i) - extending the pavement and walking and cycling access whilst being laudable should not mean that any of the existing hedges and trees are removed. The pathways and cycle-ways should be located around them. d iii) - SUDS- flooding routinely occurs by Salt Mill and this flat stretch of road whenever there is heavy rainfall and/or a high tide. This can be further exacerbated when the 2 occur together and sewerage has leaked out into the flood water. This needs to be addressed prior to any building on the site as both sewage and run-off water will increase. e i) and f- discuss the area as Tamar SPA - and this needs to be addressed prior to building e ii)- The CFC lies at the end of the access road and, as a major employer in the town, any disruption to the traffic accessing the road will be detrimental to the club which is likely to lead to reduction in staff members. To be avoided. Middle Pill, an area of countryside character lies alongside the AONB and SSSI on a greenfield site. Whilst this area (the 2 fields to the north of A38) has been identified for housing, it is imperative that the remainder of the area is recognised as an Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up ANOB and therefore should not be developed in the future. Buildings in this area have historic relevance as the whole area was used for farming ( high quality agricultural land) and marker gardening and many of the buildings go back to this era and some were built as land workers homes. It is imperative that the prospective developer and planners can demonstrate how logistically and financially the requirements can be met, bearing in mind the environmental issues, prior to any commencement of work.
Pg 72 Connectivity Policies CON 7-10 Support with modifications IT, transport, cycling facilities etc are either poor or not available at all in this C125[2] locality. It has been suggested that future residents will mainly walk into Saltash town centre but the feeling is that this is unlikely due to the steep gradient of the roads. This would also apply to cycling. Few, if any, local buses have a route along North Rd/New Rd and certainly do not come on to the peninsula- road access as mentioned above would currently prohibit this.
pg 74 Fig 30- improving safety & policy CON 2 Support with modifications No mention is made of the junction at Cutlers Corner leading out to North Rd The road junction at Cutlers Corner needs to be assessed and C125[3] and New Rd which already becomes congested on a regular basis. This, along improved bearing in mind that not only the traffic from this with the inadequacy of the road at Glanville Tce (due to the width of the road peninsula use this junction.Traffic from the site at Treledan will and the need for homeowners to park their cars on the road making it single also increase the traffic accessing this junction from the slip road lane) and the steep bend at the bottom of the hill make this a dangerous off the main A38 Also access. Should the need arise, would an emergency vehicle such as a fire engine manage to navigate this lane. The next bend, leading uphill to North Pill from Saltmill, has a cottage or historic interest on the corner making this a narrow,blind bend of 70*. This is very close to the crossing from the Saltmill changing rooms across this road to the playing fields which is in regular use by children. The full road access including pedestrian and cycle use needs to be evaluated by highways experts prior to the commencement of any work in the area.
• Oppose I wouldn’t improve anything I feel it’s unnecessary C126 • In retrospect to the plan I oppose the building of housing in the pill area. Firstly I cannot see a need for more homes in saltash it’s a very densely populated Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up area as it is and the structure of the roads can’t take any more traffic. We have seen this at the carkeel roundabout, furthermore ruining areas of natural space close to the river tamar to me reeks of commercial profit it’s said that we need houses and it’s going to benefit us and create jobs but there are already enough sites around the Plymouth areas with Sherford providing 10/15 years work and houses for around 12,000 residents. The tamar bridge itself if slightly plagued by maintenance or high winds creates havoc for traffic and commuting. The China fleet country club dear to many saltash and surrounding areas residents relies on the beauty of the entrance and views across the tamar with little traffic hence title country club, somewhere to relax without the hustle of traffic and excess life. I disagree with the plan fully, Saltash has been branded the best place to live countless times why try to change something that already works and has one of the biggest populations in the county already.
pg 58 fig 22 AONB Countryside character If building has to go ahead in this area and is not confined to C127 • Oppose Treledan, then any building should be in character with the • As designated in fig 22 the development area at Middle Pill (North Pill in the neighbourhood. document) is in a countryside character area. 12.i. pg 59 states- new isolated homes in the countryside should be avoided unless there are special circumstances such as the need of rural workers. Page 73 Summary of relevant NPPF and Cornwall Local Plan policy • Support with modifications • The access to the Middle Pill site through Glanville Tce is not fit for purpose. Under NPPF 2018 para 102- states - give priority first to pedestrian and cycle movement and second to facilitating access to high quality public transport. In places in the area there are no pavements, let alone purpose built cycle paths; and no public transport. It states - create places that are safe, secure and attractive which minimise the scope for conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles. The sharp corners, steep gradients and continual access across this road to Saltmill Park from the changing rooms means that a fatal accident will ensue unless improvements to this road are addressed. It is also stated- allow for the efficient delivery of goods and access by service and emergency vehicles. Glanville Tce is a narrow road allowing 2 vehicles to pass. However the residents park care outside their houses making this a narrow, single track road , at times not wide enough to allow service and emergency vehicles safe access. Once again the width of this road wants addressing. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Pg56 Policy GRN 4 • Support with modifications • The road at Saltmill floods with heavy rain. The above combined with high tide and low air pressure then makes the foul drains overflow. SWW are aware the escaping of effluent in this situation. This in itself need addressing without any new development at Middle Pill. Pg 58 Fig 22 • No houses should be built on AONB or countryside character areas until all other sites are exhausted.
The waterfront/ entire fore st. desperately needs to be renovated C128 • p59, p38 to bring it up to a standard befitting Saltash as currently both look • Oppose run down, tired and unappealing, which is unfortunate as it could • If you continue to build more and more homes in Saltash you will be turned around easily. continue to degrade the quality of life for residents here, already the
new Carkeal development has brought substantial traffic issues to Saltash as no consideration appears to have been given to the volume of traffic which would obviously increase as the new shops open. I have not spoken to 1 single person in Saltash who has agreed to yet more homes being built-in OUR area and feel it completely unfair that this excess of new housing is being forced upon us. I understand that the new builds bring money to Saltash council BUT it has already impacted on our quality of life in numerous ways and further development can only make matters worse, I oppose all developments of further new homes for profit in our area and will make sure this is felt by all councilors at the next election.
13 POLICY SLT-H1 NORTH PILL We should wait and see what happens at Broadmoor Farm see C129 • Oppose what facilities they end up with if any.Idont think Pillmere got what • I think the Broadmoor site should be build we should see what facilitys are built was promised to deal with that influx of people. The Schools will not cope , the health centres can not cope now we have to wait about four weeks for an appointment and the Doctors are under great pressure. Also the traffic situation will be terrible and any road improvement i believe will not solve the traffic problems. Building on North Pill would spoil that lovely green area ,do we really need more than the 1000 at Broadmoor Farm.
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up
• Support with Modifications • I agree with the idea of the green boulevard, especially making it easier to C130[1] access the heart of town by bike. But why not consider something more future proof, and consider a future where will not be able to be dependent on cars. I like the idea of a tram, which would just do one route from a new centre at carkeel to the old centre at Fore st, with perhaps a link down lower fore street which would help local residents access the waterside and draw in the wider area and tourists from further afield to a newly developed attractive waterside. There could be a hub at carkeel which would be serviced by buses and have bike parking and electrical charge points. Think big! What a destination Saltash could be! I applaud the plan to put in traffic calming measures on the A388 which makes it easier to access other areas north of Saltash, and would like to see better connectivity in accessing further west of Saltash by bike as the very C130[2] presence of the A38 hinders this. A bike lane at specific points alongside the A38 would be beneficial and not difficult to put in place? Specifically between Tideford and Landrake but all the way from Trematon to Tideford is preferable.
• Support All Policies Stated! Stoketon Cross roundabout now. 1 hour free parking in all car C131[1] parks and Fore Street More disabled parking around Fore Street C131[2] C131[3] C131[4] • Oppose Rethink Broadmoor Farm development C132 • The new roundabout at Carkeel has done nothing to ease the traffic situation. It is of considerable concern that if the Broadmoor Farm development takes place, traffic chaos will ensue.
SUPPORT WITH MODIFICATIONS C133[1] Whilst I cannot find any main reason to oppose the plan overall it is mainly aspirational in content and does not address the matter of funding et cetera. My experience dealing with local councils et cetera to affect/repairs it is usually met with ‘we haven’t got any money’! Where is this money to be found? I would ask however if the plan reflects more recent issues, notably regarding C133[2] climate change and the targets set by the government to implement its policies in this matter which have taken centre stage. There is much mention of C133[3] community, social interaction, sense of belonging, period May I suggest that Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up these are to be found in abundance in our local sports clubs who, in my experience, continue to be treated badly with below par facilities that have seen little if any improvement during my long time (50 years) in the town. Improvements Organisations and clubs with youth sections be valued and enabled to flourish with financial support and security of tenure to attract investment. Rental charges should be at a minimum to allow them to focus on infrastructure and content. it is important that new recreational activities are created nearer the town centre and not at the extremities of any new development existing facilities, notably at Chapel Field, Warfelton and Moorlands Lane need C133[4] major upgrading with provision for parking. Our young people deserve the best.
• Provide benches at Chapel Field which has had no improvements such C134 as those at Longtone Park and Warfelton • Regularly trim/control vegetation growing over footpaths in the Latchbrook area and Yellow Tor road itself • Play area could also be provided at Chapel Field noting that St Dominic has a far superior play area than anything in Saltash!
support with modifications C135 Whereas I support the additional shopping at Carkeel, I cannot agree that ‘good access, parking and circulation’ has been considered. I work in a small business that uses that access road constantly through the day. Access to the new site has not been developed properly and no consideration given to the volume of traffic/use improvements An access road from the roundabout or a road out developed past the Travis Perkins site on a new road.
Objective 4 C136 Relocate moorings to thirty feet car park wall thus making a decent area for a sanded beach. This would enhance the area better than the proposed Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up bandstand (sand from St Austell was deposited there some 30 years ago and still remains).
Community services. Support retention of healthcare at St Barnabas C137 improvements. Needs dialysis unit placed in St Barnabas to save local residents the time and travel to Eastover objective 1 C138[1] we have no problem visiting local business parks plenty of selection and no C138[2] trouble parking. C138[3] Home business is fine as long as it is regulated and does not cause annoyance to neighbours and the environment. Objective 2 green Boulevard is a good idea also better parking is necessary at the top end of the high Street. The high Street road could do with relaying and the humps C138[4] improving on. C138[5] Objective 3 great if the road system is enhanced objective 4 there are few areas left like the waterfront, be careful not to spoil an area C138[6] which is a calm place for families and the elderly. All events are well supported and the area is unspoiled, also there is a good community/spirit when events are staged. The old bar and restaurant needs refurbishment to a good class property. Existing pier is good, just needs a little work on the railings and landing stage. Youth club needs modernising to Include Outward Bound recreation. Union pub has plenty of character. The space on the waterfront is for people who enjoy being near the water without all the hustle and bustle of town and city. Choice of places to eat and drink with good access to the water. Objective 5 in agreement. Cornwall needs affordable housing for young families to allow them to continue to live in an area they love. C138[7] Objective 6 Saltash is a special place and should be treated as such. The station is an C138[8] important piece of history and to renovate it was a good idea. C138[9] Objective 7. In agreement C138[10] objective 8. In agreement C138[11] Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up objective 9. In agreement objective 10. In agreement allotments and green spaces are vital for all age groups to help them respect their environment. Objective 11. In agreement. oppose. 85 homes at Middle Hill hundreds more North Hill C139 The above area is classed as outstanding natural beauty, which it is, and always has been. It is used and visited by many. E.g.: gigs, sailing, river cruise boats, and walkers. Don’t take all our green spaces away, surely we should leave these beautiful spaces. For future generations And don’t forget the traffic problems it will cause, at least another hundred 85+ cars! What are you thinking? Improvements: there is planning permission for over a thousand new homes at Broadmoor farm. Get these built first, where it’s not going to interfere with the beautiful scenery of the River Tay Mark, and beyond. Broadmoor will have infrastructure in place accordingly, no need to widen roads, or knockdown family homes.
Oppose all building Broadmoor farm/middle and North Hill crazy idea – will C140[1] destroy our town. C140[2] Charge for use of slipways never mind free cleaning. C140[3] Speed camera for old Ferry Road 20 miles an hour do not await a death. C141[4] Close Midway entrance to slipway old Ferry Road use entrance opposite Dan’s C141[5] court. Four staff already employed to collect fees
SUPPORT C141 Objective 4. Links to waterfront – bus transport from FORE Street – passing the station – linking to trains and pubs and clubs (waterfront) derelict pub to be Compulsorily purchased with a view to reopening as a pub with good food and parking – you couldn’t have a better location with river views. The station to incorporate in its development facilities to house the 100 foot Saltash embroidery project thereby providing a destination for visitors from the UK and abroad. French visitors have particularly enjoyed seeing it. I believe this argument was used when funding for the new station was bid for. I think the Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Brunel Museum in Bristol has superseded any hope that Saltash could compete with Brunel memorabilia. Objective 5 – to support the new housing – need schools, GP surgeries, play areas, you club segue Park. support with modifications. C142[1] P3. What has happened to the Broadmoor farm housing Road sports pitches C142[2] neighbourhood centre education? It is 2019 and this was proposed in 2014!! C142[3] P4 regenerate the town centre. Still empty shops. I bank only (Lloyds) policy to C142[4] restrict any further shopping khaki – but in 2019 McDonald’s, Costa, bargain C142[5] food et cetera plus traffic problem! C142[5] P6. Enhance the built environment. Impact on views and vistas. If Broadmoor C142[6] goes ahead is the development at North Hill and middle pill necessary? C142[7] Destroying an area of natural beauty! Flooding and drainage should be a vital consideration. Remember the problems at Salt Mill. P7. Manage the rural areas of the parish. Agriculture is of great importance if Brexit comes. There is a need to produce food. Meet the demands for community services. Education. There should be consultation between Academy trusts and the county authorities to see that either extensions or new schools are fully planned. Modifications. Parking of residents cars is a problem. Areas which need attention of Glebe Avenue from outside of Saltash Wesley Hillside junction with Glebe Avenue St George’s Road and other areas. Emergency services cannot gain access in some areas. We have a good bus service but if one wishes to travel to North Cornwall, Central and West Cornwall for work or leisure a car is necessary as journey time by public transport takes too long. support with modifications C143[1] objective 11. Improved sustainability/connectivity in relation particularly to traffic and its effects on health and pedestrian/resident safety. As a resident of North Road I am deeply concerned about the use of this road as a rat run (already) and the prospect of increased traffic as a result of developments (pill and Broadmoor farm) especially. There have already been three occasions of traffic congestion and idling traffic in the last week 28th of July 2019 two third of August 2019. This congestion is Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up very worrying from the health point of view in terms of emissions (not to mention sustainability/climate change). Also North Road is the route for emergency ambulances. If this is blocked/impeded this will impact on journey times to the hospital and potentially cause additional health impact/risk of death. When North Road is not subject to traffic jams it is treated as a rat run with vehicles passing at excessive speed, refusing to stop at pedestrian crossings and generally treating it as a motorway and not a residential area. My neighbours have suffered accidents as a result and myself I have had to run/jump out of the way frequently (I have recorded these incidents and have had other residents comment on similar issues). Councillor Derek Holly has been contacted recently by me on these matters. To summarise North Road is already suffering excessively from the effects of traffic volumes. The prospect of more is quite frankly unthinkable and goes against the ethos of this plan and devalues the health and well-being of residents and particularly pedestrians. The does this plan only apply to those Saltash residents not living in North Road? C143[2] Improvements 1. Traffic reduction – Saltash has long been in need of a Park and ride scheme/car share. Radical solutions such as toll incentives on the bridge against single occupancy vehicles as in Australia. 2. Prioritise pedestrian safety – will help get people out of their cars e.g. speed cameras enforcement of speed limits/discourage traffic from using North Road as a rat run. Improved signage emphasising special limits and residential area priority. support with modifications C144 P 8 I support the suggestion modifications. I would suggest a Park and ride to connect not only the centre of Saltash but also to carry on to Plymouth. support with modifications. C145 Believe you must be very careful to balance/reconcile any proposed building of any new housing close to Saltash. Surely Broadmoor should be enough to satisfy regulations. We need to protect all green spaces hedges and hedgerows and trees et cetera. Once lost they can never be got back. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Rural infill should definitely not be considered the greenfield sites with ever more lovely aspects and views lost forever. Improvements. Do not support more infill or building any sort of housing on current green space and feels close to Saltash. These are our very lungs and help give Saltash its character.
Costs of things like the “Cross” – should be advertised – and voted upon by C146[1] everyone – the extortionate cost of that could surely have been put to better C146[2] use – I have never spoken to anyone local who felt it was money well spent! Reducing pavement size outside Lidle to double exiting the new retail Park is surely obvious – locals cannot turn left – without queueing for an age – so simple but it seems not? objective 2. Saltash was a thriving market town. It needs helped to create that C147[1] feel, but, like Tavistock has done. Voted the best market town. It is a bit late to draw trade from all the Carkel superstores when they have been given permission to be there, through doing so the trade in Saltash has been hammered and that is to do with our town and county councils, there the fault lies. McDonald’s is a disaster we will have far too many fast food outlets. C147[2] P7. Objective 9. The league of Friends of St Barnabas have raised thousands of pounds over the years to keep the hospital a community hospital but still it has closed we need it reopened for our ever expanding community, this should be high priority. Improvements. Saltash is constantly expanding we need more doctors and more medical services, dentists, social care and quality assured residential and nursing homes. support with modifications. C148[1] 2 Green Blvd. I very much support this plan. As a pedestrian I can tell you that C148[2] walking along Callington Road in another direction is an absolute nightmare C148[3] when crossing Gill Ston Road C143[4] 4 waterfront. Steps with regard to flooding are very important. Particularly in view of projected rising sea levels. 7 trees objective. Yes, urgently so in the light of increasing air pollution and global warming. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Action re-dog fouling. Statistics show that Saltash has a serious problem with dog mess. Residents are well aware of this problem. The NDP has no plan to deal with this matter. I suggest appointing a dog warden. support. Objective 2. If possible try to prevent rises in retail outlets to allow C149[1] new and existing shops et cetera to remain in force Street. Avoid future parking C149[2] fee rises for the foreseeable future. C149[3] Objective 9 your response for 9 appears good, but will this be possible in the C149[4] present and settled political climate?. C149[5] Improvements. Make double yellow lines in outlying roads in Saltash to make these areas safer to get in and out of, and to make motorists use the car parks. Again, if possible, making compulsory purchase orders on deserted and dilapidated properties in the town if they have been abandoned for more than three years. Encourage new housing developments on infill sites in the town.
Support. Shopping in Fore Street. A great many kerbs are a bit hazardous! I’m C150[1] thinking of Bellevue Road. Any chance they can be levelled? Thank you. Well C150[2] done!
1 – EM2/3 pitiful failure to egress the Allston Road/Callington Road junction – C151[1] it’s so obvious. Why not forbade a right-hand turn and force all traffic to use the C151[2] pill mini roundabout? It was already bad with LIDL traffic, now litter chaos with C151[3] McDonald’s et cetera business retail Park. 2 – e-M1/H1 what is Plan B now that the Broadmoor developer has pulled out? 3 - waterfront – why is taking so long? Assets should have been handed over from Cornwall to years ago! support with modifications. New houses at Broadmoor farm but we should be C152 sure we have sufficient facilities for all transport, healthcare, education. Improvements. Provision of convalescent care perhaps at local nursing homes. It is not acceptable to be sending patients to discard. support. Green boulevard – Callington Road C153 improvements. Removal of overhead utilities to underground ducts by Western power and open reach. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up
I think some things need to be done about Carkeel roundabout before someone C154 is killed there. Horns are always heard and last week someone very fast went through just missed my car. There needs be lights to stop cars from coming out from Saltash side. (Not light in middle) and also yellow box. support with modifications. The waterfront needs to have brave and innovative C155[1] plans. It all needs knocking down and starting again. It is an absolute mess at C155[2] the moment, not all the social housing down. Relocate it and start with a clean sheet, or it will always be a hodgepodge Of bits and pieces Housing. Please, please let’s have some imaginative housing. We have some awful developments in Saltash. Please don’t repeat the mistakes of the past. oppose. Carkeel flyover?? Too late to consider. Say “no” to Broadmoor…. – Any C156 such person who planned this should have also planned a flyover in advance – now we already have total chaos at busy times. Already the 10 mile bridge is running at full capacity! Coping with 54,000 vehicles per 24-hour day – that’s one vehicle every 1.7 seconds! They have stated to me that coping with more traffic would result in having cues much longer than they are at present! Please do not increase the population of Saltash any more – say no to over government and make the right choice – cancel Broadmoor for good. Modifications. Allow another town to expand that doesn’t share our traffic and bridge problems! If the revenue prior to recent increase to the 10 mile bridge exceeds £23 million per annum why was that all increased? (From a very concerned Saltash resident). support with modifications. Saltash waterfront – improve access from town C157[1] centre – when?? There has been a lot of waffle over this subject for years but C157[2] nothing got done. C157[3] Postscript one. Recyclable items to be collected once a week! Yet another daft idea - people who are now too lazy to recycle won’t suddenly change because there will be a weekly collection was the household waste festers for two weeks. Postscript two. The hedges from the junction of weird Road and the comp have been ripped out (policy to protect) Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up oppose. The planned schedule overbuilding in Saltash is not warranted. The C158 services in the town cannot support the number of families propose to live here. The roads cannot support the number of cars per family. What Saltash needs is more green belt and tree areas. Middle and North pill should be used in this way and the Waterside should be for leisure activities for the population. No houses should be built there. It should be a green corridor. Improvements. Amenities do not exist for the size of population already living in Saltash. Make pillar green corridor/Riverside to attract population/visitors. Plant more trees to offset amount of traffic already using our roads.
Oppose. This plan seems to be little more than a glorified wish list. It does not Improvements. Don’t permit development of middle and North C159[1] provide any detail of how it will be achieved. Tables 1 and two are little more pill. Use the area to plant trees. To plant a forest of Cornwall, be C159[2] than blather. part of that. C159[3] The proposal to build 1000 at Broadmoor farm will move the centre of gravity Resolve the sewage treatment issue before allowing any more C159]4] away from Fore Street. More café’s are unlikely to encourage people to visit the large-scale housing development. C159[5] shops there unless they have some other purpose. Scrap town centre parking charges and encourage the return of C195[6] The statement on page 56 about sewage treatment capacity makes any thought banks and building societies to encourage people to use fore C159[7] of large-scale housing development meaningless. This issue needs to be Street. C159[8] resolved as a matter of urgency. Tables 1 and two ignore this problem. It is encouraging to see that the Broadmoor development includes C159[9] Figure 33 shows the Fore Street/St Stephens Rd/Callington Road/King Edwards employment allocation. Have any potential employers shown an Road junction reverting to the way it was about 30 years ago. St Stephens Rd interest in setting up their? carries a significant amount of traffic but would become a minor road again. I could not see any discussion of the junction at Stoughton Cross. There would be a very tight turn for buses turning left from Fore Street why With 1000 new homes and a new industrial estate this junction will change the current layout? become a lot busier than it is now. How will traffic be controlled Figure 34 shows a substantial reduction in the road space at the Burton Cross and routes to prevent gridlock on the A38? And A388? junction. As para 15.12 this is a busy junction! The traffic lights allow the traffic to flow. This proposal gridlock!! Why would anyone want to stopoff at this junction? Leave this junction as it is!
Support with modifications. C160 Objective 4 – Saltash waterfront. Now that we can control our own foreshore are bylaws passed by a previous counsel enforceable by Saltash Council? If so why haven’t they been so something /unreadable\ by Cornwall Council…..I have mentioned this to a previous counsellor but it was ignored. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Clean up the old boat by getting rid of them and enforced. There have been complaints in the press about this. To my knowledge one boat has been removed. What are the duties other than collecting fees for landing on the green jetty of the wardens?
Support with modifications C161[1] 1 steering committee – William Holman should not be the secretary of this C161[2] committee. As owner of a large part of the middle pill side he has a substantial C161[3] pecuniary interest in this project. His appointment is entirely inappropriate and C161[4] should be terminated immediately. C161[5] 2 figure 3 – SLT – H1 the site is in middle pill not North pill. C161[6] 3 policy GRN4 11.8 makes no mention of the flood risk to Salt Mill. Salt Mill C161[7] creek is subject to both tidal and surface water flooding including raw sewage. C161[8] Sewage treatment – can the proposed middle pill development be completed without enhancing the capacity of the existing Saltash sewage treatment facility. 4 section 9.2. North Pill should read middle pill. 5 ENV 8 figure 21 Add hillside and surrounding area – the Northern panorama 6 policy CON 2 – states nothing about the lack of pedestrian and cycle facilities in the Cutler’s Corner Granville Terrace and salt Mill areas. The absence of crossing points in the Cutler’s Corner area should be a matter of serious concern 7. General comments. It is disappointing to note that the town council supported the allocation of land and middle pill without any reference to Saltash residents. Land is available for development at latchbrook and is in a much better location than middle pill. It is close to the Broadmoor site It could easily be connected to the public utilities and services that will have to be constructed for that site. If the current owners are unwilling to develop the land at latchbrook but because of the current size of the proposed development then the land should be forfeit and sold to a developer who is prepared to carry out the work. I would like to thank the steering committee for the time and effort spent in formulating this plan. Thank you
Section 4. P19 – to make Saltash a sustainable town we need to aim for global C162[1] warming not to exceed 1.5°. One vulnerable area (re-flooding) is salt Mill – if C162[2] Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up regularly flooded or submerged – toxic material from landfill will be leached C162[3] into the Tamar.. C162[4] Section 4. P 20 – the boulevard sounds great – how about an electric tram to C162[5] run by it, ending by going down Fore Street and lower Fore Street to waterfront – with the aim of less cars and buses being used to access these areas. Section 6. P 26 – we need to encourage more individual, independent shops rather than national high street shops. Section 5/6. The installation of internal insulation in all new houses as well as solar panels should be mandatory Section 7. Areas of wildflowers to be planted and areas of grass and verges to be left wild where possible until late in the year.
Support with modifications the plan for a thousand homes and industrial park C163 at Broadmoor. Nowhere has the plan included the specifications for the treatment of the sewage and wastewater from this development. Oppose the development on pill – again no details about the treatment of sewage, or access by road. The present Lane would not be adequate. Pill is in an area of outstanding beauty and as such is a protected zone. The area should be left as a fresh air long for Saltash.
Support. C164 Objective 8. Setup of village development boundaries. Do not encroach into the countryside. Keep boundaries to prevent this happening. Do not allow planners to develop land outside of boundaries set. Protect the hamlets and villages!
Regenerate the town centre. All very well. How about a pavement for Carkeel? C165 We have to take our life in our hands to cross the very busy a 388. Only to have to cross it again to get to the shops!!! Improvements. Cameras in the village, motorbike as a racing track. Scrap the 40 mile an hour from my house to the roundabout (it is only a few hundred yards) that would be a start.
Support with modifications. C166 Objective 11: concerns over increased traffic on North Road. Currently suffers from alternative congestion/speeding traffic. Health and safety of residents Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up already compromised. This could be exacerbated by extra traffic from proposed developments. Improvements: prioritise residents/pedestrian safety. This way traffic from using North Road by signage, speed cameras and enforced traffic reduction plans for example differential tolls on bridge, park-and-ride, safe cycle/pedestrian routes.
Objective 7: natural environment. Bus drivers, complain about Long Park Road C167 and Fairmead where parents dump their cars. The road Fairmead Road up to Yellow Tor villa is ridiculous two cars cannot pass, large vehicles use it also. Just recently the cottage near (on the junction) which is listed was hit, the cottage opposite had their front wall caved in. This seriously needs to be sorted out. Also the school rat runs who use Fairmead have caused accidents speeding to get up Barkers Hill. Also apart from cutting grass outside Down Close bungalows the Fairmead Road needs also to be trimmed regularly and the lane we have to walk along (no pavement) opposite down close never gets maintained. It’s got to the stage where it is dangerous especially at night to walk through. Having to take your chances on the road. Improvements: 1. impose dedicated no parking times (school AM/PM on Long Park Road down to Church Road roundabout also promised double yellow lines, down from Burraton school (Fairmead). 2. Also promised years ago, designate 1 Way Fairmead Rd from T-junction Longlands/Barkers Hill Road up to Yellow Tor Villa (narrow road). Hedges are never trimmed, to stop dangerous school rat runs as they use Barkers Hill one-way. Also may reduce large vehicles trying to negotiate dangerous T-junction (properties have been damaged). We thought Barkers Hill was marked one way for buses to use (no service now).
I oppose the development and middle pill. C168 1. Lack of payments so dangerous 2. The road junction of old Ferry Road, new Road, the slip road and the China Fleet Road gets so congested – another 85+ houses would be a disaster! Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up 3. The flooding by Shute cottage at high tide makes the road impassable by foot and hazardous by car. 4. Why ruin another beautiful greenfield area when Broadmoor will accommodate a thousand houses?! please note – I recognise that this plan represents a massive amount of work C169[1] and is a major achievement. My comments are meant in a positive way and I C169[2] hope they are received as such. C169[3] Support with modifications. C169[4] Figure 4 P13 – no improvement plan for dangerous junction Ferry Road/North C169[5] Road. C169[6] 6 – P – regenerate town centre – fine words not much money, time scale C169[7] therefore meaningless. C169[8] 8 – P 35 – no mention of angling facilities – which was a major part of Saltash C169[9] Heritage – and is a major recreation for millions of people. 11 – P 54 – natural environment GRN1 natural corridor shown but new development will impact GRN 4 – flooding already occurs – plan to overcome it. Sewers surcharge now! P 22/71 Figure 6 and 28 Maps differ: please explain NP1. Policy CON8 – where are sustainable transport links for North/?Middle Pill? Fire engine access.?Plans don’t show a positive cycling environment for Middle Pill. 1 how about a manage declining shopping area. Develop a strategy. Encourage small specialist shops. 2 provide fishing facilities. For anglers. See petition. 3 plan to overcome flooding in middle pill? 4 plan to overcome dangerous roads and junction with Ferry Road et cetera 5 map showing flood areas. 6 show safe sustainable links for middle pill. 7 revised to overcome danger presented to cyclists and pedestrians cars and lorries see when 10 8 show how fire and ambulance et cetera can get to middle pill down existing roads allowing for traffic increase.
I moved to Beaumont Terrace four years ago as I fell in love with the quiet C170 country location with having five children it’s a perfect place for them to go up in. So as you can imagine the thought of 85 houses being built has made me Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up very upset. So many issues will occur if this goes ahead, e.g., Road the traffic buildup will be insane! My children and from school and by building the houses will make this dangerous for them. Why would I want this to happen! I am dead against 85 houses being built!! None of the houses to get built.
Oppose C171 Housing. When the plans for Broadmoor development were approved, it was on the understanding that the thousand new homes would be the full quota of new housing required in Saltash. I should like to know why the urban extension at Broadmoor is likely to be laid and why the town Council has to consider extra development if this is the case. It would appear that plans are being hatched to build extra housing disregarding the original promise. I sincerely hope that I am wrong.
Support. C172[1] 72[2] C172[2] CON 3, 4, 6. The exit from Lidl, McDonald’s and the nearby industrial estate C172[3] onto the Callington Road urgently needs rethinking and action. CON 7 to 10. Dangerous roads for cyclists and pedestrians is the section of the Callington Road between Carkel and Hatt. The provision of a safe lane should be a priority.
ENV1- general support. Particular need to maintain suburban villas character C173[1] without subdivision of property and gardens – once lost to development they C173[2] are gone forever. C173[3] ENV5 - general support. Station building restoration and the bringing into use C173[4] for commercial/leisure activities particularly useful. Waterside enhancement required, particularly of old Wheatsheaf pub – but not with a fast food type outlet. HW B 3 – support. Support St Barnabas proposals Modifications: consider providing transport between Waterside and Fore Street/Longstone Park in say August and at weekends. Encourage a ferry service to stop at Waterside at similar times.
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up my comments on the policies of the Saltash neighbourhood development plan C174 have already been submitted online. Please note that in my references to the plan development of a further 85 houses at North Pill, this should read middle pill. Please amend as necessary I did not have the chance to say previously that I very much welcome the draft plan overall, which despite the omission of the proposed development at middle pill (and the opportunity for Saltash residents to comment) is an impressive piece of work, forecasting a bright and pleasant future for the community of Saltash. Improvements: should this development of 85 houses at middle pill go ahead it will mean a loss of valuable green space for Saltash and exacerbate the traffic, drainage, flooding and environmental concerns that I have referred to previously. It is extremely important that no further development should ever take place in this special green corner of Saltash (e.g. at North Pill) and this should be made absolutely clear within the final plan
Support with modifications: whilst I support the neighbourhood plans overall C175 aims and objectives I do not support the allocation for development of land at middle pill. Along with others in my area it was made clear to the planning inspector as part of Cornwall Council DPD allocation consultation that we saw no evidence to support that there is a risk of under delivery at Broadmoor and therefore felt that middle pill should only be designated as a reserve site until there is evidence that the Broadmoor site is behind delivery target. It is disappointing to note that the town council supported the allocation to the site at middle pill without reference to members of the Association or to Saltash residents. The following problems must be taken into account: Road structure is inadequate to accommodate construction traffic for a considerable period of time I would cause much congestion. This road through Glanville Terrace is the only access exit for all existing residents and businesses and caps any pose a major safety issue as it would prohibit immediate access/exit for emergency services. The junction at Cutler’s corner where old Ferry Road and Glanville Terrace join old/new Road can already be very busy and at such times that it is necessary to close the Saltash tunnel, takes all the A 30 traffic to and from the tame bridge. Pedestrian access there is no pedestrian access along the road from Salt Mill to the China free grounds and this is a stretch of busy road where the speed limit Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up is 60 mph the pavement along Glanville Terrace is fairly narrow and for this reason it is often necessary for pedestrians, pushchairs and mobility scooters and wheelchairs to use the road instead. Flooding. Whilst there is mention in GRN for paragraph 11.8 of flooding at fall et cetera there is no mention that Salt Mill is also liable to tidal flooding which results in sewage being discharged onto the road at Salt Mill. Protecting green spaces. It should be made clear in the plan that no further developments e.g. Northville should take place in the future.
Support with modifications: Improvements: C176[1] bring more shops into Fore Street. Needed – grocer, vegetables, fresh fish 1 improve bus service links around the town C176[2] shops,. Co-op does not have everything! As people get older they rely on local 2 Improve St cleaning in North Road, new Road, old Ferry Road, C176[3] shops as they cannot drive to supermarkets and many do not have cars anyway. Waterside. 3 when Broadmoor has been completed – Callington C176[4] Local bus services to Fore Street. There is no bus service (only national coaches) Road needs widening, better public transport along North Road, new Road, old Ferry Road. Nothing to Waterside, Forder. 4 Saltash station. The up platform needs attention – raising to There is only one. In North Road (at the top). The 72 was rerouted to St allow passengers to get on and off! Stephen’s! No bus service to ST Barnabas Hospital
it is vital in any development of Saltash that there is a proper transport C177[1] infrastructure to support it – utilising trains and ferries.
Also that with new housing, education is fully established with new skills rather C177[2] than just cramming extra students into existing ones so that Saltash.net doesn’t not expand beyond its capabilities.
Great untapped potential regarding tourism in Saltash – the railway station building should become a proper tourist information centre and build on the C177[3] Brunel legacy with links to the museum, bridge project and down to the waterfront.
Support St Barnabas staying open. C177[4]
I oppose the H1 area proposal on the grounds that it does not protect green C178 spaces which are important to the character of Saltash when they are placed close to the lower estate (Newman Road et cetera) Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up I am also concerned that the junction with old Ferry Road and North Road is already busy and additional housing in H1 would greatly worsen the situation. The provision for pedestrians and cyclists on the roads involved is inadequate Improvements: concentrate on minimising delays to the Broadmoor development rather than affecting the high quality landscape in the H1 area.
• Policy HWB 4 support. GP and health buildings. Retain St Barnabas for health C179 use.
Support C180
Policies on sustainable neighbourhoods & new housing. Specifically, for learning C181 - disabled persons and special needs. In recent years there have been closures of privately-owned residential facilities for disabled persons in Saltash leading to a dispersal of the residents with negative consequences to their lives. Also making it difficult for clubs etc. that served their social and recreational needs. It would be desirable if there could be additional provision to supplement the current provision. The Town centre is vital for the success of a community that can feel connected C182 to all of Saltash. The use of available buildings for social activities and group meetings for those who wish to partake in activities. Have a sensible rate/rent cost for people who are starting out on a new venture Pot hole, weed free streets - use street brushing instead of weed killer. C183 Regular emptying of litter bins and increase the number of bins around the town. Plant more trees and flowering shrubs around the town. Regular police surveillance. Improve the shop front appearance in Fore St. Cleaner street signs. Support C184
Provision of housing/accommodation for retired home owners eg. McCarthy C185[1] Stone type apartments. This would potentially release 'family houses' for younger people.
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look- Up Action is needed on the roundabout at carkeel - particularly for the Saltash C185[2] traffic trying to cross roundabout & exposed at light whilst waiting for green light. CON 2 Quality of air, impact on residents, noise levels. We have already seen 2 C186 accidents to the tunnel closures. We have had a lot of near misses with youngsters on skateboards and scooters racing down to Saltmill park. The rest of the plans are very well thought out. The plan makes no reference to policing. The closure of the police station and C187[1] the lack of visible policing in Saltash is an issue that needs to be addressed.
Housing provision in the plan is at odds with the idea of promoting the economy. Remove all reference to 'affordable housing' and include a statement C187[2] along the lines of 'our town must strive to attract more wealthy inhabitants and to this end must only allow houses to be erected that have a starting price of over £800,000"
Appendix D: Pre-submission consultation (Regulation 14) Consultee Comments and Reference Look-Up: Developers/Land Owners and Reference Look-Up
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look-Up RPP on behalf of Mr and Mrs Simon Shaw D1
After my initial site visit and doing normal research I found that the first Draft Saltash Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) has been formally published for consultations and is currently out for comments until the 14th August 2019. Policy RU2 - 'village settlement boundaries and rural housing' shows the paddock the subject of this pre-application submission as being designated for a rural housing development of up to 5 dwellings. The applicants/landowners have responded saying they have no objection to this small scale residential land allocation in the draft NDP for Saltash. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look-Up For your full information there is a current pre-application consultation submission made on behalf of Mr and Mrs S Shaw registered with Cornwall Council under reference PA19/01882/PREAPP ; the case officer is George Shirley.
Proposal: Proposed 'rounding off' development (5 detached dwellings) including landscaping proposals and use of the existing access onto Broad Lane; on land to the South and adjacent to Luces Tenament Broad Lane Trematon Saltash PL12 4QP
The said pre-app submission, which seeks Cornwall Council officers views on the proposed development site, can be found at: http://planning.cornwall.gov.uk/online-applications/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage
The application site boundary is at slight variance with the rural housing site allocation in the draft NDL for Saltash, as shown in figure 3 below. Justification for this is set out in the covering letter to the pre-app submission.
It will be noted that my professional opinion is that Trematon is an existing, recognised settlement; and that the proposals reasonably accord with Policy 3 of CLPSP and the interrelated advice contained within Chief Planning Officer's Advice Note: Infill/rounding off.
I furthermore suggest that the slight modification to the Trematon Site boundary is justified and in the interests of nearby residents, the village itself, and the countryside setting.
Figure 2: Trematon Settlement Boundary (extract from first Draft NDP for Saltash). Also showing the proposed designated rural housing site in red colouring. Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look-Up
Figure 3: Indicative site layout. To be noted that the application site boundary is at slight variance with the rural housing site allocation in the draft NDL for Saltash (Figure 2 above). Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look-Up
These representations have been prepared by Lichfields on behalf of CEG Land Promotions Ltd (CEG) in response to the first draft of the Saltash Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP). These comments are made in the context of the site known as Broadmoor Farm, now ‘Treledan’, which is being brought forward by CEG (the ‘developer’) and WH Bond & Sons Limited and Bond Holdings Limited (the ‘landowner’) following the grant of hybrid planning permission ref. PA14/02447 in October 2017 for: “Hybrid application comprising Outline permission for a mixed use residential-led development, including, preparatory works including demolition of existing farm buildings as necessary; up to 1000 residential units (Use Class C3); care home up to 80 beds or sheltered housing up to 50 units, or combination thereof (Use classes C2/C3); up to 6 hectares of employment land (Use classes B1/B2/B8); 1 neighbourhood centre approximately one hectare, including uses in use Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look-Up classes A1/A2/A3/A4/A5 (up to 1000 sqm, including convenience store up to 400 sqm), B1a, C3, D1/D2, with associated car parking, landscaping works (including a village square) and public realm; one commercial centre approximately 0.5 hectares (including uses in use classes A1/A2/A3/A4/A5 (including convenience store up to 60 sqm), C1 (including hotel of up to 60 bedrooms), C3, D1/D2) with associated car parking, landscaping works (including a central space) and public realm; education facilities (including a minimum 1.3 hectare site for primary school); open space including parks, amenity green space, natural and semi-natural green spaces, outdoor sports provision, facilities for children and young people, allotments, community orchards and forest gardens; associated infrastructure works (undergrounding of overhead electrical power lines, internal access roads, footpaths/cycleways including a pedestrian bridge across the A38); and landscaping works (including surface water drainage and levelling/creation of earth bunds/mounds and detailed permission for the construction of a western access, comprising a roundabout and link road off the A38 and associated highways works, an eastern access comprising a roundabout off the A388; footpaths/cycleways, landscaping and associated engineering/infrastructure works, and improvements to the existing highway (including Carkeel/A38 and Avery Way/A388 roundabouts).” Scope of Representations Our review of the draft Saltash Neighbourhood Plan therefore focuses on points relating to the above Treledan development. Figure 6 – Saltash and Village Development Boundaries, (Including DPD Allocations For D2[1] Information) We note that in Figure 6, DPD housing allocation SLTU-E1 is separated into two parts. We request that this area is represented accurately, in line with Policy SLT-UE1 (Broadmoor Urban Extension) of the Cornwall Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD) (page 316) i.e. as one comprehensive site. The plan is shown below.
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look-Up
Further, we note that the extant Treledan planning permission comprised an extended red line site area to that included in the DPD site allocation (see Appendix 1) and this should be referenced for clarity. Policy EM1 - Access to Stoketon Cross Employment Allocation Evidence and explanation is required D2[2] in relation to the basis for draft Policy EM1. This does not appear to be in line with Policy SLT-E1 (Stoketon Cross) within the Cornwall Site Allocations DPD, nor the extant planning permission (ref. PA14/02447) and accompanying Section 106 legal agreement (S106). The latter sets out the required responsibilities of the applicant/landowner relating to access and public transport as part of the development, including the delivery of an interim and then full bus service which is linked to residential occupations, not the employment uses. The references to bus provision in part 2 of draft Policy EM1 therefore require review and amendment, in accordance with the approved development, as the Neighbourhood Plan should not be introducing new requirements beyond those secured by planning condition/obligation, which have been assessed and considered to meet the statutory tests. Policy TC1 – Development at Carkeel CEG is of course supportive of improvements being made to D2[3] the Carkeel area, and its Treledan development will play a key part in this. The areas shown on Figure 8 will act as a further gateway to the Treledan eastern access, to which improvements are being made as part of development. It is, however, unclear which DPD Policy TC1 relates to, and Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look-Up whether draft Policy TC1 relates to the entire area shown on Figure 8, which extends beyond Carkeel, or only the areas marked as ‘TC1’ on Figure 8. Should it relate to the latter only, then CEG is supportive of the approach taken. If it is the former, however, then the draft policy must be amended as, for instance, residential will not be ‘discouraged’ in SLTU-E1 and it will only be retail development which must be accompanied by a Retail Impact Assessment. On this basis, we request that the first sentence is amended to state: “In the Carkeel areas, as defined as ‘TC1’ on Figure 8…” Policy SN1 – Support for Sustainable Neighbourhood Centre at Treledan CEG support the intention D2[4] to create a sustainable neighbourhood centre at Treledan, as approved under hybrid permission ref. PA14/02447. Amendments are required, however, to the wording in the following paragraphs due to their restriction of uses at the Treledan neighbourhood centre. Fo For example, paragraph 7.4 refers to restricting the nature of proposed retail provision to a level that meets the everyday ‘corner shop’ needs of the residents. This is not referenced in Para 13.18 of the Allocations DPD and in any case does not align with the extant planning permission, which approves a foodstore with a maximum floorspace of 400sqm (as detailed in draft Policy SN1, which references the correct floorspace figures). Whether or not this equates to a ‘corner shop’ does not need to be qualified in this document. A reference to the floor area is adequate and precise. The following amendments are required: • 7.3 JUSTIFICATION: The major development at Broadmoor Farm (Treledan) will form a new neighbourhood for Salltash Saltash. This new neighbourhood should be sustainable, and incorporate provision to meet the new population’s everyday local needs, so provision for a neighbourhood centre with appropriate community facilities is planned for through DPD Policy SLT-UE1. This can include small shops (including convenience store up to 400sqm), financial and professional services, offices where the services are provided principally to visiting members of the public, restaurant/café uses, a pub or wine bar public houses/wine bar or other drinking establishment uses, take-away, small business space, residential flats units, a community hall and primary school. • 7.4 Policy SN1 Intention – Policy SN1 supports the creation of a neighbourhood centre for the new Broadmoor neighbourhood, but restricts the nature of the proposed retail provision to a level that meets only the everyday ‘corner shop’ needs of the residents within this new development, and will not have an adverse impact on the Town Centre in order to implement the intentions set out in Para 13.18 of the Allocations DPD. Policy H1 – Ensuring Housing Apportionment Target up to 2030 is Achieved D2[5] We appreciate that Policy H1 as drafted relates to a position should there be a problem with delivery of Treledan that reduces its ability to contribute the required completions for the Plan period. However, we also consider it important that the Saltash Neighbourhood Plan is clear that, should Cornwall’s housing need increase and/or further dwellings are required in Saltash, then Treledan will
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look-Up be the first site to be considered to meet this need, given its sustainable location and associated services/employment etc. Policy H2 – Ensuring A Choice Of Housing While CEG supports the aim of ensuring a choice of D2[6] housing within Saltash and the approved Treledan development will deliver a mix of housing sizes and types, it is unrealistic to suggest that all sites over 0.25 hectares will include all choices of housing referenced in Policy H2. Suggested amended wording as follows: • 1. On sites over 0.25 hectares in size residential developments will be supported if they provide a mix of formats and sizes of dwellings to ensure a range of housing choice is available to meet housing need. These should may include larger family and ‘aspirational homes’, bungalows, units that provide enhanced opportunities to ‘work from home’, and small dwellings for the young and elderly. Policy GRN2 – Trees, Cornish Hedges and Hedgerows Policy GRN2 part IV suggests the planting of D2[7] additional trees at a minimum of 3 trees for each dwelling, and 1 tree for each 50sqm of gross business floorspace. It also states a tree replacement ratio of 3:1 is required to ensure rapid canopy replacement upon the loss of any trees. We query the basis for this approach. CEG looks where possible to retain and incorporate trees, Cornish hedges and/or hedgerows, but part IV of this draft policy is considered overly prescriptive and does not allow for the necessary flexibility to respond to the quality of existing trees and their associated replacement. The approach set out under draft Policy GRN2 is not considered acceptable, as it cannot be expected that one poor quality tree is replaced by three good quality trees, and there will of course be site-specific restrictions. The policy should therefore be less prescriptive and build in flexibility where required. Policy GRN3 – Countryside Character Areas We propose the following amendments to the wording D2[8] of Policy GRN3: • 1.i. Include measures to ensure that no harm occurs to the key features of their landscape character, including good quality trees, meadows, Cornish hedges, hedgerows, ponds, springs, streams and rivers, and • 1.ii. incorporate existing public rights of way, parish paths and quiet byways in ways that minimise deviation. Policy GRN4 – Drainage and Flooding Part 4 of draft Policy GRN4 states that phased developments D2[9] should include a review of flood data available at the time of construction of each phase. We note that at the point of construction, the detailed design (including technical work and associated sign off) will have been undertaken. Further, with large sites that take a number of years to complete, the flooding/surface water strategy is approved at outline stage with details of that strategy required by condition. The overall strategy cannot be held open to review in the context of changing legislation as this could significantly affect the scheme’s viability and ultimately its deliverability. This
Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look-Up links to S106 planning obligations and conditions, all of which are agreed at planning stage, and a variation to the surface water management strategy could result in a need to review of the wider permission itself. As is common practice, the drainage strategy should therefore be agreed at the time of grant of planning permission and applied throughout the development of the site, with details of that strategy required by condition as necessary, to link to the detailed delivery of each phase. Figure 28 – Key Strategic and Local Green Spaces D2[10] Figure 28 links with Policy LEI1 (Key Strategic Open Spaces) and references Broadmoor Woods POS and Broadmoor Playing Fields in relation to the Treledan development. Figure 28 should align with the approved Treledan Parameter Plan (5. Landscape and Open Space Requirements) and we therefore request that this figure is updated – see Appendix 2 for the approved parameter plan, for ease of reference. Figure 35 – Cycle and Footpath Links Figure 35 should be updated to ensure it is consistent with the D2[11] approved Treledan Parameter Plan (7. Pedestrian/Cycle Routes), included at Appendix 3 for ease of reference. At present the cycle routes as shown on Figure 35 across the Treledan site do not reflect the approved routes. Alternative Approach D2[12] Notwithstanding the above amendments, and without prejudice to these, we consider there may be an alternative approach to be taken in relation to Treledan. Given the strategic nature of this site, its allocation within Cornwall’s Statutory Development Plan and in the context of the extant hybrid planning permission (which is soon to be implemented) there is no requirement for the Neighbourhood Plan to set out new site specific policies (i.e. draft policies EM1 and SN1). The site’s allocation informed the approved development, and the extant permission and associated S106 Agreement set the parameters and associated infrastructure requirements (including public transport) for this strategic site, as agreed with Cornwall Council and other consultees. On this basis policies EM1 and SN1 are not required and could be deleted. Summary We trust these representations are helpful and will be fully considered when reviewing the draft Saltash Neighbourhood Plan. CEG and the landowner clearly have a significant interest in the Saltash area as key place makers, and request that they are more closely engaged in advance of the next round of public consultation, to enable them to input to and help shape the next draft of the Neighbourhood Plan, before it is at public consultation stage. We would be grateful if the Neighbourhood Plan Team could contact us in this regard. In the meantime, if you require any further clarification on any of the points made please do not hesitate to contact my colleague James Burman or me. We would also be grateful if you could confirm receipt of these representations. • I own a plot on Woodside Fields Carkeel plot 283, title CL105324. Please tell me anything you know D3 about Woodside Fields, who owns the whole site and what future development is proposed. Thanks Appendix E Comments by Cornwall Council Officers and Reference Look-Up Comment Received Modification Suggested Reference Look-Up I note that there are a few anomalies in the maps which are included. Please could you ensure that the maps are consistent in outlining the E1 development boundaries on all maps so they correspond with the map ‘Fig 6’ which includes SLT – H1 within the development boundary and includes village development boundaries RU2. I note that Fig 21, 22, 28 and 35 include different development boundaries.