90-home housing development at Land West Of Victoria Road, Roche, St Austell

What was proposed

The application sought outline permission for 90 homes, including 23 affordable dwellings, with access, layout, scale and appearance submitted for approval.

“Information Classification: PUBLIC 1) Outline planning permission is sought for 90 homes, including 23 affordable dwellings, on 3.14 hectares of agricultural land which is situated directly to the north of Roche on the edge of the village and adjacent to the Finsbury Rise residential estate to the south and the Pentre Close development to the north.”

Officer report

Earlier applications and consultation

No planning history or pre-application discussion was identified, and the applicants did not consult the community before submitting the application.

“17) The applicants did not consult with the community prior to submission of the application.”

“18) There is no Planning History associated with the site and the applicants did not conduct a pre-application with the LPA.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended approval

Officers gave significant weight to housing, affordable homes and the sustainable location, finding that identified harms did not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

“2) The provision of housing, including affordable housing, during a declared housing crisis in Cornwall, at a location with good accessibility to services and facilities in Roche via sustainable modes of transport are the main benefits of this application. The social, economic and environmental benefits which would stem from this are significant and attract considerable weight in the planning balance in favour of approving the application.”

“3) The proposed introduction of a new housing development into undeveloped fields on the edge of the settlement would result in harm to the distinctive character of the site and immediate locality, and this harm weighs against approval.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant’s representative spoke in support of the application and answered questions from the committee.

The vote

Councillor Rowe proposed approval, Councillor Thomas seconded it, and members voted 11 in favour, with none against and no abstentions.

“Arising from consideration of the report and debate it was moved by Councillor Rowe, seconded by Councillor Thomas, and on a vote of 11 votes in favour, 0 against and 0 abstentions, it was:-”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee approved the application subject to the Section 106 agreement and report conditions, with delegated refusal if the agreement was not completed in time.

“RESOLVED that Application No. PA25/00472 be approved subject to: The completion of the Section 106 legal agreement; The planning conditions as set out in the report and; If the section 106 legal agreement is not completed in an appropriate timescale, delegated authority be granted to the Chief Planning Officer to refuse the application due to a failure to secure the necessary Section 106 legal agreement.”

“The reasons given by the Proposer for wishing to approve the application were as set out in the report.”

Minutes