Onecornwallclr1
item1b
item1a2 item1a1b item1a1a1a2 item1a1a1a1b item1a1a1a1a2 item1a1a1a1a1b item1a1a1a1a1a2 item1a1a1a1a1a1b
item1a1a1a1a1a1a1

Wainhomes planning application: inspector allows the appeal and grants planning permission for 90 homes

The Wainhomes planning appeal public inquiry commenced in Truro on 10 February 2015 and ran for its scheduled 3 days.

Cornwall Council was represented by its in-house solicitor, its planning officer and a highways consultant. They presented the case for refusal of the appeal on the grounds of unsafe highways. Probus Parish Council was represented by a barrister and a highways consultant, with the parish clerk in attendance. They supported the line taken by Cornwall Council. I, as your Cornwall Councillor, spoke against the proposal as did other residents of Probus.

Wainhomes was represented by a barrister, a planning consultant and a highways consultant.

Evidence was heard over two days followed by discussions on the morning of the third day about possible conditions should the inspector find in favour of Wainhomes. Then the inspector and other parties carried out a site visit including walking all the roads in the area and viewing the junction of Tregony Road with the A390.

The inspector has now published his decision which was to allow the appeal and to grant planning permission for 90 homes on the land east of Tregony Road in Probus.

The main argument against the proposal made by Cornwall Council, Probus Parish Council and by me as your Cornwall Councillor was about the unsuitability of the roads in the area, specifically the narrow road into the village and the unsafe junction on to the A390. The inspector considered the arguments put forward and accepted that the roads and junctions were far from ideal and that the development would cause more traffic and inconvenience for road users. However, on balance, he felt that the benefits of providing more housing and, in particular, the affordable housing outweighed the road problems.

A copy of his decision can be downloaded from Wainhomes appeal decision

 

12 May 2015

 

item1a1a1b item1a1a2 item1a1b