OBJECTION TO
CARADON LOCAL PLAN – 1ST ALTERATION
AREAS BEING OBJECTED TO:
POLICY ALT 11 &
POLICY ALT 15
OBJECTORS: The Addington Environmental
Action Group
GROUP CONTACT: Mr R.F.K. WILTON
23
Moorland View
Liskeard
PL14
3TQ
Tel: 01579-343 111
Mob: 078-9901 7167
Email: WiltonK@talk21.com
DOCUMENT DATE:
In the submission of this document, we reserve the right not to be bound
or limited by it, now or at any time in the future. This is a “Point in Time”
document, the subject matter of which can be added to or expanded upon in any
way we see fit, with regards to the Caradon Local Plan, either in total or in
part, or any similar plan.
This document does not limit our legal rights in any way.
We strongly object to
the Caradon Council plans to grant building permission in the
areas covered by
Policy Alteration 11 and Policy Alteration 15,
for the following
reasons, not necessarily in order of importance:
1) The
Environmental Impact and Devastation to the Nature of
this
2) The
Quality of the Environment for the People of Addington
will be greatly reduced, as the Local Infrastructure
of Roads and Shops etc cannot cater for or sustain any further increase
in population for the Addington area.
3) The
previously ‘Council suggested’ site at Tencreek
offers a much better solution to the problem.
4) The Need for
the Housing being proposed for this area is not proved.
5) The
potential risk of increased Flash Flooding of the
River Seaton, in the lower valley areas.
6) The
Capacity of the nearby
7) What is being proposed for the ALT 15 site is not clear,
and can have some of the same impacts on the general area, as per the ALT 11
site.
These reasons are expanded upon in the following pages,
together with a Conclusion and Appendix
The Environmental Impact and
Devastation to the Nature of the Area
The valley area of this proposed site is one of the most
beautiful tracks of land in the region of Caradon.
The countryside that contains this valley runs un-broken
from Addington all the way to Caradon Hill itself.
The total landscape is one of beauty and wonder, which no visitors have failed to comment on.
This valley area is a natural treasure and asset for
Liskeard, particularly as it is so close to the town centre, and it should be
maintained for the future generations to come.
Equally important is the local flora, and the wildlife that roams and flies in the area of the intended site.
The area contains a great many
fully developed and established indigenous
Trees, together with many miles of old and flourishing Cornish Hedgerows.
These hedgerows with their
extensive flora and wildlife would be totally destroyed and devastated by the intended
development. This cannot be justified or allowed.
The beautiful and ancient
This lane is tree lined on both
sides and is fully canopied, for the whole of its length.
The amount of wildlife living in
this lane is numerous.
Many nature lovers walk in this
lane, to admire and awe at its beauty, and to enjoy watching what goes on with
the “local wildlife”.
This lane, and the fields either
side of it, are of extreme importance to the local creatures, for their
survival. This natural asset must be protected for the future population.
Families of Buzzards and Jackdaws have nested and lived in this area for as
long as people can remember. They must not be driven away.
The amount of other bird life in the area is also extensive, with many different
varieties, too numerous to mention here.
Many Badger sets exist on
this intended site. By law these sets
would need to remain undisturbed. This would be impossible in the middle of
a built up area.
Further more, on what would these
animals feed, in the middle of a housing area?
Wild Deer can be seen
roaming the area. What a wonderful thing for households living less than a mile
from the centre of the town.
There is the important question of
the Bat population which lives on this intended site.
These wonderful creatures are well
known to the local population, particularly those living in the areas nearby or
close to
Every night these Bats roam the area, both inside the
confines of the lane and beyond, and many
local people go out on the warmer evenings of the summer to watch the activity.
This Bat population will be totally devastated by any large amount of
building development in their vicinity.
Bats are a protected species, and must be protected from
this form of large scale encroachment into their “living and flying” areas.
It is the legal and moral duty of both Liskeard and Caradon
Councils to ensure that this protection of the local Bat Habitat is carried
out.
Note:
With immediate effect, it is recommended that a Tree
Preservation Order be taken out with respect to all the trees within the area
of ALT 11, in order to ensure their protection during the remaining time that
these local plans are under discussion.
The Quality of the
Environment for the People of Addington
The Quality of the Environment will be greatly reduced for
the people of Addington, and the other nearby population centres such as
Trevecca, Trembraze, Hendra and even Barras Cross.
The following points support this:
1)
The Local Infrastructure of the Roads will not cater for
this large INFLUX of people into the neighbourhood.
The addition of a link road
between the end of
How will all these extra people get to the centre of
Liskeard to do their shopping and other
business?
The present road from Addington to
the centre of town is already “jammed packed” at certain times of the day, thus
the resulting extra traffic will greatly add to the road overcrowding.
No solution has been proposed that
will overcome these future and sure problems, and indeed the Caradon Local Building Plan has not even considered these
difficulties of how the road from Addington to the town centre will be
effected.
2)
The neighbourhood of Addington has only one small shop.
Where are all these new inhabitants going to shop?
In the centre of town? The lack of
a good road infrastructure to the town centre has already been highlighted
above.
Is “out of town shopping” a
solution? Isn’t that just what the town council has been trying to prevent all
these past years?
Quite obviously the town of
The previously ‘Council
suggested’ site at Tencreek
This site was previously suggested
by Caradon Council in their proposal of
November 2000.
At that time it was stated that
this site had the least environmental impact on the surrounding area, when
compared to any of the other sites within the Liskeard local plan.
Additionally it was stated that
this site could be expanded and sustained almost without limit.
The site at Tencreek was considered “so good” that the
Council even had the road spurs built for it on the round-about at the A38 /
Why was this done, if the site was
not to be used at some time in the future?
Most importantly it is already on
route to
As the Central Government is
trying to make Liskeard an “over-spill area” for
It has no major building
difficulties, being largely flat and featureless, and also has little or no
flora or fauna problems. Additionally the
people of Liskeard have no personal or emotional attachments to this site,
hence there are NO OBJECTORS to it.
The only problems were the
difficulty of joining the A38, presumably in the southerly direction, and also
it was argumentative as to whether
it met the Central Governments requirement of being within a minimum distance
from the town centre.
Why has this site now been taken out of the current plan?
This question was asked at the
Not one single objection to this site had been made by any
member of the general public.
It was stated by the Planning
Officer present at the meeting that it was removed for the reasons previously stated,
i.e. the “A38 problem”, and to comply with the “distance from the centre of
town” requirement of Central Government.
Neither of these two reasons carry much weight, for the
following reasons:
1)
The “Centre of Town Distance” is argumentative,
as previously mentioned.
From where does one measure it, an
edge or a nebulous centre?
Also, when compared to Alt 11,
there really isn’t much difference in it, either way.
Just walk it and see.
2)
With respect to the A38, the same
problem would also exist for the existing
Also all the houses built
alongside
What is so special about the Tencreek site that it cannot
now be used?
It just doesn’t make sense.
Caradon Council must put forward better reasons than they
have so far.
Really good reasons that will seriously stand up to
argument.
Hiding behind a nebulous Central
Government requirement really is not good enough.
If the A38 really is such a
problem then presumably the Council will also hold any further expansion to the
Some comments, considered relevant at this point:
1)
On all Council Development Plans prior to the year 2000,
the ALT 11 site was declared a “Green Field Site”, and not
suitable for building.
What has changed its status now,
or its sudden suitability for building?
Was it a Central Government demand
/ directive or a genuine need?
2)
On this latest version of the
Local Plan, Saltash seems to have no
allocation to it.
Why is this? Why should Liskeard
have 1100 plus houses allocated to it, and Saltash have none.
Saltash is one of the natural overspill areas for
Surely the best place for a substantial amount of the Liskeard allocation is
actually in Saltash (and / or Torpoint), as this would certainly save a
large amount of unnecessary commuting along the A38, with all the benefits that
would bring to both the environment and the comfort and safety of the people
involved.
Locating houses in Liskeard will just encourage more
commuting in the future,
not lessen it. It’s “pie in the
sky” to think that any expansion of the Liskeard Business Parks will be enough
to absorb even a fraction of this planned population expansion for Liskeard.
Whether people like to face it or
not, the REAL “labour intensive” work is in the factories of
The best thing that Caradon Council can do is to re-instate
the Tencreek site onto the Local Plan, in order that this site can once again
be better assessed as an alternative site to ALT 11,
and at the same time move a substantial amount of this
housing to Saltash.
The need for the housing proposed for this
area is not proven
The Central Government in
Once this plan is implemented, we can never go back. We will have lost our rural status for all time.
The local plan that Caradon Council has put forward is a
surrender to
The planning number of 7100 houses, that has come from the
Central Government and forced into the
Whitehall does not take into account the previous local
Caradon requirement for housing, which was 3050 houses, as per the Cornwall
Structure Plan adopted in 1997, nor are they based on the local historical
population expansion rates of the area, for the years gone by.
This increase of 4050 houses is an increase of 133% over our
actual needs.
These figures are taken from the
Caradon Sustainability Appraisal, page 31, and clearly show the degree to which
we are all being exploited by the Central Government.
The words used by the authors of
the Sustainability Appraisal clearly indicate that they have difficulty
implementing plans with these large numbers, due to their “massive nature”.
As everyone knows, once statistics
are involved, and not facts, the requirements can be made to look anyway the
user wants them to look.
We could not be sure whether the
area needs 100 houses or 10,000 houses.
Even if one allows for the changing life styles of the population
(more single parent families etc) it is difficult to see why this large
increase in housing is necessary.
Are we really expecting such a
large INFLUX of people to our region?
The “juggling” of statistics has been used throughout
history to blind people to the truth.
Let our council go back to
Has Caradon Council taken up this fight with
If not, why not?
Our Cornish for-fathers were not
afraid to take up this type of challenge many years ago, in much more dangerous
times.
The Central Government is Black-Mailing the council, and this directive
should be recognised as such, and treated accordingly.
The question to be asked is “Why are so many houses required at exactly
this time, are why is the Planning Permission for them required so urgently?
Is it because the new EU Environment and Development Laws are
soon to become law in 2004?
These laws are based on the
All housing and planning
permission not passed before this law comes into effect would have to meet
these new laws, and
Whitehall is therefore trying to
“rush through” as many housing plans as possible before this legal date,
irrespective as to whether it is good for the various communities, or not.
For the next ten years or so, after this law comes into
effect, we will be building
large scale developments and their associated housing that
does not meet the Building and Environmental Standards in force at the time of
their construction.
This is possible because the new laws will not apply to
plans approved before these new laws come into force.
Is this not “slight of hand”? It may
be legal, but is it moral?
This local plan will encourage URBAN SPRAWL for our ancient country town, and once this has been
allowed to start, it will have no end. A
precedent will have been set, and future politicians and others will use it
to their advantage, for a long time to come.
We will fight this plan to the bitter end, and invite Liskeard and Caradon Councils to retract the
plan, and take up this fight with the Central Government in
which is their duty, as our Elected Representatives.
Liskeard and Caradon Councils and the Local People should
realise that one day this Central Government in
The potential risk of increased Flash
Flooding of the River Seaton
Many people are unaware that in
recent years, some “Flash Flooding” has already occurred in the lower valley
areas of the river.
Indeed, one resident of Popes Mill
has recently had to spend £5,000 on Flash Flood defences for his property,
including his dwelling.
The local inhabitants of these
river areas claim that Flash Flooding never occurred in the past, and that they
are occurring now because of the increase in high density building on tracks of
land that naturally drains into the river Seaton.
Both ALT 11 and ALT 15, and also the ALT 9
run-off’s to the river Seaton, and any building on these
areas will decrease the amount of water absorption by the land, and so increase
the potential for Flash Flooding of the areas downstream.
This Flash Flooding could become dramatic if large amounts of high density development and their
associated infrastructure is allowed to occur in these new areas under
consideration for that development.
What proposals have been put forward to attenuate and store
surface water from these new proposed developments?
Who will provide indemnity against any future flood risk to
the river valley areas?
The Addington Environmental Group
has taken notice of the “strong concern”
of the inhabitants of the river areas, and their insistence that this be
brought to the attention of Caradon Council, in consideration of this Local
Development Building Plan.
An independent Flash Flooding Impact Study for the river Seaton
should be carried out, before any consideration is made to take this Local Plan
further.
This study should be carried out
by Consultants that have been agreed to before hand by all parties concerned,
together with their terms of reference.
Caradon Council must have concern over this potential Flood
Risk Hazard, and take it seriously in their future Local Planning strategy for
these areas.
Now that it has been brought to the Council’s attention, a
legal obligation exists to ensure that the danger does not occur at any time in
the future, as a result of the Council’s action.
The capacity of the nearby
The
Have the Education Authorities
given an assessment to the Council as to whether the school has the capacity
and infrastructure to handle the anticipated number of extra students from the
600 new households of ALT 11, plus those from the other 500 new households also
in the Local Plan for Liskeard?
If the answer is no, not in its
present size, then has the school room for expansion on its current site, to
cater for the students from these additional 1100 Liskeard households?
If the answer to these questions is no, then how and where
would the additional schooling be provided?
Would even more mobile classrooms be needed in the attempt
to provide an education for our future local citizens?
These are very important questions to be asked of all our relevant local authorities,
and they demand very responsible answers.
Another consideration for the
parents of all the students is:
Do the parents want their children to be
attending a “massive size” school, like those in the higher population density
regions “up country”?
One would hope not, as experience
shows that in general the Quality of
Education suffers in inverse proportion to the number of students.
The larger the number of students, the poorer
the education.
What is being proposed for the ALT 15 site
is not clear
As the majority of the land
involved in this proposed development has considerable slopes, it will be very difficult to grade or
“flatten” in an attractive way.
Substantial retaining walls would probably be involved, and these could be unsightly.
Also what large or high fencing would be permitted?
This certainly has a visual impact on the area, and would probably restrict the movement of the
wildlife across the site, as would any large retaining walls.
Are any buildings or large structures being planned or
allowed on this intended site, to support
the sporting and recreational facilities?
If yes, what types of buildings would these be? This has not been made
clear.
The impression being given is that
only open land will be involved, but is this really the case, particularly as
the land is not flat, as previously mentioned, and developers might prefer to have “smaller activities” inside buildings,
rather than grade large areas of land for the “bigger sports” such as football,
rugby, cricket etc.
Presumably the planners have
looked at this land, and assessed its suitability for outdoor sports and
recreational activities. If they have, they should indicate which activities
would be suitable.
Conclusion
Many other questions could be
asked of this plan, such as:
Has the
capacity of the local police force to handle this increase in population been
fully evaluated, and if so with what result?
Has the
new local hospital been assessed for its capacity to handle the increased
numbers of people resulting from this plan?
Will
the new hospital being built have to be “down graded”, even before it’s
finished?
Has the
other medical and old age facilities been evaluated with this population
expansion in mind?
And
what about the other Emergency Infrastructure:
The
Fire Brigade, the Ambulance Service etc. etc. etc???
One could go on and on, but to sum up, quite simply Liskeard
is just not ready for this “giant leap of faith” that this plan is.
The Liskeard Council should reject it, the Caradon Council
should reject it, and most of all the People of Liskeard should reject it.
Appendix
Some suggestions follow that could
be considered for incorporation into any further alteration to the Local Plan,
should a decision be taken to continue further with it.
These suggestions do not imply any
agreement with the present Local Plan what so ever, and are made in good faith
in order to provide inputs for consideration to ensure that the least impact on
the Natural and General Environments take place, whatever the outcome of future
discussions.
1) A
substantial Green Belt should be kept either side of
2) A
substantial Green Belt should be kept between the current housing that borders
onto the ALT 11 area. This will lower the impact for the already established
housing.
3) A Green
Belt should also be kept either side of
4) A
substantial area of
ALT 11
site, and this
The top
of Trembraze lane would serve as a very convenient entrance for this
5) Every
effort must be made to protect all the wild life and flora in the area, both
during and after any development period. Their rights should be taken into full
consideration, even though they are unable to protest the situation.
6) Lower
height dwellings (bungalows) should be built on the remaining higher ground,
and double story dwellings should be kept lower down the site. This would
contribute to a much smaller visual environmental impact overall.
7) A
substantial reduction in the number of dwellings planned for ALT 11 should be
considered, as this would also go a long way to lowering the environmental
impact for all concerned, flora, fauna and people.
8) An
independent Flash Flooding Impact Study for the river Seaton must be carried
out, to prove that no dangers are involved for the effected areas along the
river banks. This study should include the effects of ALT 9, ALT 11 and ALT15.
Any
development plans must clearly show what precautions have been taken to avoid
these risks, and also state what indemnity has been provided within their
plans, should these precautions prove inadequate or fail.
9) It is
strongly recommended that the whole of the present Caradon Local Plan be
halted, and replaced with the newer Local
Development Framework Concept, which is more Environmentally Friendly, and
should at least offer the populace a better and more sustainable future in all
aspects of life.