A contentious proposal to build houses off an existing estate came before a planning committee for a second time today (Monday, October 14) as concerns were again raised that it would be “very, very dangerous”, writes Local Democracy Reporter Lee Trewhela.

Lowen Heights Limited submitted a revised application to build seven homes on land off Boiler Works Road, North Roskear, Camborne, after councillors deferred a plan in the summer over access concerns through Barberry Way, a “congested cul-de-sac”. Residents have complained that emergency vehicles could have difficulty accessing the site via a narrow entrance.

At a meeting of Cornwall Council’s west area planning committee, Camborne town councillor James Ball said: “The revised plan does nothing to alleviate any of the concerns raised last time. Access to the site once it’s developed is still coming through Barberry Way. It would cause many issues if an emergency vehicle needs to access the development.”

He said that if the resident at No 9 Barberry Way had to erect scaffolding on his property it would completely block the access to the new development. Cllr Ball added that the construction phase would put a lot of pressure on an already busy junction, which is used by children walking to school, and could be “very, very dangerous”. The town council has recommend refusal.

Danny Green, the applicant, was next to speak at the meeting. He said: “Back in July you asked me to look at the plans and the concerns raised by the residents, which I have done and we’ve gone back to the drawing board. One of them was to remove the garages, which we have. We’ve added extra parking, so now there’s plans for seven houses with 14 parking spaces, which in unheard of.

“One of the main concerns, which I do agree with, is the construction traffic coming in through Barberry Way, even though this site already has planning and is policy compliant. I could start bringing construction traffic in through Barberry Way today. I’ve listened to the residents and I’ve taken heed and action, and have succeeded in negotiating a temporary access to bring in the construction vehicles. I’ve also put a traffic management plan together with conditions.

“I physically can do no more on this site. I feel I’ve made it much, much better. We need houses – I’m trying to supply seven houses here, which will help local first-time buyers get on the market. Highways are happy with his, planning consultants are happy with this. If it gets refused, I’ll go to appeal.”

Mr Green said the possibility of the entrance to the development being blocked if the neighbouring house had to erect scaffolding was not a “major issue, as highways wouldn’t have passed it”. He added that was a civil matter rather than a planning issue.

Local councillor Peter Perry said the temporary construction access in a nearby lane “cuts right across the footpath that leads from the shop which is used by a lot of mothers and toddlers. Those people would be at risk from the traffic using that narrow entrance. We want the houses but I cannot see a satisfactory way of getting them without a huge impact on the whole road structure [in that area of Camborne]”.

Cllr Mike Thomas added: “Anybody looking at this would say we are creating a situation that will put people potentially at risk. I can understand the parameters we’re in – we can’t do anything about it. It puts us in an invidious position.” Cllr John Thomas said: “We keep saying it’s a civil matter, but we’re potentially approving something to go through that hazardous entrance. I think there will be traffic and pedestrian conflict.”

Councillors were warned about refusing the application due to the entrance concerns next to the house on Barberry Way, as many houses are positioned right next to a road and it wasn’t a planning issue.

Cllr John Keeling said he 100 per cent understood fellow councillors’ concerns, but also accepted the officers’ comments and moved it should be approved. The vote was lost with four in favour, six against and one abstention.

Cllr Sally Anne Weedon believed the design was flawed and there needed to be a much safer access. Following officer advice, she proposed a deferral to ask the owner of the lane why the temporary entrance for construction traffic could not be used as the permanent entrance for the development, or alternatively ask the applicant to consider a revised layout for access. The committee voted in favour of deferral by ten votes with one abstention.