Mabe: Housing numbers and Rural Parishes

The draft Cornwall Local Plan envisages that 500 dwellings will be added over a 20 year period to the existing housing stock in the rural Parishes of  Perranarworthal, Mylor, St Gluvias, Mabe, Budock, Constantine and Mawnan.  These Parishes comprise the rural elements of the Falmouth and Penryn Community Network Area

500 dwellings points towards an average additional 25 dwellings per year which equates to about 4 per year for each of the seven rural Parishes.  Expectation of local communities is of small scale developments: infills, use of brownfield sites and the like.  Not massive developments on agricultural land.  Indeed it can be no coincidence that Parish Plans, formulated before the initial consultation on the Cornwall Local Plan identify housing number increases in line with this average.

On Thursday 7th February Cornwall Council's Strategic Planning Committee considered a planning application for 90 dwellings in Mabe; more dwellings that the Parish Plan, based on extensive local consultation, expects for a 20 year period.  The Parish Council did not support the planning application on a number of grounds including the scale of the development, loss of a 'buffer strip', loss of grade 3a agricultural land and road safety concerns.

In case anyone should suspect a local nimbyism tendency this is not borne out by the fact that Mabe's dwelling numbers increased by 15% in the 20 years to 2010, against 14% for the entire Community Network Area, with the Parish Council having also supported the very extensive development of the University Campus at Tremough.  As an aside I suspect that in hosting Exeter University and Falmouth University, with Plymouth University operating the Tremough Innovation Centre, that Mabe Parish is home to more Universities then any other UK rural Parish.

Countering the over-development issue is the local affordable housing requirements.  The Planning Officer recommended approval on a number of grounds including the fact that 30% of the dwellings would be affordable, with the majority for rent at well below open market rates.  I have in recent years assisted a number of individuals and families with strong connections to Mabe who, through local affordable housing shortages, have to live elsewhere.  

My presentation to the Planning Committee - available as a webcast at http://connect.cornwall.public-i.tv/site/player/pl_v7.php?a=93891&t=&m=flash&l=en_GB - sought to address what are conflicting issues and whilst I started from the over-development position, reflecting the Parish Plan, did pay regard to all the issues.

Earlier in the meeting the chairman had made it clear that he would not allow members to question the local member - personally I'd have preferred to answer members questions to ensure that they had the fullest possible understanding of the issues - but instead had to say all I wanted to in one go.  This meant that I had to anticipate all possible outcomes including that the planning application might be approved and if it was I had to seek to secure the best deal for the local community.  Doing this without wanting to be seen to be in favour of or opposed to the application required a tight rope walking job.

The Planning Officer's recommendations including developer funded financial contributions to education, transport and open spaces.  I felt that any monies should be focused on local needs, rather than 'lost' to Cornwall wide budgets.  I am pleased that the Committee adopted my proposal that:

• the £164,160 school places contribution should be focused on Mabe Primary School,
• the transport improvement sum of £135,000 should, in part, be allocated to the planned Kernick roundabout pedestrian crossing with the balance allocated to Mabe Parish Council for other improvements,
• the £170,000 for 'open spaces' should be all allocated to Mabe Parish Council to ensure it is spent in accordance with local needs.

All-in-all I remain uneasy that the views of the local community, as set out in the Parish Plan, have been overlooked as regards housing numbers.  This does not sit easily with the localism agenda.  On the other hand the financial gains for the local community are not insignificant.  For example the Kernick pedestrian crossing, across the A39, will improve the 'walk to school' routes for Mabe Primary School and Penryn College whilst allowing greatly improved pedestrian access to retail outlets and Kernick Industrial Estate.

Did the Strategic Planning Committee make the right decision?  On the balance of all the material considerations I think they did.

 

Cornwall Council Tax: the case for no increase

Cornwall Council has published proposals for a 1.97% increase in Council tax for 2013/14.  This percentage is conveniently below the 2% level which would trigger a referendum.

Council tax is set by a meeting of all the councillors and whilst Cornwall Council's Cabinet have a duty to prove guidance on the level of Council tax they do not make the final decision. 

There has been some complaints that Central Government have somehow been unfair in their funding of local authorities, as the Coalition Government continues to address the financial mess it inherited from the last Labour Government.  These complaints carry little weight as increasingly it is accepted across the political spectrum that the Government has to balance the books.  It is impossible to continue to have expenditure exceed income with borrowing, repayable by future generations, filling the gap in the UK's finances.

Austerity is a necessary evil with the duty of Government to make certain that funding allocation is as fair as possible.  It is only right and proper that local authorities play their part in that process.

The argument will likely be trotted out at some stage that the proposed increase in Council tax is a matter of "a few pence a week per household".  This is clearly true however misses the bigger picture.

A quick look at the economic landscape shows there to be a number of these "few pence a week" demands on purses and wallets.  These include domestic fuel ( http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Markets/RetMkts/rmr/smr/Pages/indicators.aspx ) and motor vehicle fuel (  http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/take/oil-and-gas-price-forecast-for-2013/305 ).  Then there is food price inflation ( http://www.effp.com/knowledge-bank/price-forecast-analysis/effp_latest_forecast.aspx ) and the capping of welfare benefits as part of the austerity programme ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/9788019/Capping-welfare-benefits-is-the-moral-thing-to-do.html ).    It is worth pointing out that some of these factors are beyond any Governments control such as the price of crude oil however the Chancellor has shown himself willing to moderate the price of fuel at the pumps by scrapping the planned fuel duty escalation rise last Autumn ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/05/george-osborne-fuel-duty-autumn-statement ).  Offsetting these inflationary effects will be the rise in personal tax allowances taking effect in April 2013 which will reduce tax bills by up to £267 per year for standard rate tax payers.

There are many other inflationary pressures which in aggregate are far more than "a few pence a week".  It seems to me that Cornwall Council needs to remain a part of the austerity solution by continuing to exercise discipline to keep Council tax rates unchanged.  If it were to approve an increase, in part to fund the 20% increase in councillors' allowances, then I would regard the Council as failing to respond to the financial pressures facing individuals and families, many of whom are seeing no increase in their pre-tax incomes.

On the subject of councillors' allowances I voted not to increase them and am hopeful that before too long the Council has a further opportunity to discuss this issue and consider whether to reverse its previous decision.