Friday 17th November

All allegations of impropriety against Restormel Borough Council (RBC) would be withdrawn by Carlyon Bay Watch at the appropriate time during the public inquiry, said Mr Harry Spurr, barrister for RBC.

Therefore he would not be focusing on this issue any further.

Giving evidence on behalf of the council, Mr Tony Lee, Head of Planning Policy, said: “There is a lot of community support for this scheme. The Coliseum has a long history of leisure uses and low and high points in its history. Any development proposal that Restormel looked at would be considered on its merits as an asset to the borough for tourism.

“I can give planning advice to the council members but they will make up their own minds on the other issues. There was a long meeting with presentations from opposing factors and experts. I’m sure members understood what was being asked and the importance of carrying out a comparative analysis between the old and the new scheme.

“We were also responsible for approving plans for the Eden Project which one might argue was contrary to latest policy but look what that has done for the district.”

He believed the main issue was whether the new proposal provided a better level of protection that the1988 design. “Parties attending the inquiry will raise other issues but none will be as important. In determining the application, the council was clear that this proposal would provide a better level of defence. We took expert advice to independently verify the extensive submissions made on behalf of the applicant and nobody appears to be disputing this basic premise or has submitted credible evidence to the contrary.”

The Environmental Statement provided a realistic and adequate assessment of the known and predictable risks and effects associated with the proposed development and were supported by substantial research and technical detail which had been scrutinized by statutory consultees, appointed experts and interested parties.

Referring to the £3 million ‘pot of money’ that would be provided by Ampersand for use by the council to maintain the sea defences in the unlikely situation that it would be needed, Mr Lee said: “This issue was raised by Restormel fairly early on in the discussions in 2003 and Ampersand offered £3 million. I took advice from the Environment Agency and our own engineers and it was thought of as an over estimate and very reasonable. Its purpose is to carry out repairs in an emergency, not to replace the sea wall. Those repairs would probably be involving recharges to the beach rather than the wall itself.”

As far as claimed rights of way were concerned, if they were proven then there were a number of alternatives which could be considered and the development could be amended to allow for these

He said the beach at Carlyon Bay was unusually gritty due to the fact that it had evolved due to the industrial waste washed down from the clay pits. “It’s not the same as other beaches in the north of the county or other beaches in the area which are arguably nicer. It’s not very nice to walk on.”

“This proposal will update the defences to address the greater knowledge and understanding of the risks from changing weather patterns and rising sea level and will address government advice in PPG25. Accordingly, permission should be granted,” he said.

To view Mr Lee’s summary proof of evidence, click here.

Speaking on behalf of Cornwall County Council, Mr Robert Cocker said the highways department had been consulted on the application. When cross examined, he accepted that the construction traffic impacts could be mitigated to make them acceptable.

“I’m happy that there are workable measures and we would expect the contractor to enforce these measures,” he said. “If the agreed route was not adhered to, we would expect the planning officer to take enforcement action.”