Object to the Shipyard Application before it is too late.

The battle over the innovation-come-restaurant-come-unclear use building is still being fought. The building has been refused twice at committee stage, but with a slight change to the windows, a fourth incarnation of this building is winding its way through the planning system.

I have read the comment on Facebook and I am heartened to see so many comments that are supporting refusal. However, by commenting on Facebook will not stop this application from being approved. As people need to let planners and councillors on the planning committee this proposal is not wanted.

For this application to stand a chance of being refused, please take the 5 or 10 minutes to make you comment via the planning system by either online, email or in good old-fashioned letter form. Not just post on Facebook and think you have done your part. Ironically, it probably took longer to post on FB than it would via the official means. You could even cut and paste your comments from FB into an email etc.

The online way is via HERE or email planning@cornwall.gov.uk using the planning reference number in the header – PA18/06813

I have seen a few comments to ask how to object on planning terms. These three simple reasons are valid for any objection:

  • The proposed development is not in harmony in terms of shape, scale, massing, bulk and proportions with the existing character and appearance of the area;
  • The proposed development does not protect or enhance the character and appearance of the area;
  • The proposed design does not respond positively to the Porthleven Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy.

These points have formed the strong reasons for refusal(s) at the committee.

I ask you what would you prefer, take 5-10 minutes to make your objection known or having to look at the building for the next 50 plus years and wish it was never there. Once it is there, you cannot undo it. I know what I would rather do than see something that will result in harm to our much-loved Porthleven.

For a more in-depth objection you could use these reasons as follows:

The proposed development would, due to its scale, bulk and form, result in an imposing building which would fail to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and wider appreciation of Porthleven within the AONB landscape and harm the setting and appearance of non-designated heritage assets namely St Bartholomew Church and the stone boundary wall fronting Methleigh Bottoms.

The less than substantial harm identified would outweigh the benefits of the proposal and the development would be contrary to the aims of Policies 1, 2, 12, 23 and 24 of the Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies 2010-2030, paragraphs 7, 14, 17, 56, 57, 58,115, 126, 127, 131 and 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012, guidance within the Porthleven Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy and Cornwall AONB Management Plan 2016-2021 and Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990.

(Of course for those supporting this application are able to give supporting comments too).

7 comments

  • …thanks for update, as mentioned previously there are architects and their are architects. The building doesn’t need to look like this and maybe you could have word with the applicant to suggest he may have more success if he engaged an architect who was sympathetic to the historic environment.

  • Gilly Zella Martin

    Thank you for the update Andrew, and promoted timely reminder for which to lodge an objection.

    The proposed building will in my opinion be disproportionate in size to its surrounding buildings. It lacks an aesthetically pleasing characteristic appearance in contrast to existing historic neighbouring properties, and therefore will not be sympathetically in line to what should be a protected conservation area.
    Any proposed entry/exit into the Methleigh Bottoms Road will in my view cause a highways hazard near to the bend of an already busy main road, and at the very least, incur the ruination of an historic boundary wall. Porthleven is a unique historic fishing port and deserves the respect for which to retain its character in what is an area of outstanding natural beauty. The added traffic, lack of parking availability, and noise issue of a commercial building, for the closely situated residential area, would also I believe, impact on the lives of permanent residents.

  • K. Thomas

    I’m sorry Mr Gamblin, but it doesn’t matter what design Mr Osborne put forward it would not be acceptable to the objectors in Porthleven !!Every project he brings forward brings a barrage of objectors (the same names appear every time) to start the witch hunt!!!! Would you not think they would welcome new projects bringing jobs for our youngsters ?? The land in question is doing nothing !!

  • Gilly Zella Martin

    I would just like to clarify, I personally have in the past supported some of the planning proposals put forward by Mr Trevor Osborne, just one example is the huts/kiosk on the walkway on the harbour front, my support can be varified by my registered comments on the Cornwall Council planning website. There is no “witch hunt” as far as I am concerned, my opinions on every individual planning application submitted, are indeed based on what I believe long term would be right for Porthleven residents, whilst paying due cognizance to the protection of the visual appearance of a conversation zone. Additionally, as far as I am aware, I believe there has been no guarantee put forward as to the future long term use of the building, or whether any employment opportunities would benefit local people.

  • Holly SC

    For anyone that feels strongly about something I’m surprised they haven’t bothered to register their support on the planning website, I’ve read through all the names and there’s only a few supporters. I suppose those with a prejudicial interest can’t register their support though? At least those that object stand up to their opinions and register their objections.

  • Cllr. Mike Thomas as a Helston Councillor on the planning committee, voted in favour of it last time, yet in Helston they’re losing shops no end, and it can’t help not having decent bus shelters that would actually keep people dry and give them somewhere to sit, or any free car park parking other than a few time restricted bays. It was the council that prevented decent bus shelters, claiming they were restricted by the conservation area, yet here we had Cllr. Mike Thomas expecting Porthleven to have a monstrosity building in its conservation area.

  • christine Grogan

    In my opinion this proposed development should not get planning permission Porthleven is a village and although the boundaries are constantly being pushed we are what we are and to build something of this scale in such a prime position would be a travesty, especially as its very purpose is unclear if ,as suggested it may house a restaurant then I am doubly against it: one thing I am certain of is that Porthleven does NOT need another restaurant .we have an historic harbour and part of the charm of our village is our harbour and to put a building of this size and this modern a design would add nothing to our village and the view would be spoiled forever. If built we do not know what the impact would be as at the moment its very purpose is unclear I am not opposing Mr Osborne I am opposing a building that would, in my opinion, be too big, too modern, in the wrong place and one that as yet has no definitive purpose

Please feel free to leave a comment to the post, as I like to hear your views! However, comments that do not meet the rules of the site (found in Blog Disclaimer) will not be published. Furthermore, all comment need to be approved by admin before publication.