®Planning appeal decision
Meudon Hotel, Maenporth Road, Mawnan Smith, Falmouth, Cornwall, TR11 5HT
full planning application comprising 10 no. holiday units (C3) (total 1,615 sqm GIA) following demolition of two units in the grounds of Hotel Meudon; guest amenity building comprising swimming pool, restaurant, gym and fitness suite (C1) (total 235 sqm GIA); cycle store, greenhouse, bat roost building and substation; demolition of existing staff accommodation block, Bream House, Meudon Cottage and other ancillary garden structures; comprehensive landscaping scheme including biodiversity enhancements and planting to northern field and northern slopes of existing garden; together with other necessary infrastructure
- Authority
- Cornwall Council
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- leisure-sport · Major retail and services
- Inspector
- Fish A
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area including the Cornwall National Landscape (CNL)
- Whether the appeal site is in a suitable location having particular regard to the scale of the proposal and its accessibility by sustainable modes of transport
- The effect of the proposed development on the significance of heritage assets
- The effect of the proposed development on the integrity of the Fal and Helford SAC
- The effect of the proposal on protected species, with particular regard to bats
- Whether there are any material considerations, including benefits which would outweigh any identified harm
What decided it
The significant economic benefits of securing the long-term future of the hotel, together with the biodiversity and landscape benefits of garden investment, were found to outweigh the lower-end-of-spectrum harm to the CNL landscape and non-designated heritage asset.
The significant economic benefits (securing the hotel's future, jobs, tourist spend) and significant benefits from garden/landscape/biodiversity investment outweighed the lower-end-of-spectrum harm to the CNL landscape and non-designated heritage asset, so the balance tipped in favour of allowing the appeal despite conflict with the development plan.
Framework references: 89, 109, 183, 209, 182, 185, 85, 88, 56
Plan policies cited: Policy 12 of the LP, Policy 23 of the LP, Policy 5 of the LP, Policies 2, 3 and 7 of the LP, Policy 22 of the LP, Policy 4 of the NP, Policy 5 of the NP, Policy 6 of the NP, Policy G1 of the DPD, Policy G2 of the DPD
Judgments cited: Sheila Moore v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Suffolk Coastal District Council [2012] EWCA Civ 1202, 2012 WL 4050191
The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.