Homes 'land grab' on Falmouth farmland like 'medieval pillaging'

First published in Cornwall
Last updated

Plans to develop fields on the outskirts of Falmouth, covering them with up to 300 houses were described as “medieval pillaging” at a meeting last week when the outline scheme was approved.

Cornwall Council’s strategic planning committee debated the plans for more than an hour when local town and county councillors spoke against the scheme, but were over-ruled when it came to the vote.

Persimmon Homes (SW) Ltd and Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd’s outline planning application for the land at Lower Kergilliack Farm, off Bickland Water Road, was approved subject to conditions and a section 106 obligation by 14 votes to six, with one abstention.

At the meeting, Cornwall Councillor Neil Hatton, who represents the parish of Budock, within which lies 95 per cent of the application site, said: “This to me is an example of medieval pillaging.

“This is land grab on a bad and awful scale and it will set a precedent where a town with constraints on where it can build - what else can it do but push out into neighbouring parishes and neighbouring parishes are very sensitive to their own identities. Falmouth is not suitable to have any more expansion of houses, certainly within its parish but at no cost should it be allowed to land grab across its borders.

“We are trying to conserve the identity of rural villages and this is one way certainly it will be destroyed.

“We are facing a situation where parishes are under threat of losing their identities, for what purpose? It’s not for the benefit of the parish.”

John Bastin, chairman of Budock Parish Council, said: “This land is a vital green field buffer of high amenity value between the communities of Budock and Falmouth. The retention of this buffer acts as a block to further prevent urban sprawl from Falmouth.

“The residents within this new development would have no natural allegiance to Budock parish but will consider themselves part of Falmouth.”

Cornwall Councillor Mark Kaczmarek, though, said: “Falmouth cannot go in any other direction than outwards and Falmouth is one of the largest towns in Cornwall. If we don’t build, all that does is force up house prices.

“We need to do this. There is pressure from people who want to stay in the community they were born in and brought up in.”

Cornwall Councillor Mary May added: “I do have feelings for Budock, but Falmouth is an up and coming town and Penryn has a uni town on its doorstep. This Budock site sits well with Mabe, it sits well with Truro and also sits well for Falmouth.

“I think it’s a difficult decision for councillors here today, but when you go knocking on people’s doors they are asking for affordable housing for their families.”

Of the 300 houses, around 105 will be affordable and the development will also include amenity space and a local centre, with shop. It is anticipated the development will take three years to complete.

Read the letter here

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:12pm Wed 10 Jul 13

Gillian Zella Martin 09 says...

I thought medieval pillaging was like when my neighbour wanted to take over my garden or wanted me to grow what he wants in it, and plucks all the weeds out from underneath my car when it is parked in the road and wants to build a shed in my garden.

Is the Falmouth/Budock argument to do with the respective areas keeping their own identities or is there more relevance to the objection to affordable housing and its occupants?
I thought medieval pillaging was like when my neighbour wanted to take over my garden or wanted me to grow what he wants in it, and plucks all the weeds out from underneath my car when it is parked in the road and wants to build a shed in my garden. Is the Falmouth/Budock argument to do with the respective areas keeping their own identities or is there more relevance to the objection to affordable housing and its occupants? Gillian Zella Martin 09
  • Score: 0

1:19pm Wed 10 Jul 13

upset resident says...

We need affordable housing etc. I also think if so many built, we would also need a new school, or are all children squeezing into St Francis school?
We need affordable housing etc. I also think if so many built, we would also need a new school, or are all children squeezing into St Francis school? upset resident
  • Score: 0

5:25pm Wed 10 Jul 13

Cornish heath says...

Whilst I can understand issues here, CC Hatton's comment is a bit over the top, especially with what he has supported in his own area, leaving some of us living with the consequences ad infinitum, and since when did Budock have any affinity with Truro !
Whilst I can understand issues here, CC Hatton's comment is a bit over the top, especially with what he has supported in his own area, leaving some of us living with the consequences ad infinitum, and since when did Budock have any affinity with Truro ! Cornish heath
  • Score: 0

5:46pm Wed 10 Jul 13

MARTIN GILL says...

I wonder if anyone has thought about the names for the new roads' for the Estate at Kergilliack? How about Eva Avenue, Bainbridge Close, Vicky Street, Kazcmarek Road, et al.

I would imagine that Carpet Cleaning businesses in the area would do well.
I wonder if anyone has thought about the names for the new roads' for the Estate at Kergilliack? How about Eva Avenue, Bainbridge Close, Vicky Street, Kazcmarek Road, et al. I would imagine that Carpet Cleaning businesses in the area would do well. MARTIN GILL
  • Score: 0

6:06pm Wed 10 Jul 13

Gillian Zella Martin 09 says...

Why would anyone want a carpet cleaned in a new build dwelling with brand new fittings lol
Why would anyone want a carpet cleaned in a new build dwelling with brand new fittings lol Gillian Zella Martin 09
  • Score: 0

6:36pm Wed 10 Jul 13

seacom says...

I would say yes it is an issue of identity for Budock as for affordable housing of course it is needed.But as most people agree on useing brownfield sites before green ,take a walk up the hill to the Budock hospital site.Publically owned land which could be 100% affordable or local authority for rent, built by the council for the council.This could reduce the local wating list by what 200 properties in one foul swoop.
I would say yes it is an issue of identity for Budock as for affordable housing of course it is needed.But as most people agree on useing brownfield sites before green ,take a walk up the hill to the Budock hospital site.Publically owned land which could be 100% affordable or local authority for rent, built by the council for the council.This could reduce the local wating list by what 200 properties in one foul swoop. seacom
  • Score: 0

6:36pm Wed 10 Jul 13

seacom says...

I would say yes it is an issue of identity for Budock as for affordable housing of course it is needed.But as most people agree on useing brownfield sites before green ,take a walk up the hill to the Budock hospital site.Publically owned land which could be 100% affordable or local authority for rent, built by the council for the council.This could reduce the local wating list by what 200 properties in one foul swoop.
I would say yes it is an issue of identity for Budock as for affordable housing of course it is needed.But as most people agree on useing brownfield sites before green ,take a walk up the hill to the Budock hospital site.Publically owned land which could be 100% affordable or local authority for rent, built by the council for the council.This could reduce the local wating list by what 200 properties in one foul swoop. seacom
  • Score: 0

7:19pm Wed 10 Jul 13

Gillian Zella Martin 09 says...

seacom wrote:
I would say yes it is an issue of identity for Budock as for affordable housing of course it is needed.But as most people agree on useing brownfield sites before green ,take a walk up the hill to the Budock hospital site.Publically owned land which could be 100% affordable or local authority for rent, built by the council for the council.This could reduce the local wating list by what 200 properties in one foul swoop.
I would like to see the council be responsible for some new build affordable houses, allocated to locals currently on the home choice register or for social rented, however, sadly, Cornwall Council I believe would not be in a financial position to so, nor would they be in a financial position to maintain them long term. I believe that is why a majority of council owned dwellings were transferred to non profit making housing associations to run a long time ago.
[quote][p][bold]seacom[/bold] wrote: I would say yes it is an issue of identity for Budock as for affordable housing of course it is needed.But as most people agree on useing brownfield sites before green ,take a walk up the hill to the Budock hospital site.Publically owned land which could be 100% affordable or local authority for rent, built by the council for the council.This could reduce the local wating list by what 200 properties in one foul swoop.[/p][/quote]I would like to see the council be responsible for some new build affordable houses, allocated to locals currently on the home choice register or for social rented, however, sadly, Cornwall Council I believe would not be in a financial position to so, nor would they be in a financial position to maintain them long term. I believe that is why a majority of council owned dwellings were transferred to non profit making housing associations to run a long time ago. Gillian Zella Martin 09
  • Score: 0

9:18pm Wed 10 Jul 13

seacom says...

Maybe its time to buck the trend of not building by the authority itself ,they do maintainance on the property stock they retain so could also manage on new property.The idea of dfferent government departments owning publc assets is really outdated ,these parcels of land and redundant buildings should be given to local authorities in order to ease the waiting lists not sold to the highest bidder.
Maybe its time to buck the trend of not building by the authority itself ,they do maintainance on the property stock they retain so could also manage on new property.The idea of dfferent government departments owning publc assets is really outdated ,these parcels of land and redundant buildings should be given to local authorities in order to ease the waiting lists not sold to the highest bidder. seacom
  • Score: 0

9:39pm Wed 10 Jul 13

Gillian Zella Martin 09 says...

seacom wrote:
Maybe its time to buck the trend of not building by the authority itself ,they do maintainance on the property stock they retain so could also manage on new property.The idea of dfferent government departments owning publc assets is really outdated ,these parcels of land and redundant buildings should be given to local authorities in order to ease the waiting lists not sold to the highest bidder.
In some cases the land is privately owned though, in which case it is up to the landowner to whom he sells his land, or if he chooses to build on it himself.
[quote][p][bold]seacom[/bold] wrote: Maybe its time to buck the trend of not building by the authority itself ,they do maintainance on the property stock they retain so could also manage on new property.The idea of dfferent government departments owning publc assets is really outdated ,these parcels of land and redundant buildings should be given to local authorities in order to ease the waiting lists not sold to the highest bidder.[/p][/quote]In some cases the land is privately owned though, in which case it is up to the landowner to whom he sells his land, or if he chooses to build on it himself. Gillian Zella Martin 09
  • Score: 0

10:14pm Wed 10 Jul 13

seacom says...

In this case though with a site so close at Budock hospital how can it be justified to lose green field agricultural land when an alternative is avilable?
In this case though with a site so close at Budock hospital how can it be justified to lose green field agricultural land when an alternative is avilable? seacom
  • Score: 0

12:51am Thu 11 Jul 13

Gillian Zella Martin 09 says...

seacom wrote:
In this case though with a site so close at Budock hospital how can it be justified to lose green field agricultural land when an alternative is avilable?
I don't know, have you contacted your local Councillors and asked them personally?
[quote][p][bold]seacom[/bold] wrote: In this case though with a site so close at Budock hospital how can it be justified to lose green field agricultural land when an alternative is avilable?[/p][/quote]I don't know, have you contacted your local Councillors and asked them personally? Gillian Zella Martin 09
  • Score: 0

6:29am Thu 11 Jul 13

seacom says...

As the article states local councillors are opposed to the plans and those i have spoken to have identified the Budock hospital site and other brownfield sites within Falmouth.But the trouble is one or two councillors seemed to change course when the wind changed ,any port in a storm so to say.
As the article states local councillors are opposed to the plans and those i have spoken to have identified the Budock hospital site and other brownfield sites within Falmouth.But the trouble is one or two councillors seemed to change course when the wind changed ,any port in a storm so to say. seacom
  • Score: 0

7:06am Thu 11 Jul 13

Gillian Zella Martin 09 says...

seacom wrote:
As the article states local councillors are opposed to the plans and those i have spoken to have identified the Budock hospital site and other brownfield sites within Falmouth.But the trouble is one or two councillors seemed to change course when the wind changed ,any port in a storm so to say.
As I understood it all the land for potential housing was earmarked and put on a list several years ago and this was agreed by the Falmouth Town Council at the time. Now some of those Falmouth Town Councillors are objecting to it and the list had to be referred to in order to show what was previously agreed.
[quote][p][bold]seacom[/bold] wrote: As the article states local councillors are opposed to the plans and those i have spoken to have identified the Budock hospital site and other brownfield sites within Falmouth.But the trouble is one or two councillors seemed to change course when the wind changed ,any port in a storm so to say.[/p][/quote]As I understood it all the land for potential housing was earmarked and put on a list several years ago and this was agreed by the Falmouth Town Council at the time. Now some of those Falmouth Town Councillors are objecting to it and the list had to be referred to in order to show what was previously agreed. Gillian Zella Martin 09
  • Score: 0

9:19am Thu 11 Jul 13

ucsweb says...

Some of the comments about this are so daft it almost defies belief.
Falmouth and the surrounding area is not what it was several years ago.
If the councillors don't know what is needed in the area and don't know what the voters want then perhaps they should not be councillors.
The continual building of a large majority of homes for the housing market is not solving the housing problem it is causing it!
The policy should be that ALL new homes are affordable until the local housing problem becomes manageable. I have read that if there is not enough profit the builders will not build, rubbish! They will adapt their business model to suit the conditions. Let the existing market and housing stock carry the burden of people who want to move into the area.
It will only make the problem worse if the ratio of new homes is a lot larger than that of affordable.
Also, all the affordable homes should be for rent so that they are always affordable.
Some of the comments about this are so daft it almost defies belief. Falmouth and the surrounding area is not what it was several years ago. If the councillors don't know what is needed in the area and don't know what the voters want then perhaps they should not be councillors. The continual building of a large majority of homes for the housing market is not solving the housing problem it is causing it! The policy should be that ALL new homes are affordable until the local housing problem becomes manageable. I have read that if there is not enough profit the builders will not build, rubbish! They will adapt their business model to suit the conditions. Let the existing market and housing stock carry the burden of people who want to move into the area. It will only make the problem worse if the ratio of new homes is a lot larger than that of affordable. Also, all the affordable homes should be for rent so that they are always affordable. ucsweb
  • Score: 1

1:09pm Thu 11 Jul 13

MARTIN GILL says...

I totally agree with those comments about the former Budock Hospital site. We thought that when the demolition of the Buildings took place, that there would indeed be new homes built. The Field opposite which has longed been used by Falmouth School, could also have been earmarked for Housing. Those idiots on Cornwall Council Planning Committee, should have had a meeting at the proposed site for 300 homes to at least seen for themselves what an outstanding area of Countryside it is.
I fear that Budock Water, which is virtually a crime free Village, will see more in the way of incidents of Burglary when the new Estate is built. I know that Prislow Fields has its share of 'low life' residents living in Social Housing, and no doubt some of the people on the Kergilliack Estate will be housed in a similar type of accommodation .
I totally agree with those comments about the former Budock Hospital site. We thought that when the demolition of the Buildings took place, that there would indeed be new homes built. The Field opposite which has longed been used by Falmouth School, could also have been earmarked for Housing. Those idiots on Cornwall Council Planning Committee, should have had a meeting at the proposed site for 300 homes to at least seen for themselves what an outstanding area of Countryside it is. I fear that Budock Water, which is virtually a crime free Village, will see more in the way of incidents of Burglary when the new Estate is built. I know that Prislow Fields has its share of 'low life' residents living in Social Housing, and no doubt some of the people on the Kergilliack Estate will be housed in a similar type of accommodation . MARTIN GILL
  • Score: -1

1:22pm Thu 11 Jul 13

Gillian Zella Martin 09 says...

ucsweb wrote:
Some of the comments about this are so daft it almost defies belief.
Falmouth and the surrounding area is not what it was several years ago.
If the councillors don't know what is needed in the area and don't know what the voters want then perhaps they should not be councillors.
The continual building of a large majority of homes for the housing market is not solving the housing problem it is causing it!
The policy should be that ALL new homes are affordable until the local housing problem becomes manageable. I have read that if there is not enough profit the builders will not build, rubbish! They will adapt their business model to suit the conditions. Let the existing market and housing stock carry the burden of people who want to move into the area.
It will only make the problem worse if the ratio of new homes is a lot larger than that of affordable.
Also, all the affordable homes should be for rent so that they are always affordable.
In an ideal world that would be the case, however, because the government refused to allow a change in legislation that Cornwall Council proposed, which would have given them the ability to monitor and limit homes built for use as second homes, holiday lets or the conversion of existing dwellings into second homes/holiday lets, then the only alternative is to build. It would appear to be a government mandate.
I would like to see more homes to rent, however, the affordable homes to buy will remain affordable as they will be restricted with any future transfer of ownership.
[quote][p][bold]ucsweb[/bold] wrote: Some of the comments about this are so daft it almost defies belief. Falmouth and the surrounding area is not what it was several years ago. If the councillors don't know what is needed in the area and don't know what the voters want then perhaps they should not be councillors. The continual building of a large majority of homes for the housing market is not solving the housing problem it is causing it! The policy should be that ALL new homes are affordable until the local housing problem becomes manageable. I have read that if there is not enough profit the builders will not build, rubbish! They will adapt their business model to suit the conditions. Let the existing market and housing stock carry the burden of people who want to move into the area. It will only make the problem worse if the ratio of new homes is a lot larger than that of affordable. Also, all the affordable homes should be for rent so that they are always affordable.[/p][/quote]In an ideal world that would be the case, however, because the government refused to allow a change in legislation that Cornwall Council proposed, which would have given them the ability to monitor and limit homes built for use as second homes, holiday lets or the conversion of existing dwellings into second homes/holiday lets, then the only alternative is to build. It would appear to be a government mandate. I would like to see more homes to rent, however, the affordable homes to buy will remain affordable as they will be restricted with any future transfer of ownership. Gillian Zella Martin 09
  • Score: 0

6:47pm Thu 11 Jul 13

jobsworthy says...

no one seems to question why more houses (for general sale ) are being approved- from what I can see on the website of wainhomes swanvale development, they have not sold a single property in about 8 weeks and have now reduced some of their prices by 10% (they can afford to do so - existing home owners cannot) is getting social housing built for them the only reason that the council approves these developments? I am guessing that wainhomes still have about 150 homes yet to build and sell at that site! if you think depressing house process in the area only affects home owners with large mortgages, think again - landlords are investors - if there is no gain on the capital value of their properties they will look to increased rental yield!
no one seems to question why more houses (for general sale ) are being approved- from what I can see on the website of wainhomes swanvale development, they have not sold a single property in about 8 weeks and have now reduced some of their prices by 10% (they can afford to do so - existing home owners cannot) is getting social housing built for them the only reason that the council approves these developments? I am guessing that wainhomes still have about 150 homes yet to build and sell at that site! if you think depressing house process in the area only affects home owners with large mortgages, think again - landlords are investors - if there is no gain on the capital value of their properties they will look to increased rental yield! jobsworthy
  • Score: 0

11:11am Fri 12 Jul 13

MARTIN GILL says...

jobsworthy wrote:
no one seems to question why more houses (for general sale ) are being approved- from what I can see on the website of wainhomes swanvale development, they have not sold a single property in about 8 weeks and have now reduced some of their prices by 10% (they can afford to do so - existing home owners cannot) is getting social housing built for them the only reason that the council approves these developments? I am guessing that wainhomes still have about 150 homes yet to build and sell at that site! if you think depressing house process in the area only affects home owners with large mortgages, think again - landlords are investors - if there is no gain on the capital value of their properties they will look to increased rental yield!
You are quite right about Wain Homes. I saw the plans in 1997 for their development at Goldenbank before they were made public. Every House went for general sale, and i believe that is why over the years there has been such a shortage of housing for first time buyers. You would think, that building a large number of Houses at Swanvale would suppress any need to build elsewhere. But those Tyrants on the Cornwall Council Planning Committee have gone against the Falmouth Town Council and Budock Parish Council and voted to build at Kergilliack. I notice in this weeks West Briton that they intend to build up to 400 Houses in the College Valley, Penryn. So you can now see the way they are thinking; build from Mabe right the way across to Higher Kergilliack . Once again, Cornwall Council are intent on destroying further areas of open Countryside, and no amount of protests will sway them.
[quote][p][bold]jobsworthy[/bold] wrote: no one seems to question why more houses (for general sale ) are being approved- from what I can see on the website of wainhomes swanvale development, they have not sold a single property in about 8 weeks and have now reduced some of their prices by 10% (they can afford to do so - existing home owners cannot) is getting social housing built for them the only reason that the council approves these developments? I am guessing that wainhomes still have about 150 homes yet to build and sell at that site! if you think depressing house process in the area only affects home owners with large mortgages, think again - landlords are investors - if there is no gain on the capital value of their properties they will look to increased rental yield![/p][/quote]You are quite right about Wain Homes. I saw the plans in 1997 for their development at Goldenbank before they were made public. Every House went for general sale, and i believe that is why over the years there has been such a shortage of housing for first time buyers. You would think, that building a large number of Houses at Swanvale would suppress any need to build elsewhere. But those Tyrants on the Cornwall Council Planning Committee have gone against the Falmouth Town Council and Budock Parish Council and voted to build at Kergilliack. I notice in this weeks West Briton that they intend to build up to 400 Houses in the College Valley, Penryn. So you can now see the way they are thinking; build from Mabe right the way across to Higher Kergilliack . Once again, Cornwall Council are intent on destroying further areas of open Countryside, and no amount of protests will sway them. MARTIN GILL
  • Score: 0

12:58pm Fri 12 Jul 13

ucsweb says...

Shouldn't Cornwall Council and its employees be looking after the interests of the residents / voters / council tax payers, and not the commercial interests of the builders?
If the existing new houses are not selling why allow the building of more? The same with industrial units, if there are many empty, why allow the building of more?
Who is supposed to be buying them?
Shouldn't Cornwall Council and its employees be looking after the interests of the residents / voters / council tax payers, and not the commercial interests of the builders? If the existing new houses are not selling why allow the building of more? The same with industrial units, if there are many empty, why allow the building of more? Who is supposed to be buying them? ucsweb
  • Score: 0

1:33pm Fri 12 Jul 13

juwhite says...

I seem to remember that when the Budock Hospital was closed several years ago now it was proposed to build on the land so what has happened to these plans?? I am all for more affordable housing been built but on brownfield sites first not on agricultural land. How many of us can remember what the Bickland Water Road looked like before it was extended the industrial estate built up and then of course the Wainhomes. This was a single track lane at some points and of course we had the Docks Football pitch there. Enough land has been lost. If this amount of homes are to be built then the whole infrastructure needs to be changed with more schools been built etc as the primary schools cant cope as it is and soon neither will the secondary school. Lets not forget either that there is Falmouth and Budock Water both have separate identities and lets keep it that way.
I seem to remember that when the Budock Hospital was closed several years ago now it was proposed to build on the land so what has happened to these plans?? I am all for more affordable housing been built but on brownfield sites first not on agricultural land. How many of us can remember what the Bickland Water Road looked like before it was extended the industrial estate built up and then of course the Wainhomes. This was a single track lane at some points and of course we had the Docks Football pitch there. Enough land has been lost. If this amount of homes are to be built then the whole infrastructure needs to be changed with more schools been built etc as the primary schools cant cope as it is and soon neither will the secondary school. Lets not forget either that there is Falmouth and Budock Water both have separate identities and lets keep it that way. juwhite
  • Score: 0

5:26pm Fri 12 Jul 13

ucsweb says...

I seem to recall that Budock was going to be replaced with a nice big new hospital for the area.
I seem to recall that Budock was going to be replaced with a nice big new hospital for the area. ucsweb
  • Score: 0

7:19pm Sun 14 Jul 13

MARTIN GILL says...

juwhite wrote:
I seem to remember that when the Budock Hospital was closed several years ago now it was proposed to build on the land so what has happened to these plans?? I am all for more affordable housing been built but on brownfield sites first not on agricultural land. How many of us can remember what the Bickland Water Road looked like before it was extended the industrial estate built up and then of course the Wainhomes. This was a single track lane at some points and of course we had the Docks Football pitch there. Enough land has been lost. If this amount of homes are to be built then the whole infrastructure needs to be changed with more schools been built etc as the primary schools cant cope as it is and soon neither will the secondary school. Lets not forget either that there is Falmouth and Budock Water both have separate identities and lets keep it that way.
I remember when the road was just a single track, and the Docks Sports Ground. I firmly believe, that there is a plan to build Housing Estates from Kergilliack all the way to Roscarrack Farm. There seems to be a determination to build up to 4,000 Houses in the area, and unfortunately we have a crass idiot ' Councillor' by the name of Steve Eva who has backed the call for this increase in the number of homes in Falmouth.
I am sure that those residents living along Bickland Water Road will see the value of their properties diminish once the new development at Kergilliack is commenced.

I am not against building Housing Estates by any means, but to me it is all about Location. When i look at the Kergilliack site, i am just amazed that all the Trees and Hedges will soon be Bulldozed and Wildlife disturbed.
Mind you, i am sure that the Planning Officer who recommended the area be developed hasn't ever been to the area to see for himself.
[quote][p][bold]juwhite[/bold] wrote: I seem to remember that when the Budock Hospital was closed several years ago now it was proposed to build on the land so what has happened to these plans?? I am all for more affordable housing been built but on brownfield sites first not on agricultural land. How many of us can remember what the Bickland Water Road looked like before it was extended the industrial estate built up and then of course the Wainhomes. This was a single track lane at some points and of course we had the Docks Football pitch there. Enough land has been lost. If this amount of homes are to be built then the whole infrastructure needs to be changed with more schools been built etc as the primary schools cant cope as it is and soon neither will the secondary school. Lets not forget either that there is Falmouth and Budock Water both have separate identities and lets keep it that way.[/p][/quote]I remember when the road was just a single track, and the Docks Sports Ground. I firmly believe, that there is a plan to build Housing Estates from Kergilliack all the way to Roscarrack Farm. There seems to be a determination to build up to 4,000 Houses in the area, and unfortunately we have a crass idiot ' Councillor' by the name of Steve Eva who has backed the call for this increase in the number of homes in Falmouth. I am sure that those residents living along Bickland Water Road will see the value of their properties diminish once the new development at Kergilliack is commenced. I am not against building Housing Estates by any means, but to me it is all about Location. When i look at the Kergilliack site, i am just amazed that all the Trees and Hedges will soon be Bulldozed and Wildlife disturbed. Mind you, i am sure that the Planning Officer who recommended the area be developed hasn't ever been to the area to see for himself. MARTIN GILL
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree