Collapse All  Expand All

Cornwall Wildlife Trust
Consultation Date: Thu 23 Oct 2025
Hayle Town Council

Comment Date: Fri 21 Nov 2025
Strong Objection.

Angarrack is a small village with a tightly knit development and a strong rural character.
Introducing a cluster of modern holiday pods would be a visually intrusive form of development, out of scale with the existing settlement.
Cornwall Local Plan policies 12 (Design) and 23 (Natural Environment) require development to enhance local character, landscape and distinctiveness ' the proposal clearly fails to do this.

The village is valued for its peaceful, low-traffic environment. Short-term holiday accommodation is typically associated with:
' Late-night noise
' Outdoor social activity
' Irregular arrivals and departures
' Vehicle movements at unsociable hours
This would lead to a significant loss of residential amenity, contrary to Cornwall Local Plan Policy 13 (Development Standards) and NPPF safeguards on protecting existing communities.

Access to the village is by narrow rural lanes, many of which have:
' No pavements
' Limited passing places
' Poor visibility
' Congestion at pinch points
Visitors unfamiliar with the roads pose an additional risk. The proposed development would introduce unnecessary and unsafe levels of vehicle movement, contrary to Local Plan Policy 27 (Transport and Accessibility).

The village already faces challenges with drainage capacity and surface water management, particularly during periods of heavy rainfall.
The application fails to provide robust evidence on:
' How foul water will be safely handled
' How increased impermeable surfaces will be mitigated
' Whether the existing infrastructure can cope with intensified seasonal use
This raises clear risks of environmental harm and potential flooding impacts.

The surrounding Angarrack area supports varied wildlife and mature vegetation typical of rural Cornwall.
Holiday pods, associated lighting, and year-round activity threaten:
' Nocturnal species
' Hedgerow habitats
' Landscape features protected under Cornwall Local Plan Policy 23
The application lacks sufficient ecological assessment to ensure no loss of biodiversity.

Cornwall Local Plan policies promote sustainable tourism, particularly where accommodation is accessible by walking, cycling or public transport.
Angarrack does not offer such options. Visitors will rely exclusively on cars, conflicting with the NPPF's sustainability principles and Local Plan policies on reducing carbon emissions and traffic impacts.
Cornwall already has an oversupply of holiday accommodation relative to local housing need. The proposal provides no evidence of unmet demand.
Further short-term lets, risk undermining the balance of a small village community already affected by seasonal variation in occupancy.
If approved, the development could open the door to further tourist accommodation schemes around Angarrack and Hayle, leading to cumulative loss of tranquillity, rural character, and community coherence.

Conclusion

The proposal conflicts with the Cornwall Local Plan ' specifically policies 1, 2, 12, 13, 23 and 27 ' and the core principles of the NPPF relating to:
' Protecting rural character
' Ensuring residential amenity
' Reducing car dependence
' Supporting sustainable development
The proposal also conflicts with the Hayle Neighbourhood Plan ' specifically policies ST1 relating to tourism development being supported where they demonstrate they will:
' not adversely affect the local infrastructure
' not have an adverse impact on the character of the area but rather will enhance its location and setting.
' not harm residential amenity and
' not adversely impact on road safety

Should the Planning Officer be minded to approve this application, we would ask that it is called into Committee.


Environment Agency

Comment Date: Mon 03 Nov 2025
We object to this application and request further information.

Reason
The submitted information requires clarification. The Design and Access Statement suggests that there are just two pods, the FRA talks of 5 holiday chalets and the site plan includes 4 lodges a detached annex and garage with further accommodation, as well as pool/garage/gym building. As a result, it is difficult to understand what we are being consulted on under this application and what was existing previously.

We request a plan/summary be submitted identifying what elements of the site is this proposal seeking planning permission for under this specific application.

As the site is fully surrounded on sides by flood zone 3, including its access/route, the LPA should confirm that the Sequential Test has been met. Intensification of the site for residential use would increase the flood risk. Flood Risk is defined in the guidance as a combination of both probability and consequence and the consequence of this development is that more people would be at flood risk.

Flood Risk Assessment
The submitted FRA is inadequate and has not met all the elements of paragraph 181 of the NPPF in particular.

o Whilst the FRA has acknowledged that the only access and egress route from the site will be at risk of flooding and identified the risk in terms of potential depths, it has not assessed the likely frequency and duration now and in the future. This is important for the LPA's emergency planners to make an informed decision on whether they would be able to manage an emergency during a flood event in the future.
We should point out that the FRA suggests that the residents of the chalets would need to remain on site till the water subsides and those in the annex would need to retreat to higher ground during a flood event. This further information would be needed for the production of a robust Flood Warning and Evacuation Plan (FWEP). As FWEP is the only mitigation proposed, we would suggest that this would need to be produced and signed off by the emergency planners prior to any occupation, with a commitment to update regularly. We do, however, acknowledge that the Hec-RAS modelled extents appear to show that the sites access and egress are shown within the current 30 year outline.
o The FRA has not considered the increase in surface water from all the extra built development or provided a surface water drainage strategy. Therefore, it could increase the risk of flooding to third parties, including the development itself.
o No information has been provided on any flood resistant and resilient measures used in the construction to allow the building to be swiftly restored following a flood event.
o The FRA has not provided any information on how close the built development is to the Main River that borders the northern boundary of the site. This is required to assess any impacts on the banks and the ability to access the watercourse for maintenance.

If you are minded to approve the application contrary to our objection, please contact us to explain why material considerations outweigh our objection. This will allow us to make further representations. Should our objection be removed, it is likely we will recommend the inclusion of <a condition/conditions> on any subsequent approval.

Site Allocations DPD

Comment Date: Mon 27 Oct 2025
Thank you for consulting the Delivery Team.
Although the application is within a 200m buffer of allocation H-E1
on this occasion, we do not have any comments.

Powered by Idox