On the 13th September 2007, a Section 106 agreement was signed by four parties:<\/p>\n
The agreement relates to planning application E2\/06\/01399\/OUT<\/a> that grants St Mellion International Resort permission for a number of enhancements, including the construction of 265 houses. Although a number of conditions are defined in the agreement, I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122m focusing on the \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Sustainable Transport Contribution\u00e2\u20ac\u009d section that grants \u00c2\u00a3117,000 for various transport improvements in St Mellion village. The documented improvements are:<\/p>\n To date, only the first of these items has been completed and that was done, outside of the 106 agreement and funded from other sources. \u00c2\u00a0There was some discussion in 2012 about the provision of Speed Bumps in Church Lane but no conclusions were reached. All was then quiet until late 2012 when enquiries from various sources led to Cormac conducting a presentation of options<\/a> and a subsequent period of consultation.<\/p>\n Once again, things went quiet until July 2013 when the new Parish Council called an Extraordinary Meeting to discuss the 106, with Cormac and Cornwall Council representatives in attendance. \u00c2\u00a0Subsequent to that meeting, I’ve sent the following email to Christine, the Parish Council Clerk.<\/p>\n Hi Christine,<\/p>\n Hope you don’t mind me expressing some points following the Extraordinary Meeting? I’d have liked to do this sooner but I’ve been away, coast path walking since Tuesday. \u00c2\u00a0Now I have sore feet and time to rant a bit!<\/p>\n Regarding the original presentation and survey conducted by Cormac, I think the results would have been quite different if the content of the original 106 had been known at the time. \u00c2\u00a0An understanding of the cost of each option would also, potentially, have shifted opinion.<\/p>\n With Option F, opening the old entrance, costing virtually all the remaining 106 money, it would no longer get my vote. \u00c2\u00a0I don’t even understand why that option is on the table: Cormac and CC explained why some of the schemes on the original 106 could not be provided but there was no clarification of why an \u00c2\u00a380k scheme could be added to the\u00c2\u00a0original scope. \u00c2\u00a0Steven Towers, representing one of the four signatories on the 106, was also clearly against it.<\/p>\n I was shocked to hear statements from the St Mellion Park residents present at the meeting, including Parish Council members, that they currently use Church Lane as a rat run and will continue to do so unless the old entrance is reinstated. \u00c2\u00a0I get the impression they are seeking \u00c2\u00a380k be spent on providing them better access to their own homes. \u00c2\u00a0The subsequent reduced traffic in Church Lane would be a possible by-product of their new access route.<\/p>\n I do appreciate that each proposal for Church Lane comes with an issue: Closing the lane completely would cause chaos at peek school times. \u00c2\u00a0Making the lane one-way would probably cause similar issues. \u00c2\u00a0Proposals like “Access Only” and “No left turn” though are currently being rejected on the basis they are difficult to police. \u00c2\u00a0We live in a relatively law-abiding community and I simply don’t buy this as justification: Tell me it’s a crime to turn left out of Church Lane and I won’t do it. \u00c2\u00a0Place signs saying the lane is “Access Only” and I won’t use it. \u00c2\u00a0I strongly believe this holds true for the large majority of road users.<\/p>\n I welcome improvements to the Crocadon entrance and have absolutely no objection to the old resort entrance being reopened. \u00c2\u00a0I do strongly object though to the proposed source of funding to accomplish these objectives. \u00c2\u00a0The fact that four of the Parish Councillors and St Mellion Park residents would greatly benefit from improved access does not justify siphoning a pot of money that was specifically allocated to sustainable transport improvements in St Mellion village.<\/p>\n Please can the council give strong consideration to the proposals of: Best wishes, On the 13th September 2007, a Section 106 agreement was signed by four parties: Caradon District Council Bennelong Golf (St Mellion) Ltd Nat West Bank Cornwall County Council The agreement relates to planning application E2\/06\/01399\/OUT that grants St Mellion International Resort permission for a number of enhancements, including the construction of 265 houses. Although a… Continue reading Parish Council Extraordinary Meeting<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":24,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-681","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-st-mellion","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.stmellion.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/681","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.stmellion.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.stmellion.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.stmellion.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/24"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.stmellion.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=681"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/blog.stmellion.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/681\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":686,"href":"https:\/\/blog.stmellion.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/681\/revisions\/686"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.stmellion.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=681"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.stmellion.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=681"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.stmellion.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=681"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n* Improved pedestrian access through Church Lane
\n* Access Only signage at both ends of Church Lane
\n* No left turn at the resort end of Church Lane
\nThe combination of these three items would serve to achieve all the goals of the 106 and at a reduced cost. \u00c2\u00a0They are also all clearly within scope of the original 106 scheme of Church Lane works.<\/p>\n
\nSteve<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"