Formal complaints have been lodged over the handling of a planning application on the Rame Peninsula.

Last week, Cornwall Council’s East Planning Committee voted by seven to six to approve plans for a four-bedroom detached house on a site close to Rame Head, within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

Their decision went against the recommendation of both the case officer and the planning officer for the AONB, who described the impact as ‘harmful to the landscape and scenic beauty’ of the setting.

Three of the 13 councillors on the committee asked to have it placed on record that they had voted against the scheme.

More than 1,750 people have now signed a petition calling for the planning decision to be reversed.

A formal complaint has been lodged with both the local authority and the Maker with Rame Parish Council about the way the planning process has been handled.

Local campaigner Tonny Steenhagen said that he had ‘watched in horror’ as the virtual planning meeting unfolded.

‘During the committee meeting,’ said Mr Steenhagen, ‘some councillors appeared very opinionated, referring to “those AONB people”. Others appeared ill-informed (there are no sheep to look after on Rame Head), misinformation was spread and irrelevant questions were asked.

‘The vice-chair of MwRPC and some of the Cornwall Councillors rode complete roughshod over the substantiated professional opinion of the case officer by arguing that the visual impact wasn’t as great as indicated – or was even exaggerated.’

The vote had to be taken twice after concerns were raised that some councillors were unsure if they were voting for or against the officer recommendation.

Mr Steenhagen has asked South East Cornwall’s MP to intervene.

He highlights the fact that, in 2016, Cornwall’s senior development officer had stated that ‘the principle of new built form in this sensitive setting is not accepted’. Less than a week before the committee meeting, he says, the local authority had rejected a proposal for a new house in a ‘less conspicuous setting’ just down the road in the hamlet of Forder for reasons of its size and design and impact on the landscape, a decision backed in that case by the parish council. He points out that the parish council did not hold a public consultation about the planning application.

In lieu of this, Maker with Rame Parish Council had asked local people to make their views known on Cornwall’s planning portal, and 137 of the 194 comments left were in objection.

But the parish council went on to back the plan. The clerk to the council has since stated that many of these objections came from outside the parish and that ‘decisions are not based on numbers but on the facts of an application as presented’. The project differs to the refused Forder application, she said, in that it is for an agricultural dwelling.

The applicant is a farmer, Chris Wilton, who says he needs a new home for his growing family and to be close to the land and business he looks after. Some of the committee who voted in favour were sympathetic to this side of the application, and the new building will have an agricultural tie.

Mr Wilton is also the chair of the parish council, a fact which has been made much of by some objectors. In her response to the part of Mr Steenhagen’s complaint that the potential conflict of interest had not been handled with enough transparency, the parish clerk said: ‘Although the applicant is chairman of the Parish Council, he and Mr John Wilton both declared an interest as soon as the application was sent out to councillors, and were not part of any aspect of the process’.

The clerk told the Cornish Times: “Five councillors took part in the vote on the application, four were in support and there was one abstention.

“Mr C Wilton and Mr J L Wilton declared an interest, therefore didn’t get involved in any discussions or have any part of the voting process.”

Meanwhile, Mr Wilton says that he is taking advice on legal action after a ‘nasty and personal campaign’ directed towards him online.

‘It was evident right from the start that this was a personal campaign against me, borne out by the personal comments made on the planning portal and social media, with quite a few being removed as they breached the Cornwall Council guidelines on being libellous, inflammatory or offensive,’ he said.

‘Other recent new home applications in the Rame Head AONB have either not attracted any comments or only a few in objection.

‘The comments on social media have gone way wide of the mark and set out to demean my position, and me personally.’

Mr Wilton said that he had received hundreds of congratulations from people online and in person after obtaining planning permission.

He said that the petition had been ‘worded to mislead’ and added that it would be noted by the local authority but not carry any weight.

Mr Steenhagen, who was among the long-term campaigners to mount a successful judicial review which saw a complete halt to the dumping of dredged waste in Whitsand Bay in 2017, has urged people to ‘stand up for what they want to protect without making enemies’.

‘It is unavoidable that if you strongly stand up for what you believe to be right you are bound to end up in conflicts, but these conflicts don’t have to be personal,’ he said.

‘I don’t know Mr Wilton and I don’t have a personal axe to grind. But I do have strong views about what needs protecting and strong views on process, transparency, and handling conflict of interest in the right manner.

‘Despite differences of opinion, let’s try to keep the Rame Peninsula a friendly place.’