EACH week, hundreds of planning applications come before Cornwall Council’s planning department, seeking to win approval for various plans right across the Duchy.

These plans can comprise of a number of different reasonings – ranging from permission to replace windows or listed building consent ranging up to large house building developments or changing of use of a building, for instance, from an office to a café, or flats.

Within this large and often complex system, there are a number of formats from which planning advice and approval can be sought.

These range from full applications where all the details which comprise a proposed development or work to a building are submitted, to outline applications, where further details are yet to be confirmed, for example, an outline application with reserved matters for appearance may not confirm the final proposed development but rather seek permission in principle.

An example of this is one for an outline permission for 20 dwellings on land with reserved matters for appearance and scale; the reserved matters would require further permission later for their inclusion.

Other types of applications include pre-application advice requests, where would-be developers submit often outline proposals to a local authority to ascertain whether it is likely to gain support or not prior to submitting a planning application.

The vast majority of applications are decided by planning officers employed by a local authority under ‘delegated powers’, meaning they do so on behalf of their employer, however, some applications are ‘called in’ by local councillors to be discussed at an area’s strategic planning committee meeting, meaning the final decision rests with a committee of councillors.

THE reinstatement of a storm damaged roof on an agricultural barn, doors, fenestration and associated works on land near Pensilva has been refused.

The application, concerning a derelict barn at Tokenbury Manor has previously been subject to proposals for the conversion into a dwelling. One application in 2025 was withdrawn while a previous attempt at obtaining prior approval was deemed as requiring planning permission.

It was summarised as: “This planning application seeks full permission for the reinstatement of the roof on an existing agricultural barn, along with repairs to doors, fenestration, and associated works. It is necessary due to significant storm damage, which has left the roof compromised and the building increasingly vulnerable to further deterioration. The reinstatement works are essential to ensure the building remains safe, functional, and fit for purpose. The proposal involves essential repairs to return the building to a safe, usable condition.”

However, Cornwall Council stated that it was, in its view, in fact a derelict barn which had been at the centre of previous attempts to convert to housing.

Refusing the development, it told the applicant: “The proposed development, by virtue of its reinstated roof, domestic fenestration pattern, and increased visual prominence, would result in a structure that is incongruous with the rural character and landscape setting of the Bodmin Moor Cornwall Character Area.

“The removal of adjacent hedgerow and unauthorised levelling of land has further eroded the site's integration with the surrounding field pattern and landscape features. The development would fail to respect the distinctive character of the area and would not sustain local distinctiveness or landscape quality.

“The building has been unused for a prolonged period, and previous applications have sought residential conversion, undermining the credibility of its claimed agricultural use. In the absence of any compelling operational or agricultural justification, the visual and landscape harm arising from the proposal cannot be balanced or mitigated.”

A second reason for refusal added: “The proposal will be unable to accurately comply with the statutory requirement to deliver a minimum 10 per cent Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG), The applicant has incorrectly claimed exemption under the de minimis threshold, despite the presence of grassland habitat within the building footprint and prior unauthorised clearance of hedgerow and vegetation around the site. These actions constitute habitat degradation, and the site must be assessed on its pre-clearance ecological condition. No Biodiversity Gain Plan or mitigation measures have been submitted.”

There are growing concerns among people living near one of Cornwall’s most iconic landmarks that 71 apartments for the elderly could soon be built near it. Cornwall Council has applied for planning permission from itself to create the extra care development on just over a hectare of land near Bodmin Beacon.

The council submitted an outline planning application earlier this year for the extra care residential scheme on a site which is in close proximity to Bodmin Beacon nature reserve and the 144ft tall Gilbert Memorial, which can be seen for miles around.

A planning statement by Trewin Design Architects on behalf of the council said: “This extra care scheme will provide new housing in a well-connected and sustainable location, contributing to Cornwall Council’s goal of meeting local housing needs and supporting the district’s overall provision of extra care facilities. Extra care homes are essential in Cornwall due to the county’s ageing population and the growing demand for specialised housing and support.”

The planning statement admits that the site’s location near residential dwellings “introduces potential overlooking concerns, both into and from neighbouring properties in particular to the western boundary. Privacy will need to be carefully managed through thoughtful orientation, strategic window placement, and possibly the inclusion of screening or landscape buffers to minimise any visual intrusion”.

Bodmin Town Council has previously voted not to support the application.

Emma Wherry, whose property would back on to the proposed development if it is approved, said: “Every day those fields are used by dog walkers, families and children walking to school – it’s an extension of The Beacon, a nature reserve.

“When we attended the consultation we were told that the field failed tests for drainage and that as part of this project there would be large ponds acting as soakaways – what will happen when we get heavy rain fall and they can’t cope? Our gardens and properties already flood from the run-off in bad weather so I fear this could cause a greater and more regular flood risk for Foster Drive as it’ll run off into our garden and properties – this or any development is going to make this worse.”

She added: “I’m worried about overlooking as these properties will be higher than ours and at the consultation they said there will be roof-top gardens and social areas so there will be overlooking and risk of noise and light pollution. This will not only affect residents but all the wildlife that live in the surrounding fields.

“I do not think this is the correct piece of land for any development – it should remain as a tranquil green space and a continuation of The Beacon as it has been for generations. An extra care facility like this needs to be located closer to amenities like GPs and shops like pharmacies so people can live as independently as they can. Not at the end of a rat run where they are going to be isolated.”