The Central Sub-Area Planning Committee of Cornwall Council met on Monday 12 January 2026 to discuss planning applications. The committee resolved to grant delegated authority for the approval of a community convenience store in St Agnes, subject to conditions and the completion of a Section 106 Agreement. They also noted the Appeals Report.

Community Convenience Store Approved in St Agnes

The committee granted delegated authority to the Service Director for Planning & Housing (Chief Planning Officer) to approve application PA25/02531 for the erection of a community convenience store, access, vehicle parking, and landscaping at Land South West of Penwinnick Farm, Penwinnick Road, St Agnes, Cornwall. This decision is subject to conditions outlined in the report and the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure an off-site Biodiversity Net Gain payment. Delegated authority was also granted to refuse the application if the Section 106 Agreement is not completed within three months, or an agreed extension period. An additional condition regarding the car port construction was also stipulated.

During the debate, Councillor Pete Mitchell, the Electoral Division Member, reiterated his previous objections, citing concerns about the negative impact on the High Street, potential business closures, and the uniqueness of St Agnes. He also expressed surprise at the Highways Officer's assessment regarding traffic and safety, suggesting a Road Safety Audit should have been conducted. Councillor Mitchell argued that the proposal would adversely affect the amenities of residents, particularly those in affordable housing, due to delivery vehicles and customer traffic, and that the car port parking was too close to properties. He urged the committee to refuse the application, deeming it flawed due to highway safety issues and detriment to residents' amenities.

Officers responded to questions, with the Highways Officer confirming that the built pedestrian refuge and road dimensions were acceptable and within build tolerances. A swept path assessment demonstrated that large vehicles could access and exit the site. The officer clarified that a Safety Audit was undertaken for the Section 278 Highway Agreement, and as the current application proposed no alterations to the adopted highway, a new audit was not requested. The officer stated that safety audits focus on safety, not volume of use, and confirmed satisfaction with the access, parking provision, and highway/pedestrian provisions.

The Development Management Group Leader and Senior Lawyer addressed concerns regarding Biodiversity Net Gain, confirming that the Section 106 agreement would secure an off-site payment to a registered habitat bank. They also highlighted that Condition 11 would require a delivery management plan to minimise noise and disturbance. The car port's design and dimensions were explained as an improvement to the relationship between the car park and neighbouring properties, offering better outlook and noise screening. Condition 10 would restrict opening hours to protect residential amenity. While acknowledging the proposal would change the character of the estate entrance, officers believed mitigation measures were sufficient. They also confirmed that no independent retail impact assessment was required due to the store's size and location, and that the World Heritage Site Planning Advice did not consider the development to impact the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage Site.

The debate saw members express concerns about increased traffic, road safety, noise and light disturbance, and the impact on the historic character of the village. However, it was also noted that there was no evidence to support concerns about adverse effects on local businesses, and the proposal would create employment opportunities. Some members felt there were no policy reasons sufficient to withstand an appeal if the application were refused, and that the site was located outside the Conservation Area with officer support.

Ultimately, the motion to grant delegated authority for approval, subject to conditions and the Section 106 Agreement, was carried by a vote of 4 in favour, 3 against, and 3 abstentions. Councillor Ball left the meeting during the questions of officers and took no part in the debate or voting.

Appeals Report Noted

The committee also noted the Appeals Report, which provided information on appeals lodged and decided between 3 November and 28 November 2025.