Login Register

POLL: Were Cornwall Councillors right to reject the Coyte Farm application in St Austell?

By CG_News  |  Posted: January 17, 2014

REJECTED: Councillors in Cornwall turned down the application for Coyte Farm

Comments (24)

Cornwall councillors yesterday narrowly voted to reject the planned £110 million retail complex at Coyte Farm, on the outskirts of St Austell - but were they right to do so?

Big names including Marks and Spencer, Next and Sainsbury's had been signed up and Primark was even rumoured to be close to agreeing a deal to open a store on the site.

However, the application was rejected, with the casting vote of the chairman deciding matters at County Hall.

Cast your vote, in the poll to the right of this page, and tell us whether you think councillors made the right decision.

Related content

Read more from West Briton

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters


  • kernewekonan  |  January 27 2014, 4:13PM

    Yet again county hall has looked after Truro. The city chamber of commerce has certainly got a hold on them & must be laughing their socks off. To turn down the Coyte farm development in St, Austell is nothing more than an utter disgrace & I for one certainly smell a rat. this unitary dictatorship has been no good from the start. Time to look more deeply into what is really going on there. We may soon see what happens to what I see as nothing more than a bribe regarding building more houses near the all ready over congested Treliske area in return for a stadium which would be in the worst possible place. I am absolutely appalled at the refusal of Coyte farm.

    |   7
  • sau_sadhappy  |  January 21 2014, 11:52PM

    This decision is an absolute disgrace! How on earth can St Austell ever get any better when you have a council and chamber of commerce like ours? They should embrace the fact that these new business's want to come into our town. The town centre was never planned correctly in the first place and I don't have enough 'characters remaining' to list the amount of discrepancies that there are! However we have to live with another dreadful decision and work with it. So now the town centre should be, as the signs point out when entering St Austell a 'Market Town' but to keep us residents in the 21st century and stop us creating more emissions by driving to Truro, build the outlets on the edge of town. St Austell could and should be such a thriving town and if we continue to stop progress we will never get anywhere. Change isn't always a bad thing if it is what the majority of residents want. Lets start moving these projects along instead of always throwing negatives in the way. Look at the neglect thats already happened... Carlyon Bay Regeneration!! St Austell Train Station (Platform 2)!! Tesco getting planning then doing nothing with Totem site!! Polkyth Leisure Centre The Town Centre that has no identity!! Need i go on?

    |   12
  • MarjProops  |  January 21 2014, 10:54AM

    Good news: Simon Hoare from the developers has said "The idea that a refusal would then clear the decks and we would we disappear up the A390 in a cloud of dust is very far from the mark." http://tinyurl.com/psezl6s

    |   9
  • jamjar  |  January 19 2014, 1:05PM

    St Austell is dying because the investment is being blocked. If the people didn't want Coyte Farm they would have created there own campaign to stop it and why didn't they come up with the Together St Austell plan before Coyte Farm came along. They would be doing more than just putting a few posters on one of the many empty units in the town. It was something put together to sway the vote and even if it does come through to planning will be blocked by Truro Councillors anyway. The teacher that says about minimum wage jobs is totally wrong. There will be no high paid jobs until we start keeping the young people in the town. The retail industry don't just provide minimum wage they provide management training to there employees and incentives to promote within the business and I know this as I gained opportunities through internal promotions in St Austell. With the jobs created through retail and the prosperity would make the town more attractive to the businesses that don't just pay minimum wage that without investment would only come to St Austell if there hand is forced such as the resources being in the town such as China Clay but the town has lost that as well. Without the investment the No sayers will continue to moan about the youth moving away because of no jobs and not enough money to get on the property ladder. The people of St Austell need to take the initiative and welcome investment to the town. I have lived in Bristol and people kept saying that the city would be killed by Cribbs Causeway and new out of town retail parks right around the city but it never happened. In fact it created more competition and more investment as with the increased interest in the city from shoppers attracted more big businesses into the city and the shppping centres including the city centre adapted to accomodate the big retailers and new businesses that opened to accomodate the increased footfall such as restaurants and bars. This all increases the employment opportunities for the city and created many more higher paid positions as the teacher mentions. This in turn has kept the young people in the city meaning that business not related to retail have moved into the city as they can fill the positions that they need filling. St Austell has the population and opportunity to become a thriving town that can support all ages and just needs its people to believe in it and welcome the retail investment which will go a long way to improving the town economy as a whole. In relation to the alternative site not going ahead if Coyte Farm does I feel that this is scaremongering and if Coyte Farm is built and the success is brought to the town every developer in the country would be biting our hands of to develop the site and also the vicarage place plan as detailed in another media report by ellandi and stop coyte farm.

    |   26
  • greengrass  |  January 19 2014, 11:04AM

    bring on the alternative site, this would be an extension of the town and not a new "out of town" shopping area,the old pentewan labs and council offices are prime areas to be redeveloped coyte farm and all its new infrastructure would make travelling on the a390 a nightmare there would be traffic lights and roundabouts for about 5-6 miles causing havoc from the Britannia inn through holmbush to st mewan dip

    |   -15
  • debruis  |  January 19 2014, 10:39AM

    Please to see the church or retail has been rejected. If shopping is your religion there are stll plenty of places for you to go to. Job? Mmmm. Yes i really want kids to have futures in shelf filling on minimum wage (and therefore supported by tax payers with benefits). All we have hear is 'we believe...' with no sound evidence to back up any of the claims of the developers. Yet the claims from the antis can be validated by untold similar developments around the country (look at Hayle). Give me EVIDENCE of the benefits and i may change my mind.

    |   -22
  • popnpix  |  January 18 2014, 2:23PM

    Our delightful (substitute whatever you wish there) planning committee have not only ignored the people of St Austell, they have also ignored the recommendation of the Member of parliament for St Austell, Mr Stephen Gilbert, and I quote "This submission is made in my capacity as the Member of Parliament for St Austell. It is not intended to be political, nor is it intended to persuade you of my personal opinion, rather I am writing as a representative of my constituents to ensure that their views and concerns are considered as you decide on this proposal and cast your votes." He goes on to represent views of his constituents both for and against the development of Coyte Farm, the document runs to 12 pages, so I hope you will forgive me for not including the whole thing. In his conclusion he says: "It is clear that the difference of opinion on this issue is strong, and views are forcefully held on both sides of the debate. Since my election in 2010, I have not known a local issue to be so divisive or do evenly balanced. I total I have received 397 representations from my constituents about this issue. Of that 258have been supportive of the proposal, while 124 have been opposed to the plans (a further 15 were either undecided or unattributable). There is, rightly, overwhelming support across the town for more investment in St Austell, more jobs and more retail choice-on that everyone can agree. The key disagreement comes on the location and scale of this application. There is also a completely understandable cynicism across communities around St Austell about plans to deliver additional opportunities within the town centre from a local community that has been jaded by too many false dawns, too many undelivered promises and is suspicious of the ability to deliver further such promises. It is clear to me that there is wide spread and real support for this application among the "silent majority" who see it as a real chance, indeed perhaps a final chance, to bring retail choice, investment and jobs to our town. Those opposing the application argue that, in time, the same type of opportunities can be delivered within the town centre, or closer to its periphery, and in addition to the potential damage to the town centre they point to the loss of green field land and the threat of urban sprawl as key reasons to oppose this application. Without the help of a crystal ball it is impossible to predict with any certainty what the impact of this development will be on our town. Indeed, I view this proposal as a great risk for St Austell but, without taking big risks, big rewards will never follow. On a personal level, I continue to have significant reservations about this application. But, as the Member of Parliament, I would point the committee to the wide=spread public support that has been secured that suggests a sizeable proportion of St Austell are prepared to accept the potential risks associated with this proposal in order to secure the potential rewards." In his covering letter Stephen Gilbert Wrote, "But, in the end, it was clear that the majority of those who have written to me want to see the investment, new retail opportunities and job creation that Coyte Farm has to offer. That is why I have pointed the committee to that wide=spread public support and encouraged them to vote for the plans." So Thank you county hall for ****ting on St Austell once again, (look into Treliske hospital and the money left by Mrs Cobbold- Sawle to the people of St Austell to build their own Hospital). As for the people of St Austell continuing to shop in Truro, I say look out Plymouth here we come.

    |   35
  • Energy1239856  |  January 18 2014, 2:18PM

    I have lived in Cornwall for 35 years and arrived when Bodmin was thriving, but the Chamber of Commerce at that time opposed large well known shops coming into the town and Truro embraced them, which proved to be the better decision?The same will happen to St Austell. Millions has been spent on regeneration it hasn't worked. Cornwall Council is not working, time and time again bad decisions are being made and our money is being squandered. It is run like a dictatorship and not a democracy. Coyte Farm was the perfect opportunity to try to get some credibility back but these people are so arrogant that they don't care what us mere mortals think, they get paid however badly they perform, so where is their incentive to do a good job or even to find out what the majority of their tax payers want. We know from the recent past,the well documented corruption in parts of Restormel Council and this appears to have continued to this day. I hope the Coyte Farm developers turn their back on Cornwall because until local people are prepared to stand up and be counted nothing will change. The young people will move out of Cornwall and not because of second home owners but because there is no future for them. Wake up and smell the coffee.

    |   18
  • Seaem  |  January 18 2014, 1:55PM

    This development could only be good for St. Austell as people visiting the shops would more than likely also go into the town, especially the summer visitors. I hope they appeal against our narrow minded, short sighted and useless council's decision.

    |   19
  • Doubletrees87  |  January 18 2014, 10:03AM

    This is a decision that has been made to protect Truro. Our town looses millions of pounds worth of trade to Truro every year. Our population is larger and yet we have 60% less non-retail shopping space. It is a disgrace that councillors who were elected by democracy can then ignore those who elected them to do whatever they like. No doubt we will have another housing estate on Coyte Farm and meanwhile we will all have to shop in Truro. More car journeys, more fuel costs, less jobs, no environmental benefit as the area will be consumed with housing in any case. Despite the negative views which come across in this article there is massive public support for this scheme from the people of St. Austell.

    |   35



      Were Cornwall councillors right to reject the Coyte Farm retail park at St Austell?