A CONTROVERSIAL bid by a developer to avoid paying nearly £350,000 in infrastructure contributions to health and education infrastructure in Bodmin has been withdrawn by the developer.

Wainhomes South West had told Cornwall Council that the requirement to pay the Section 106 funding, that it had agreed to prior to the planning approval for 58 open market homes on land to the east of Pandarosa Farm in Bodmin, made the project “unviable”.

It sought an amendment to the planning obligation agreed in a Section 106 agreement on March 20, 2026 that would see it removed from an agreement to pay £348,798 towards education places and healthcare infrastructure.

The developer has cited unviability of the development, which is presently under construction if it was required to make the payments, submitting a document from Vickery Holman that stated that with the payments removed it anticipates a profit of just over 13 per cent, whereas with the payments retained it drops to 10 per cent.

While both figures are under the 17.5 per cent profit that it states are necessary for the scheme to be considered ‘viable’, the application by Wainhomes states that if it was excused of the infrastructure payments, it would lessen the amount the project was ‘unviable’ by.

The proposals, which were first made public by Iliffe Newspapers Cornwall led to a chorus of condemnation from local figures.

Bodmin Town Council’s planning committee were the first to make clear its objections. At a planning committee meeting which was attended by concerned residents and representatives from Save Halgavor Moor, the council made clear its objections.

It told Cornwall Council: “The council is not persuaded that the submitted viability case justifies reducing or removing previously agreed planning obligations. Allowing such a variation would undermine public confidence in the planning system and set an unacceptable precedent whereby developers may seek to renegotiate legally binding obligations after planning permission has been secured.”

The town council were joined by the Cornwall branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), who also objected to the plans, concluding: “Approval here would tell every developer in Cornwall that infrastructure contributions can be renegotiated away soon after consent. That would undermine the plan-led system and the Council's ability to secure infrastructure from development. This is a serious concern and a strong reason to refuse.”

The member of parliament for North Cornwall also stated his opposition, citing it as an example in Parliament of the ‘infrastructure emergency’ Cornwall faces.

Prior to this, he had shared his own concerns over the proposal, stating: “This attempt to walk away from a huge £348,000 commitment to vital local infrastructure, including a new primary school, in Bodmin is exactly the kind of behaviour that leaves our communities high and dry.

“Developers cannot be allowed to promise this infrastructure to win planning permission, then quietly drop it once the ink is dry."

No reason is given for withdrawing a proposal, however the Cornwall Council planning portal has confirmed it is no longer an active application.

Find out about planning applications that affect you by visiting the Public Notice Portal.