Pip’s Patch

ARC News Service – a report by the Association of Rural Communities’ monitoring team which attended the November meeting of the YDNPA planning committee. For discussion about the conversion of the bothy at Coleshouse at Askrigg, the barn at Austwick, and the hard standing at Little Ings in Gayle also see YDNPA – planning decisions October 2010.

Austwick – Seven members voted to accept the planning officer’s recommendation that the application to convert a barn which was outside the development boundary  should be refused. Six voted to approve the application and there were two abstentions.  It had been explained to the members that there had to be exceptional circumstances to go against planning policy. The applicant, Mr Taylor who lives at Airton,  had argued that the conversion would be in accord with those policies which permitted local needs affordable housing and the provision of suitable accommodation for the disabled. The ground floor would have been made suitable for him and his wife (who has Alzheimers) and the first floor would have provided accommodation for his son and grand daughter. The conversion would also have saved the barn from becoming derelict. The parish council opposed the application mainly because the barn was outside the village development boundary. The parish council chairman, Mr Smith, told members that some affordable housing that was suitable for the disabled would soon be available in the village. Several members said that in time permission would be given for the barn to be converted.

Kevin Lancaster commented that the Authority’s policy regarding barn conversions was one of the most unpopular. He added: “I don’t think this is a good policy and I don’t think it will be in existence in five years.” Chris Armitage said that the YDNPA was trying to protect areas that were outside the development boundaries. The head of planning, Peter Watson, added that the Authority’s policy was in line with national policy regarding providing new housing in open countryside and barn conversions. He said that on the occasions the YDNPA had given permission for new houses to accommodate those who were disabled the applicants had family living locally.

Linton – Last month the majority of members voted against the officer’s recommendation to approve full planning permission to convert a barn to provide five extra en-suite bedrooms for The Fountaine Inn. It was debated again at the November meeting under the reference back system. Craven Coun John Roberts said it would not be possible to park cars beside the converted barn and so these would, after being unloaded, have to be parked around the village green. He told the meeting: “Linton is a conservation area – not a car parking area.”

The parish council had objected to the application because of the lack of parking facilities. It also argued that there was a lack of commercial need for more overnight accommodation at The Fountaine, but this was strongly contradicted by the owners of the inn. William Weston argued in favour of granting permission as it was necessary to protect this type of business in the Dales. He added that something should be done to provide a long term solution to the parking problem in Linton. Eight of the members, however, voted again to refuse this application on the basis that the development would result in an unacceptable level of on-street parking within the village, exacerbating parking problems already existing there and displacing existing residents’ parking resulting in inconvenience and nuisance to local residents and so harming residential amenity.

Crina Bottom near Ingleton -  The members were unanimous in accepting the officer’s recommendation that an application for a new domestic wind turbine at the farm at Crina Bottom. Some members said this was the first time that the YDNPA had given permission for a wind turbine to be erected within a triple SSI. There was an old, bladeless turbine at the farm and one of the conditions of the planning permission was that this should be removed. The new turbine will be sited a little lower so that it is less visible. The application was approved partly  because one wind turbine was a better option than power lines snaking across the countryside to provide the farm with mains electricity. The members were keen that the farm should have a more dependable source of power supply which was in line with the YDNPA‘s renewable energy policy.

Kettlewell -  The members were also unanimous in approving planning permission for the creation of a parking space in the garden at Renar Cottage in Kettlewell.

Langcliffe – Just one member voted against giving full planning permission for new outbuildings and the construction of a car port at The Farmhouse, Upper Winskill, Langcliffe. The parish council had argued that this would change the character of one of the oldest buildings in Langcliffe.  Roger Bingham said that the out buildings to be demolished were a good example of traditional farmyard buildings which had now mainly disappeared. The planning officer stated that due to the modest scale, appearance and materials of the proposed buildings they would not detract from the character and appearance of the traditional houses around them.

Askrigg – The majority of the members again voted to refuse planning permission for the conversion of the bothy at Coleshouse at Askrigg. The planning application included a bedroom extension. They therefore confirmed their decision last month not to accept the officer’s recommendation that it should be approved. The reasons given were: the impact of the proposal on the Askrigg Conservation Area including the loss of a section of wall, and the detrimental impact upon public views into and out of the village. The proposed design was also considered to be inappropriate. Mr Bingham used the phrase “alien intrusion” to explain why he saw the design, materials, fenestration, and the range of gables as not being in keeping with the Askrigg conservation area. He said he was disappointed that the it was not possible to take into consideration the historical association with the artist and writing team of Marie Hartley, Ella Pontefract and Joan Ingleby especially as they had done so much for the area. Several residents including artist Piers Browne spoke against the application at the October meeting.

Gayle – A majority of members voted to allow Christine Cloughton to create a hard standing for her car at her home in Little Ings. This was debated at the October meeting when the majority of members voted against the officer’s recommendation to refuse the application on the grounds of highway safety. At the November meeting planning committee member Chris Armitage warned that it would be reckless to approve this application when there was so little visibility when backing out onto the road.

Low Row – The majority of members accepted that the proposed scheme in the new application for the conversion of Low Barn was considerably better in design terms than that approved by the Authority in 1977. It was also accepted that there were several problems with converting the barn into a dwelling. The county council’s highways department had recommended refusal because of the limited visibility and because the parking bays were not wholly sited on land within the applicant’s control so their future presence could not be guaranteed. Now that the application has been approved the highways department will want to impose some conditions.

Alan Thorogood told members that Melbecks  parish council was very concerned about the road safety issues. The parking bays were used by school buses bringing children to Hazel Brow Farm and lorries unloading agricultural supplies. Although there had been no accidents involving people, there had been several incidents in the last three years. Sheep had been killed and last year a sheep dog was killed close to the barn.

The main problem for the planning committee was that as a Certificate of Lawfulness had been issued in 2006 the 1977 permission still stood, which included that the barn, once converted, could be sold on the open market. Coun John Blackie backed the request from the parish council that the property should be subject to a local occupancy restriction as this was a new planning application. Other members felt that, in view of the prior planning permission, this would be difficult to impose. As members were equally divided on this the chairman used his casting vote against adding a local occupancy restriction. A majority of members did vote for the owner to be asked to rescind the 1977 permission in favour of that granted at the November meeting.