Pip’s Patch

An ARC News service report:

Town Head, Hawes – A couple in Hawes found a 21st century solution to heating their 17th century house – only to have their air source heat pump described as an ugly intrusion to the town’s roofscape and be threatened with enforcement if it wasn’t removed. The YDNPA planning committee did not, however, accept the officer’s recommendation.

Margaret Grattan told the YDNPA planning committee on Tuesday, May 10: “We believe in the present climate everyone must do their best for the environment and the community that we live in.” So she and her husband  wanted an alterative to a central heating system which used oil – a non renewable fossil fuel. They were advised by the manufacturers and installers that for their house, which has no loft space, the best location for an air source heat pump was on the small section of flat roof which overlooked the A684 near the garage in Hawes. This section is protected on three sides by other roofs. The unit has provided sufficient heating for the Grattan’s house for over a year.

N Yorks County Coun John Blackie pointed out that all 15 of their neighbours had written in support of their retrospective application, many of whom hadn’t even known where the unit was until the YDNPA planning officer recommended refusal. Coun Blackie did not take part in the debate at the parish council meeting. The parish council subsequently wrote to the YDNPA to support the Grattan’s application and stated:

“Councillors were alarmed to hear that the Chief Executive of the YDNPA had written to the local MP, Mr Hague, enclosing some zoomed photographs which gave an inaccurate impression of the visual appearance of the heat source unit in the overall street scene, along with his comment ‘I think the photographs speak for themselves.’ They felt that as Chief Officer ultimately responsible for the decisions of the Planning Service, he should have remained impartial until the application has been decided, and the bias he has shown against it at this stage was most unfortunate.”

At the April planning committee it was decided to hold a site meeting at the Grattan’s home. At the May meeting several members of the committee said that the unit was just one more piece of “roof top detritus” in a town full of TV aerials, satellite dishes and wires as well as the large garage signs nearby. They did not feel that the unit was that obvious and believed that if it was moved to the southern elevation it would have an unsightly impact upon the 17th century aspect of that row of houses as well as disturbing some of the neighbours due to the noise it made.

Coun Blackie was among those who did not believe it would set a precedent especially as very  few residents would be able to copy exactly what the Grattans had done. Mrs Grattan reminded the committee that small scale energy developments were decided on a case by case basis.

The majority of the members decided not to accept the planning officer’s recommendations that not only should the application be refused but that if the air source heat pump was not relocated to the southern elevation within three months of the committee’s decision then enforcement action would be commenced. The planning officer was asked to discuss with the Grattans if it was possible to paint the unit to make it less obvious. This decision will, therefore, be discussed again at the June meeting.

Raybridge Lane, Gargrave – The majority of the members of the planning committee also decided not to accept the recommendation of a planning officer to refuse an application for the erection of a two storey extension to Raybridge House. A site meeting was held there in April.

Mrs Joyce Varley explained that the extension would provide a bigger kitchen as well as a defence against flooding. The house had been flooded twice since 1992 with water gaining access through a door. The new door would be set higher and would not be facing towards the source of the water when there was flooding.

The planning officer stated that the extension would dominate the existing building and would result in the loss of the traditional style frontage. It was pointed out by some members that it was not clear what was the historical frontage of the house, and the “traditional style” one referred to had been created in the 1930s. The owners did intend to use some of the interesting older stonework in the extension.  This “frontage” is not that visible from the minor road adjoining the property.

Andrew Colley said that the main view of the house was from the Leeds Liverpool Canal and that had been spoilt by the addition of a conservatory for which the YDNPA had granted permission in 1995. It was decided that as the majority of members voted to approve the Varley’s application and there were no conditions to be attached, this decision would not need to be referred back to the May meeting.

Dry Rigg Quarry, Helwith Bridge

David Parrish, the YDNPA minerals officer, reported that the existing planning permission for quarrying at Dry Rigg would expire on May 31 2011. He recommended that the company should be given additional time to negotiate the details of the planning application made in January this year to extend mineral working at the quarry until December 2021.

He reported that consultees and local residents had raised further issues relating to the transport of material from the site including the use of rail haulage; the protection of Swarth Moor SSSI; and landscaping and restoration. A full report should be made to the planning committee no later than the September meeting.

Enforcement notices

Thornton Rust Hall cottages – The committee was informed that the appeal hearing regarding the enforcement notices on the cottages in the Outgang at Thornton Rust had been set for August 16 but the owner had requested that there should be an appeal inquiry.