By Betsy Everett
Dales parish councillors have accused the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority of being an “unelected quango” which ignores their views, and has demanded it comes forward to explain its planning decisions.
“It seems to me they ask for our views and then do the exact opposite of what we want. They do just whatever they like,” Councillor Darren Percival said of the decision by planners to allow the development of five new shared ownership houses behind the Rose and Crown pub.
He was responding to North York county councillor Yvonne Peacock who told the meeting of the parish council that the planners were “not listening” to their views.
“It’s extremely disappointing. I honestly don’t know why they bother to consult us and then ignore our views. They are totally undemocratic. If Richmondshire District Council planning authority behaved like this their representatives would be voted out at the next election. That’s the difference,” said Cllr Peacock.
The authority had approved a new application from Hornblower Developments Ltd to build the homes under a shared ownership scheme, following legal challenges to earlier plans.
Councillor James Peacock, chairman, said he had spoken to a member of the planning committee and told him parish councillors were “not happy” about the shared ownership proposal.
Yvonne Peacock said the cost of the proposed houses was £80-90,000 more than under the previous scheme “and yet that’s supposed to be affordable to local people. We were never happy about the scheme yet our hands are tied. The planners rule,” she said.
Members agreed to write to the national park authority and ask them to send someone to their next meeting “to explain themselves.”
Comments are closed.
Last September Councillor Peacock was crying our for more affordable homes in the Dale’s, recommending 5 houses be built in every village to meet housing shortage. Seems 5 in Bainbridge fits the bill! Or is
this too close to home?. No body gave a damn about approving 17 new homes in West Witton, taking a big hit and way over what should have been approved. It’s totally altered the village,will increase traffic and pollution as people will need to travel for work and the misery it has caused to those that live near with the constant building works, lost views, increased light pollution. So much for the environment!
The 5 homes in Bainbridge are needed but not under the shared ownership scheme. We already have that sort of development not fully subscribed to, some of the properties are rented out. Bainbridge requires affordable homes to buy at a discount for local young people who want to remain in the village, probably where most of them were born.The previous application was approved for exactly this twice by the national parks they then decided it was not affordable so never issued the decision notice, a 3 bedroom house then was between £184,000 & £192,000 with the 30& discount this was just 2 years ago, now they approve a shared ownership development with prices for the same houses at beTween £270,000 & £280,000. Basically you are allowed to buy 80% of this which is £216,000 plus an increasing rent on the remaining 20%, whereas you could have bought 100% of the same house for a price of between £184,000 & £192,000. Can anyone explain the logic? No wonder the locals and the parish council are so against it
I agree with all of the above. The Parks authority have also ignored a comprehensive professional report detailing the flood risk from this development.SO not only is the parks committee unelected, they seem totally unqualified to be in the decision making process.
Another problem is there is a shortage of dentists, doctors and hospitals in this area the more people in these new houses will only put more strain on a desperate situation.
Only 5, how about the 140 they are going to build at Brough St Giles on the main route into the Garrison.Lack of the usual Doctors Dentist traffic on the roads, school places.