Peak District councillors defy ‘nitpicking’ planning rules to approve affordable home

Members of the Peak District National Park Authority’s (PDNPA) Planning Committee went against planning officers’ recommendations and approved an affordable home in Tissington that will enable the fourth generation of a farming family to stay in the picture perfect village.

Stephen Carr, whose family has been part of the community for 113 years and owns Town Head Farm, was granted permission for the three-bedroomed ‘local needs’ house on land north west of Sharplow Cottages, in Rakes Lane, despite officers’ concerns that it exceeded the maximum size allowed.

Senior planner Andrea Needham explained there was no question over whether the applicant met local needs criteria, however the proposed property was 97 square metres, which was the maximum size allowed for a five-person household, and only Mr Carr and his fiancée would occupy it at present.

She said PDNPA policy stated the absolute maximum that could be allowed for a two-person household was 70 square metres.

“If we accepted every new affordable home up to any size proposed to the maximum threshold it would defeat these objectives and would alternatively deliver housing stock of larger dwellings that would be oversized and unaffordable to many with identified need,” Ms Needham said.

The applicant’s grandfather, Chris Carr, a former member of the planning committee, said: “We need to keep some young people in the village.

“The population of the park is ageing, as you are very well aware.”

“When I was on the committee I was told by an officer that we should not use common sense in planning.

“I hope you will take the common sense approach and appeal to you all to approve this application.”

Sir Richard FitzHerbert, who owns Tissington Hall and chairs the parish council among his many roles, said he represented the village when he appealed to the committee to approve the application and allow young people to remain and the community ‘flourish’.

He commented: “There are 45 properties in the village, I know them well, of which 35 are two bedrooms, only one is three bedrooms, and only four are more than four bedrooms, including our house – you can see the imbalance in our housing stock.”

Sir FitzHerbert added that the family was well known and contributed to many community events including the famous well dressings.

The applicant himself said: “We’re looking to start a family and it makes sense to design a property with this in mind, so that we don’t have to extend or move.

“This is not about profit, it is about building a family home that can adapt to our changing needs as the family grows, which will allow us to bring our children up in the village and breathe new life into it.”

Councillor William Armitage referred to the planning policy as ‘nitpicking rules’, commenting: “If we don’t have young people staying in the village they’ll go elsewhere.”

Councillor Kath Potter added: “It is ludicrous, I think we have to take into consideration the fact that most people get married because they want children therefore they should have a house capable of bringing up those children in.”

Members agreed that a ‘common sense’ approach was needed in determining the matter, however head of planning Brian Taylor defended the policy, stating: “It isn’t about common sense, these are material planning considerations we’re talking about.”

Members voted unanimously against the officers’ recommendations and approved the application with conditions.