1. Site Description
1.1 The site for the proposed development is located in open countryside on the west side of the Leeds / Liverpool canal which runs through Bank Newton. The buildings themselves are adjacent to the lane which links Bank Newton through to East Marton.
The lane has bridleway status from Newton Grange through to East Marton.
1.2 The farm complex is comprised of a farmhouse, a former chapel which has been used for agricultural purposes and two barns, one of which is a traditional stone barn with modern additions.
2. Proposal
2.1 The proposal is to demolish and rebuild a traditional stone barn on its original footprint, and construct a new building adjacent to it to provide visitor accommodation. The accommodation would be linked to an application currently with the Council for the construction of a stable block for 10 horses (application no. 5/2001/1220). The occupancy of the residential units would be tied by planning condition to the use of the stables, and vice, versa to avoid the stables and the visitor accommodation being used independently thus ensuring that traffic movements were kept to a minimum.
2.2 The scheme for the reconstruction of the barn and the construction of the new building would create 9 no. units of accommodation. The scheme has been designed to take account of the traditional rural architecture of the area.
2.3 The access to the site would be via a very narrow access road which which runs from the road passing through Bank Newton, crosses the Leeds/Liverpool Canal and eventually links to East Marton having passed Newton Grange Farm.
3. Planning History
3.1 5/5/4
– Establishment of Caravan Site – refused March 1976.
3.2 5/5/5 – Establishment of Riding School in OS field 3543 – approved March 1976.
3.3 5/5/18
– Construction of Livery Yard involving the erection of 25 Horse Boxes and ancillary facilities – approval 1987.
3.4 5/5/18/B
– Erection of covered menage area associated with the existing riding stables
– approval 1988.
4. Planning Policy Background
4.1 Adopted Local Plan Policies ENV1 – “Development in open countryside”; ENV2 –
“Requirements for development in open countryside”; ENV12 – “Farm Diversification”;
EMP13
– “Visitor Accommodation outside settlement limits”; SRC7 – “Horse and
Equestrian Facilities”.
5. Parish/Town Council Comments
5.1 Bank Newton Parish Meeting have commented as follows:-

5.2
“The Bank Newton Parish Meeting met on January 11 th , 2001 to consider the planning applications 5/2000/936,937,938,939,941, submitted by Mr J Howard for Newton
Grange Farm.
5.3 Permission is sought to alter and extend the listed farmhouse, convert the listed chapel as a manager’s house and build 5 visitors accommodation from old buildings and build 4 new visitors accommodations, making 11 dwellings instead of just the farmhouse, (which may be divided into flats).
5.4 In Bank Newton there are 18 dwellings- so the scheme proposed a more than 50% increase. The Parish Meeting considers it too large a development to be classed as farm diversification.
5.5 The meeting considers that traffic levels going up and down a mile of single track road to Newton Grange will be greatly increased with resident visitors, the service vehicles required to support them and what ever is needed by way of entertainment (not more shooting we hope !).
6. Consultations
6.1 British Waterways – Have stated that they are concerned about the effects of the traffic on the nearby bridge which is a listed structure the strength of which is currently unknown. It is recommended that an assessment is carried out to ensure that there is no adverse effect from the increased use of the bridge, especially by heavy construction traffic.
6.2 Environment Agency
– recommends that planning consent should not be granted until it has been demonstrated that non-mains sewage facilities will not cause adverse impacts to the environment, amenity and public health.
6.3 Yorkshire Water – no objections.
6.4 Highway Authority
– comments awaited.
7. Representations
7.1 Four letters have been received in connection with the application making the following points:-
Crossgates Farm
7.2 We farm at the bottom of the single track and use it daily as access to our fields.
Through the summer month we walk a hundred plus cows up and down this lane twice a day. At other times we use it frequently with tractors and machinery to operate our business which is our livelihood.
7.3 This lane is in very poor condition and is not maintained by the highways any more, e.g. no gritting. All year round the road surface is muddy and running with water, this is due to leaks in the canal. In winter it can become icy and very dangerous.
7.4 The applicant states in his planning application that there were previously 40 stables and therefore 40 cars travelling up the lane daily. This is definitely not true as the
Fittons who were the previous tenants at Newton Grange owned at least 15 – 20 of these horses and out of the remainder we know that some people actually owned two

horses each, so there were never 40 cars going down the lane daily. A more accurate figure was usually 10 a day at weekends and less through the week.
7.5 Our family have farmed Bank Newton for over 70 years and treasure the peace and tranquility of the hamlet as it is now. We feel the large development that is proposed will change all this.
Old School.
7.6 I would like to state that provided I am left to go about my business in peace I have no real objections to the regeneration of Newton Grange. However, the regeneration process I still in its infancy and I have been subject to vehicles parking and turning on my land, litter being deposited and 5 site notices relating to this development being attached to my land. This form of harassment is not acceptable. I have been at
Newton Grange / land adjoining for 42 years and feel it is my right to be left in peace.
7.7 Following the recent parish meeting I have to support my fellow parishioners in their concerns about traffic volumes. In the event that the road between Newton Grange and East Marton becomes passable by the average motor vehicle volume and speed will increase as it has in the past. This could lead to a serious accident as this route is popular with horse riders, walkers and cyclists, not to mention motor cyclists who all regularly use this right of way through the centre of Newton Grange Farm.
7.8 I hope that my observations will be of some value and that Newton Grange Farm will become viable again.
Grange Laithe
7.9 We are writing to object to the proposed development of Newton Grange Farm. We live next door to the farm and will be directly and severely affected by the proposals. In particular we are worried on three counts: a) The increase in residents / visitors b) The noise pollution created by the increase c) The problems of access, increased traffic and disruption to our own driveway access.
7.10 Taking each in turn to provide substantive evidence: a) Resident / Visitor numbers.
The plans state 9 new holiday cottages, a 3 bedroomed farm manager’s cottage and the refurbishment of the main house.
Provision for car parking for those living at and visiting the cottages and stables is significant, suggesting far greater numbers of people than in recent times. Indeed from personal experience we never saw more than 6 - 7 vehicles parked at any one time during the previous occupants tenancy of the farm (excluding their own vehicles). b) Noise Pollution
Previously when run as a dairy farm and livery yard, all visitors were business like and intent only on caring for animals, and in the case of horse owners, riding out. Visits were of very short duration, absolutely quiet and all had left the premises by early evening - summer and winter alike.
7.11 The introduction of holiday cottages into this peaceful and tranquil hamlet would inflict a great deal of noise on us and the surrounding wildlife, at all hours of the day and night, seven days a week. The lane between the farm and our house has strange acoustics in that noise carries in an amplified way between the two properties. (When we first moved here it took us some time to realise that a car starting at the farm, or a conversation between people wasn’t actually taking place in our own drive!)

7.12 Visitors to the holiday cottages are unlikely to lock themselves away after 6pm each evening, and the noise from cars, people, dogs, children playing etc will severely affect our quality of life. We currently enjoy peace and quiet most of the time and certainly the evenings. c) Access
The planning proposal states that traffic would be reduced from that experienced recently. This is totally untrue. In the 4 years we have lived here we have first hand experience of the amount of traffic going up and down the single track lane past our house, in that Gordon Steventon works at home on a full time basis. During the week traffic was very light, up to five people coming to visit their horse on any one day. Not everyone visits their horse each day and a substantial proportion of the horses were owned by the previous tenants. Forty stables was far from forty horse owners, with many horse owners owning two or more horses.
At weekends it was busier, up to 10 visitors per day, but well staggered throughout the day.
The increase in traffic caused by 9 holiday cottages, the farm manager and his family plus horse owners for 40 stables would put a considerable burden on what is already a difficult road to navigate. It is very narrow, single track, steep, tight corners across the canal bridge and permanently running with water (leakage from the canal) and for 6 months of the year blocked twice a day with cows for up to 20 minutes. In addition our driveway would become a de facto passing place for the increased traffic moving up and down the lane. We would be left with no alternative other than to block that access, whereas at the moment we accommodate the few who need to use our driveway, be they on foot, in a car or on horseback.
Walkers, canal boaters and horse riders treasure this hamlet for its peace, wildlife and safety. We all value the countryside and have no need of more traffic or increased building works. The proposed plans would change the nature of Bank Newton and its
(increasingly rare) uniqueness as a peaceful agricultural centre.
Please come and see for yourself what we are talking about. It s only by a site visit that you can appreciate the full extent of our concerns.
Newton Head
7.13 It is with considerable concern that we write with regard to the proposed development of Newton Grange Farm. As residents of Bank Newton, and living almost on top of the access lane, we are directly affected by the plans and have major reservations about the proposals. These relate to:

The increased resident/visitors numbers at Newton Grange.

The problems of access to Newton Grange and increased traffic.
Resident numbers
7.14 The plans submitted make interpretation difficult in terms of the absolute increase in the number of residents at the new development. The 9 new holiday cottages should be added to the provision of 3 bedrooms at the ‘Farm Mangers Cottage’ and the uncertain use of the main house which may also be split into separate tenancies. The site also has approval for 64 stables (recently increased from the previous 40). The provision of car-parking for these cottages and stables is significant and quite clearly a far larger number of people will be using the site than in recent years.
Access
7.15 The planning proposal states that traffic using the access lane would be reduced from its current/recent state. We believe this is untrue. In the three years we have lived here we estimate that on average 10 vehicles pass in either direction per day at weekends, falling during the week to as few as 5. It is not unusual for the lane to be

unused for several hours at a time. Although the previous occupiers had up to 40 horses on site almost half were owned by themselves making the numbers of outside visitors relatively few. All of the local residents have no doubt that the planned development would very significantly increase traffic on a daily basis.
7.16 Access to Newton Grange is via the lane passing directly beside our home. It is narrow single-track, steep in places with a tight blind bend crossing the canal and almost all year round the road surface is muddy and running with water. This is partly a result of chronic leaks from the Leeds-Liverpool canal as well as poor drainage. The road carries cattle passing twice daily for at least 6 months of the year and is frequently used by cyclists and horse riders. The current use causes deterioration of the surface and it has required frequent repair. Freezing surface water causes a problem in winter and the road is not gritted.
7.17 This lane is simply inappropriate to cope with the considerable increase in traffic that the development would bring. We have major concerns about safety for people and animals and the increased traffic would significantly affect our quality of life due to the position of our house, effectively ‘above’ the narrowest section.
7.18 We hope that the planning authorities will visit the site where the issues above will be immediately apparent.
7.19 Bank Newton is a tranquil community treasured by residents and visitors alike. It is enjoyed by horse-riders and walkers along the Leeds-Liverpool canal and the surrounding footpaths and bridleways including the Pennine Way (which passes close to Newton Grange). The canal passes through some of its most attractive scenery immediately adjacent to the development site. It is precisely the lack of traffic or development which give the area such a peaceful atmosphere.
7.20 The scale of the proposed development would involve significant new building and a marked increase in traffic. These plans would change Bank Newton irrevocably . In our opinion the proposal would significantly damage the environment of this quiet and appreciated district for residents and visitors alike.
7.21 We hope the planning department will give due consideration to these points and the concerns of other residents.
7.22 The applicant’s agent has provided the following statement of case:-
REGENERATION OF NEWTON GRANGE FARM, BANK NEWTON
Replacement livery stables
1. The application is for the erection of a stable block for 10 horses. This replaces and relocates some of the 28 boxes removed in November 2000 to a position clear from the listed Barn. This application is to be read in conjunction with the application for 9 No. visitor accommodation units and the general regeneration of Newton Grange
Farm. This is a joint statement covering both applications and responds to queries raised after initial consultation by the District Council. The visitor accommodation units and stables are to be used in conjunction with each other.
2. The applicant has owned and tenanted out the farm since 1986. The tenant's occupation however commenced years prior to this and the establishment of the farm

for stabling and as a riding school in conjunction with dairy farming began in 1973.
The attached letter and schedules Appendix B and C refer.
3. The tenancy has ceased due to bankruptcy of the tenant in November 2000.
Stable blocks were in dilapidated condition, mostly of timber frame and boarded construction, erected and owned by the tenant. These were cleared by the applicant as part of the proposed regeneration and rebuild of the farm. The use however for riding purposes has not changed with a minimum number of loose boxes maintained and a Craven District Council rating for stabling. The purpose of the current application is to replace these but relocated away from the Listed Barn.
4. Current applications being processed by the District Council have received letters of objection relating to highways matters. Comments have been put forward relating to the upkeep of the County Highway and the wall with British Waterways which are in themselves not Planning issues. It is assumed that section of highway referred to is that from the centre of Bank Newton to the canal bridge. Comments have been made without proper statistical evidence or traffic counts. It should also be considered that over the latter years the Newton Grange business was in decline and with it the numbers of visitors. Some current occupancies of adjoining properties do not exceed
3 years in relation to some 28 years that the riding school / stabling business until present. Details of fact are however known and recorded and follow.
5. The number of horses on the premises varied yearly, reaching a peak in the early
1990s at a count of 70 though no documentation exists. The following letters and schedules do give evidence of numbers and these form the basis of our calculations a Letter dated 1.9.95 from Fisher Hogarth, Chartered Surveyors, as attached appendix D. Total count - 45 horses. b Letter dated 12.2.96 from Fisher Hogarth, Chartered Surveyors, as attached appendix E. Total count - 50 horses.
6. Evidence of stabling accommodation is as follows a Letter dated 17.4.2000 from George F White, Chartered Surveyors, as attached appendix F.
Total timber stables - 22
Total stone built loose boxes -13 b Statement of Case for the Arbitor dated 6.3.86 as attached appendix G
Horse boxes - 26 c In November 2000
Total timber stables - 28
Stables in stone buildings - 19
7. The previous tenant made planning applications for extensions to the riding school on land in his own ownership immediately next to the farm off the same access road as follows a Application 5/5/18 dated 12.10.1987 for a livery yard incorporating 25 horse boxes and ancillary accommodation and parking for 25 cars. The supporting letter from
David Hills, Land Agents, dated 10.9.1987 stated this was to be run in conjunction with the existing riding school and stables. This represented a near doubling of the

horse business.
The Highways Department report offered no objection
The applicants later withdrew the application. b Application 5/5/18A for a covered riding school comprising 31 stable boxes and covered yard
The Highways Department report offered no objection
The applicants later withdrew the application. c Application 5/5/18B for covered menage and associated stables with a later phase of additional stables indicated.
The Highways Department report offered no objection
The application was approved
The reports were made in knowledge that the above were in addition to the existing stabling at Newton Grange Farm. Representations by J Howard that a separate riding school could be running adjacent to the existing should the tenant vacate the farm were not considered by the Planning Department to be relevant Planning issues.
The road serving Newton Grange Farm was the same then as now. The number of properties served by the road was the same then as now. The potential number of car movements then had Mr Fitton proceeded would have been significantly higher then as proposed now in the farm regeneration by Mr Howard.
8. With an ongoing farm the numbers of vehicle movements have been discounted for the purposes of trade off calculation, there being little potential change from existing to proposed for servicing the farm.
In conjunction with visitor accommodation an estimated maximum potential of 4 vehicle movements/day/each unit has been put forward by the Environment Services
Department.
The Department offers no recommendation in its design guide for equestrian use. The business has been based on horses stabled and owned by the Farm for hire, stabling rented by private owners and others bringing horse to the site in trailer boxes.
Statistics are not known of the number of hired rides per week at its peak. As a guide privately owned horse are usually the responsibility of the owner and require twice a day attention irrespective of riding. No statistics are known for day visitors with trailers.
Vehicle movement is greater for horsiculture, than for dairy farming and or visitor accommodation. There would have been greater incidence of peaking with the former tenants activities with horse servicing early am and early evening, and weekday riding generally late afternoon and early evening with children and clubs.
The proposed accommodation provides stabling for visitors with horses and in such circumstances there is a halving of predicted vehicle numbers.

Appendix sheet A attached gives our prediction of potential car movements for the
Farm, those that would have applied had Mr Fitton extended the business, and those now proposed. The potential for the previous business use without accommodation greater exceeds that as now proposed in even on conservative estimates. On this basis we put to you that the proposals now submitted represent a significant trade off over past use and not grounds to object on highways issues.
9. This is a County highway without restriction, not a private road until reaching the
Farm. It is not the intention to allow this to become a through route to East Marton.
10. Mr Fitton promoted equestrian events at the farm as the attached newspaper article appendix H refers. It is not the intention of Mr Howard to continue these events.
The statement of the previous application may have misled and further qualification is given. That the applicant has a good track record of diversification at Heslaker Farm,
Carleton, providing visitor accommodation at Funkirk barn and hosting equestrian events is known. This was given as evidence of his commitment to proper equestrian establishment not of intent to duplicate. Heslaker Farm is well able to cater for equestrian events having adequate land and good servicing access from a trunk road.
It is not the intention to duplicate this at Newton Grange where the emphasis is more a gentle leisurely approach particularly with proposed accommodation immediate. The basis of the proposal is solely to provide a sound economic footing for the farm.
Appendix A to Applicants Statement
Calculation of past and proposed vehicle movements as evidence for trade off
1. Vehicle use and servicing related to non horse farm activities assumed constant to all, excluded from calculation
2. Calculation of past usage a) based on highest documented no. of horses recorded by Fisher Hoggarth b) past ownership and use levels of horses are estimated. No tenant records are available.
3. Traffic is assumed as minimum average / day. There is increased likelihood of movements at weekends.
4. Journey in and journey out are counted separate. Peak periods early am and evening.
A. Under past tenancy
Ownership/livery vehicle movements/day
Estimated apportionment as -
Tenant owned, private use
Riding school owned/hired max recorded no
50
2
20
28 assume 6 horses x 3 rides per day x 2 total journeys
(single)
0
36
2 Private owned, rented livery as
DIY Basis
Half Livery
Full Livery
16 16
6
6
4 x 16
4 x 6
4 x 6 x 0.5
64
24
12

Outside staff
Servicing (feed/bed/vets etc) say
2 2 x 2
2 x 0.5
4
1
Total 147 per day
5. Full livery requires additional stable staff to service with additional vehicle movement. Am and pm sessions
6. DlY/half livery requires owner to visit a min twice daily.
B. 1987/1988 proposed increases in stabling (no objection by Highway Authority)
Predicted traffic movements
Stabling increase then 25
Estimated apportionment as -
Riding School owned / 12 36 hired
Private owned, rented 13 assumes 6 horses x 3rides per day x
2 livery as-
DIY Basis
Half Livery
Full Livery
Outside staff
Servicing (feed/bed/vets etc) say
6 4 x 6
5 4 x 5
2 4 x 2x 0.5
2 4 x 2
2 x 0.5
Total
24
20
4
8
1
93 per day
Potential total 1987/88
C Proposed including accommodation and livery
9 4x9 NYCC figure Visitor accommodation units
Manager's House 1 4 x 2
Proposed stable block as
Connected use to visitor units
9 in with visitor units assumed 2 cars
Other private hire
Servicing (feed/bed/vets etc)
1 say
4 x 1
2 x 0.5
Total
240 perday
36
8
4
1
49 per day
7. Remaining loose boxes removed as buildings replaced.
8. The proposed uses represents a substantial reduction let alone trade off.
8. Summary of principle planning issues

8.1 The main issues in this case area considered to be whether or not the proposal would meet the requirements of the various local plan policies set out in section 4 of this report.
8.2 The means of access to the site and the effect of the proposal on the access road.
9. Analysis
9.1 The application has been presented as a Farm Diversification Proposal and is therefore subject to the provisions of local plan policy ENV12.
9.2 The Ministry of Agriculture has encouraged initiatives to broaden the economic base of farms. Many farms have brought forward business ideas such as farm shops, tourist accommodation and field sports. A supplementary farm income helps to support an agricultural use, landscape and rural character of an area.
9.3 While in general encouraging new enterprise, it is important that where there are new proposals for change of use or new building, proposals should not spoil the character of the area.
9.4 Local Plan Policy ENV12 states that planning permission for the diversification of agricultural enterprises will be granted provided that, amongst other things, the likely level of traffic generated by the proposal is acceptable taking into account the suitability of existing access and approach roads.
9.5 The scale and character of the proposal should be complementary to its rural surroundings and should not result in an adverse impact on the character and amenities of the area or the local residents, by way of noise, air and water pollution.
9.6 The proposal where possible should make use of existing farm buildings and any new building should be closely related to any existing buildings and should be in keeping with them.
9.7 Local Plan Policy EMP13 States that visitor accommodation will be permitted only where it involves, as in this case, the provision of ancillary accommodation within existing farmhouses. Any such proposal should be in scale and compatible with its surroundings and appropriate to the existing level of activity in the area. It should not unacceptably affect the character of the countryside nor result in a detrimental impact on road safety and the free flow of traffic along the adjacent highway network.
9.8 The proposal should be well related to primary transport routes and be served , or be capable of being served by public transport. Sufficient parking should be provided.
9.9 The proposal should not have an unacceptable effect on the amenities of existing residents.
9.10 Local Plan Policies ENV1 and 2 seek to prevent the character of the countryside from being spoilt by sporadic development but accepts that some types of appropriate small scale development would be acceptable, in particular, those which benefit the rural economy and support the efficient operation of agriculture or forestry. Again the policies focus on the impact of traffic generation and the effects of the proposal on neighbouring amenity.

9.11 Local Plan Policy SRC7 relates to horse and equestrian activities and most of the requirements of this policy are common to the other policies described above. One main difference is the requirement for developments to have good access to existing bridle ways.
9.12 The common aims of the above policies are to protect the character of the countryside, neighbouring amenity and to ensure that there would be no adverse impact from traffic generation associated with any proposal.
The proposal in the context of Local Plan Policy.
9.13 The proposed scheme for the visitor accommodation makes use of an existing barn and a new similar sized building would be constructed immediately to the rear to provide in total 9 units of residential accommodation. This would be linked to the proposed new stables for which consent is being sought under application no.5/2001/1220.
9.14 Apart from the mass of the buildings the proposed scheme is well designed and in a location where it would not be a prominent feature in open countryside and thus not be harmful to countryside character. In terms of its design, and its location in the landscape, the scheme is considered to be acceptable. However, the current local plan policies which relate to this type of development require proposals to be in scale with their surroundings and the existing level of activity in the area. Taking the rural nature of the area into account and the substandard means of access to the site, it is considered that the scale of the proposal would need to be reduced to achieve the objectives of local plan policies ENV12 and EMP13. To achieve this, the proposal should allow the construction of unit A only which would provide 5 units of residential accommodation.
9.15 The activities at this scaled down level would be more appropriate to the character of the area and would be unlikely to adversely affect neighbouring amenity through noise or smell as the buildings would be sufficiently distant from any neighbouring dwellings.
In any case, the proposal is located in a working rural environment which already generates agriculturally related noise and smell.
9.16 A further policy criterion which is common to most of the local plan polices relating to this proposal concerns the effects of traffic generation on the local road network. It is a matter of fact that the planning history of the site in terms of the consents granted over the years have allowed a riding establishment to be created at Newton Hall Farm and consequently it would be difficult to argue that such a use had not been established.
However, there are no existing stables on the farm at present, and no visitor accommodation, therefore, the proposal should be considered as a completely new one and be assessed on its merits particularly with regard to traffic impact.
9.17 The road from Bank Newton through to East Marton is very narrow with very few opportunities for vehicles to pass
9.18 The applicant’s agent argues that there would be a reduction in traffic to the highway if the present scheme is allowed compared to the situation which had existed previously.
Under current circumstances there is little or no traffic generated by any horse or equestrian use of the site on a regular basis as the stables which had existed on the site have been demolished.

9.19 However, if this application to re-establish the riding school is to be supported on the basis of the farm diversification policy some basis for assessing what level of traffic generation would be acceptable needs to be formulated. Consequently it would be relevant to take account of the site history and its effect with regard to the current proposal.
9.20 The consent which was granted under decision no. 5/5/5, in 1976 established the principle of use of 1.72 acres of land for the purposes of a riding school and the application for the livery yard which was approved in 1987, but not implemented, further consolidated the principle of livery use.
9.21 However, taking into account the substandard width of the access road to the site and the representations from local residents in that behalf, it is considered that the scale of the proposal as submitted is too great and it should be restricted to the conversion of the existing stone built barn on the site. This would produce 5 units of accommodation with potential for the generation of 10 cars although the actual figure may be less if visitors arrive in only one vehicle per unit.
9.22 Traffic movement may be kept to a minimum by the fact that both the stabling and the related accommodation would be interdependent and be located close together.
9.23 It is considered that if the scale of the proposed development was reduced as suggested and formally linked by condition to the proposed stable block under
5/2001/1220 then the application would be acceptable and would meet the requirements of local plan policy.
10. Recommendation
10.1 Delegated Authority to approve the application is requested subject to the proposed stable block under 5/2001/1220 being approved and the scheme being amended to provide 5 no. units of visitor accommodation only on the site of the existing stone barn.
11. Summary of Conditions
11.1 Each unit of visitor accommodation hereby approved shall only be occupied by a person or persons keeping a horse, or horses the stable facilities approved under decision no. 5/2001/1220 and shall not otherwise be occupied. No unit of visitor accommodation shall be occupied for more than 30 days in any 3 month period.
11.2 Reason: The use of the visitor accommodation independently from the stabling would be likely to result in unacceptable additional levels of traffic along the access road to the site which is very narrow and has insufficient passing places.
11.3 No development shall take place in advance of the approval in writing of the District
Planning Authority of a sample panel of not less than 2sq.M of the stone to be used in the face of the external walls of the proposed building showing the method of walling and pointing.
11.4 Reason: To ensure that the building will be of good appearance.
11.5 This grant of consent shall extend only to the plans a amended showing the original
Block “B” deleted from the scheme received by the District Planning Authority on the
4 th January 2002.

11.6 Reason: The approved plans were formulated through negotiations with the District
Planning Authority and any departure may be unacceptable to the District Planning
Authority.