News RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


Skipton council site homes 'should be approved'

An artist's drawing of the proposed homes An artist's drawing of the proposed homes

Housing plans for the former Skipton offices of Craven District Council are being recommended for approval.

Last month, a decision was deferred to consider a request from the education authority for the developer to contribute towards the expansion of Water Street School.

Craven District Council’s Planning Committee was asked to consider the impact of the additional 57 houses on primary education and ask for a contribution of £163,000 from the developer.

But on Monday, councillors will be advised it would be an unreasonable request, bearing in mind the number of vacant spaces in other nearby primary schools – Ings and Parish.

Developer Lovell plans to build a mixture of family homes and apartments at the Granville Street site. Twenty-two of the properties, including 16 apartments and six houses, will be affordable, with the remaining put on the open market.

Lovell has agreed to contribute £120,000 towards public space enhancement, including new paths to Aireville Park and play facilities.

The scheme has been opposed by Skipton Civic Society and Skipton Town Council and the council’s own tree officer objects to the loss of mature cherry trees.

Jane Houlton, spokesman for Granville Street objectors, said residents supported the principle of housing, but not the current plans.

“There will be an excessive density of buildings on the site – far higher than the outline plans granted for Elsey Croft – as well as the destruction of the trees at Upper Granville Street and the overlooking of nearby homes,” she said.

“The scheme will create yet more traffic gridlock and parking problems for Skiptonians.”

click2find

Most popular


About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree