Inspector rejects plans for giant shop

Owners Chris and Suzanne O'Donnell planned to turn the centre on the A65, near Settle, into a major tourist attraction, which would put Craven on the map.

They planned to invest £2.5 million creating two new all weather exhibition facilities and a hotel to help them double visitors to 140,000 a year and boost local trade.

Plans for an enlarged shop created controversy in North Craven despite assurances from the O'Donnells that their shop would not compete with retailers in Settle, Ingleton or Bentham.

However members of both Settle and Ingleton Chambers of Trade objected to the size of the proposed shop, which, at 1,060 square metres, was almost the size of the Booths supermarket in Settle.

Craven District Council backed the traders and on Friday Inspector Mike Croft upheld its decision to refuse planning permission following a public inquiry.

He said: "Settle appears to me to be at most risk. It is clear to me also that spending by someone at the new retail facility would inevitably tend to have an effect on his or her spending elsewhere: quite simply, more spending at the centre would mean less spending somewhere else.

"I consider that there is clear potential for the vitality and viability of nearby centres, particularly Settle, to be harmed. I accept the appellant's point that the proposed retail unit would not offer the same attraction as a retail park but then it would not need to do so to have an adverse effect on the small local centres in the locality.

"With a floorspace equivalent to about half the goods retail floorspace of the whole of Settle town centre, (on the appellant's assessment), it would be a significant addition to the local retail scene."

Mr Croft ruled that the proposed shop was too large, describing it as the same size as a medium sized supermarket, and in no way could it be considered necessary to the running of the centre.

He said: "There is no evidence that, that size is necessary for reasons of financial viability, it would be out of step with the norm at other attractions, the financial forecasts associated with it are not to be relied on and it could be used to sell a wide range of goods unrelated to falconry."

There would also be nothing to stop the falconry centre stocking items which had no connection at all with birds of prey and although this was not what the O'Donnells intended, a future owner may have different plans, said the inspector.

The O'Donnells pointed out they had a "fall back" position and claimed, that if they lost the appeal, they could build a caf of over 1,000 square metres and then convert it to a shop over which, they said, the council would have little control. However the inspector said this would contravene planning regulations.

Summing up, Mr Croft said: "I am not satisfied that the proposed retail element of the appeal project would be ancillary to and a necessary adjunct of the falconry centre. The project needs to be assessed against both tourist and retail policies and there is less than total compliance with tourist policies."

Chamber of trade members were pleased the inspector had backed local shopkeepers.

Tony Price, chairman of Settle and District Chamber of Trade, said: "The appeal has got it right at the end of the day and the chamber of trade is very thankful the inspector reached this decision."

Chris Bonsall, of Ingleton Tradespeople's Association, said: "We just feel that it is the correct decision and common sense has prevailed.

"The retail shop was just totally inappropriate to the area and we are pleased the decision has been made against them."

The O'Donnells have six weeks to challenge the decision at the High Court if they wish to do so. Permission has already been granted to create new exhibition facilities, a hotel, residential training centre and caf at the falconry centre although it is unclear whether these plans will proceed without the shop.

The couple declined to comment on the inspector's ruling.