Hot tubs, seating and a play area must be removed from a Lake District pub.
A Government inspector has ordered the removal of lighting posts, part of a seating and play area as well as hot tubs from land to the west of Garr Lane in Torver, near Coniston, in connection with The Wilson Arms.
The Planning Inspectorate upheld three enforcement notices issued by the Lake District National Park Authority.
According to the inspector’s report, the appellant Matthew Mayvers is now required to remove 30 lighting posts, four hot tubs and a raised decking areas and steps from land around shepherd’s huts on the site.
Other required actions include the removal of a track formed with stones and the appellant is required to spread grass seed over the exposed land.
According to the report prepared by the Planning Inspectorate, the appellant argued the track was approved as part of plans granted in 2019 however the inspector states there was no reference to a track in the design and access statement.
The appellant added no breach of planning rules occurred in relation to the hot tubs as they did not constitute a building. The Planning Inspectorate disagreed and said the proposals display a level of permanence.
The inspector’s report states in relation to this enforcement notice: “The development harms the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area and, while localised in its extent, fails to conserve or enhance the local landscape of this part of the national park.
“In my view, it follows that if the landscape and scenic beauty of this part of the national park is materially diminished, the identified OUV and thus significance of the WHS is also incrementally harmed.”
In a second enforcement notice the appellant is also required to stop using part of the land as a seating and play area for customers of the Wilson Arms.
Previously a planning application was approved in 2019 for the change of use of land from a field to a beer garden but according to the inspector’s report the authority say the beer garden extends beyond the permitted area.
The appellant says planning documents state the description of the plans says field and not part of field, the Planning Inspectorate report says.
The inspector’s report adds “The appellant asserts that the beer garden is an important element of the public house’s business and supports its continuing operation as a visitor and community facility.
“Be that as it may, I am mindful that the development is an extension to an existing beer garden, of which the latter would remain whatever the outcome of the appeal.”
The inspector dismissed the appeal and concluded: “The development has a harmful effect on the living conditions of neighbours, with regard to noise and disturbance.”
Another enforcement notice was also upheld in relation to the use of a marquee but according to the inspector’s report the marquee has now been removed.
The Planning Inspectorate dismissed the appeal and upheld the three enforcement notices on April 5.
