A LONG-RUNNING planning saga over plans to extend a rural airfield looks to be at an end, after the Planning Inspectorate published its adjudication on the row.

Martin Scott has been seeking to develop Bagby Airfield, near Thirsk, four several years, but has met strong local opposition.

His scheme to build a three-bedroomed club house, with extended aircraft hangers and a helicopter landing pad look to be in tatters after his appeal against Hambleton District Council’s decision to refuse planning permission was dismissed by planning inspector John Braithwaite.

The adjudication seemingly brings to an end a lengthy planning row over the airfield, following a three-day public inquiry in March.

He overturned the council’s decision to refuse planning permission for Mr Scott to install matting on one of the airfield’s runways and add a concrete apron to one of the hangers.

This work will now be allowed to go ahead.

An enforcement notice, issued by the council in September 2009, requiring the removal of allegedly unauthorised modifications to aspects of the airfield, has been quashed by the planning inspector.

Previous proposals for the airfield, also refused by the council, included plans for an 18-bedroomed hotel.

Campaign group Action4Refusal was set up by local residents to oppose the expansion.

It claimed the expansion would increase noise disturbance and present a safety hazard because of the potential increase in aircraft movement.

In his report, Mr Braithwaite wrote: "Most flying activity at the airfield is for leisure purposes and is focussed at times, at weekends and during summer months, when residents of the area are also seeking to maximise their leisure time.

"Noise from aircraft and helicopters will occur at any time, directly over Bagby and Thirkleby, and will cause significant disturbance for residents."

Stephen Hornsby, of Action4Refusal, welcomed the planning inspector’s decision and praised the efforts of those who opposed the development.

Mr Scott said he was pleased the enforcement issues had been resolved, but expressed his disappointment at the decision, saying he would consider submitting revised development plans in future.

He said: "The airfield cannot stay as it is, parts of it are in such a dilapidated state."