Residents were given a chance to question a Yorkshire Dales National Park boss about objections to proposed new sites for affordable homes for local people at a public hearing in Grassington on Thursday.

Lined up before the Inspector, David Vickery, on the third day of the hearing – it had opened in Bainbridge on Tuesday – were people representing communities in Grassington, Cracoe, Austwick, Linton, Long Preston, Malham and Threshfield, where there are proposals for about 75 homes.

The plan covers 76 communities throughout the park and pinpoints a potential 240 development sites over the next 15 years.

The proposed sites include three in Grassington – a village that has had few affordable homes in the past 20 years – one in Austwick and Cracoe, two in Malham and Threshfield and three in Long Preston.

Defending the plan was the park’s head of sustainable development, Peter Stockton, who told the hearing at Grassington Town Hall that the plan did not set out to find housing “at all costs” and that not all potential sites had been identified.

He said it had been calculated that the Grassington area, which included Threshfield and Kettlewell, needed 11 affordable homes every year for the next five years.

Mr Stockton defended the authority’s decision not to extend the proposed site on land near Pant Head, in Austwick, where there was potential for eight homes, despite a plea that without making the site bigger it would not be viable in terms of cost.

He said the cost of building each home on the site would be in the region of £110,000 compared to the £60,000 contribution from the local authority for each affordable property.

But Mr Stockton said the plot had been drawn up in such a way for environmental reasons and he envisaged a line of terraced homes set back from a stone wall and line of trees.

The plan for three or four houses south of the Croft in Cracoe was described as “the last piece of land anyone in their right mind would chose”. The route was barely passable because of its width and access to the main road was poor.

Mr Stockton said it was not considered a dangerous site as it was a “modest” size and was unobtrusive in the landscape being back from the road.

The three sites selected in Grassington for a potential 26 homes were north of Lyth End for two houses, north west of Woodside suitable for six homes and north of Moody Sty Lane, the most contentious site, where 20 homes could be built.

There was also an attempt to get the park to substitute a site near Wharfe View for the Moody Sty Lane plot but Mr Stockton said there were potential archaeological implications, relating to the 17th century enclosures and it would encroach into the countryside.

Grassington Parish Council chairman Michael Rooze said approval had recently been given to four, three-bedroomed affordable homes for a site in Moody Sty Lane and he questioned the need for more affordable homes. He claimed there was a slow take-up when the development in Mirefield was completed and calculated that 20 homes represented a five per cent increase in the population of the village.

Mr Stockton said there was an outstanding need for affordable homes and Moody Sty Lane was suitable because of how it related to the centre of Grassington and did not spoil the character of the area.

There had been concern about the land being contaminated following the burial of animals during a foot and mouth outbreak in the 1960s. “It is believed the burials were small scale and carrying very little risk,” he said.

The site north west of Woodside was a good site, near to local services and could be developed without harming the countryside. “The only downside is the distance from the village centre,” he said.

There was concern from residents of Linton about where the “settlement boundary” had been drawn, in particular in relation to The Rectory, Manor House and Linton House which the inspector said he would consider.

The Inspector heard concern from Long Preston residents about the need for 20 affordable homes on three sites – west of Grosvenor Farm and two sites north of Greengate Farm – and their impact on medieval crofts.

He asked Mr Stockton to clarify the situation of ownership in relation to the sites west of Daisy Bank and west of Garden Cottage in Malham by tomorrow.

Mr Stockton defended the park’s decision to select two plots in Threshfield, south of the Institute, despite fears that it was in the oldest part of the village near six grade II-listed houses. He said the plots could be developed without harming the listed buildings and defended the quality of affordable homes.

The Inspector will now consider the arguments and his report is expected to be published in April.