Agenda with Maps and Applications (21Mb) - pdf - Selby District ...
Agenda with Maps and Applications (21Mb) - pdf - Selby District ... Agenda with Maps and Applications (21Mb) - pdf - Selby District ...
2.8.18 Other material considerations are the Draft Core Strategy Policies, however these can only be afforded limited weight as they are subject to extant objections. 2.8.19 Following the initial Core Strategy Examination in Public further justification and evidence was sought for the housing numbers put forward, which stipulates a minimum of 700 units could be provided in Sherburn-in Elmet, given that this is based on up to date evidence it is considered that moderate weight should be attached to this. Whilst the figure is the subject of extant objections, it is considered that the effect of the objections will (if anything) cause the figure to go up. This is not, however, the position of the Council and will be determined at the forthcoming EIP. 2.8.20 In terms of the Site Allocations DPD this will need to be re-written to reflect the new evidence base and as it is at a early stage of production very limited weight can be afforded to this. This further reduces the weight to be attached to the resolution of 13th September 2011, which purports to rely on a version of the Allocations DPD which is now out of date. 2.8.21 In terms of sustainability Sherburn in Elmet is identified in the Local Plan as a Market Town, being one of the largest centres of population and employment and physically and environmentally the best able to accommodate significant growth. The Local Plan states that the town is close to the A1 and enjoys good accessibility, particularly following the opening of its bypass with major investment in infrastructure having already taken place. As such the Local Plan identifies Sherburn in Elmet as being one of the most sustainable locations identified in the District. 2.8.22 In light of all of the above it is concluded that the principle of housing proposed for this site (also taking into account the other applications for development of this Phase 2 site) and the quantum of development proposed are acceptable as they are in accordance with the housing numbers released as part of Policy H2A. Very limited weight can be attached to the Council decision of 13 September 2011 in terms of releasing limited numbers on this site as the SADPD on which this decision was based is now out of date. The resolution is not a material consideration to which greater weight can attach than the adopted Local Plan. In addition significant weight should be attached to the compliance of the proposals with the NPPF. It is therefore concluded that the application for residential development on this Phase 2 site is acceptable in principle and the previous reasons for refusal have been overcome, in the light of the latest policies. 2.9 Highways, Access and Transportation Relationship to Existing Highway and Access 128
2.9.1 Policy ENV1 (2) states that in considering proposals for development the Council will take account of “the relationship of the proposal to the highway network, the proposed means of access, the need for road / junction improvements in the vicinity of the site, and the arrangements to be made for car parking”. In addition, Policy T1 seeks to ensure that development proposals are well related to the existing highway network and that schemes are only permitted where existing roads have adequate capacity and can safely serve the development, unless appropriate off-site highway improvements are undertaken by the developer. 2.9.2 Policy T2 outlines that development proposals which would result in the creation of a new access or the intensification of the use of an existing access will be permitted provided: 1) There would be no detriment to highway safety; and 2) The access can be created in a location and to a standard acceptable to the highway authority. The Policy also states that “proposals which would result in the creation of a new access onto a primary road or district distributor road will not be permitted unless there is no feasible access onto a secondary road and the highway authority is satisfied that the proposal would not create conditions prejudicial to highway safety”. 2.9.3 At the site specific level, Policy SHB/1B states the proposals must make provision for: (1) A new distributor road linking Moor Lane and Low Street via allocation SHB/1A; (9) The safeguarding of future improvements to the junction of Hodgsons Lane and Moor Lane, to facilitate long-term access to safeguarded land to the north-east of Sherburn in Elmet 2.9.4 The “Approved Development Brief”, for the wider site dated 2003, notes that access to the wider site should be via one access from Moor Lane and two from Low Street. It also states that there should be avoidance of a direct through-route to reduce the potential for ‘rat running’, a design approach which designs road curvatures to minimise traffic speeds and the introduction of appropriate traffic calming measures, the creation of pedestrian safe/dominant environments at focal points and throughout the residential areas. It also notes that the accesses on Low Street are likely to be “priority “T” junctions with ghost island turning facilities provided for these new junctions and also for existing adjacent junctions in order to increase safety”. The Development Brief also shows that the whole of the allocation site (with the exception of 5 units off Carousel Walk and 5 off Fairfield Link) are to be served through the main spine route. The Development Brief also sets a context for a Transport Assessment relating to applications on the site. 129
- Page 77 and 78: infrastructure) and came into force
- Page 79 and 80: 2.22.9 As such the scheme is consid
- Page 81 and 82: 2.23 Climate Change, Energy Efficie
- Page 83 and 84: have raised the need for affordable
- Page 85 and 86: ii) affordable housing provision, r
- Page 87 and 88: climate change flood event. Details
- Page 89 and 90: The agreed drawings must be approve
- Page 91 and 92: No dwellings shall be constructed w
- Page 95 and 96: Public Session Report Reference Num
- Page 97 and 98: Low Street to the south of the vill
- Page 99 and 100: Reason for Refusal 1 The proposal b
- Page 101 and 102: • The increase in numbers of resi
- Page 103 and 104: of adoption an indicative capacity
- Page 105 and 106: • Types and Sizes - Affordable Ho
- Page 107 and 108: and that further clarification/evid
- Page 109 and 110: ecording a condition should be appe
- Page 111 and 112: • The provision of well designed
- Page 113 and 114: presented as an Appendix within the
- Page 115 and 116: We support the proposed preservatio
- Page 117 and 118: - When travelling around Leeds and
- Page 119 and 120: - The traffic projections are woefu
- Page 121 and 122: - The Sherburn village centre is al
- Page 123 and 124: determination must be made in accor
- Page 125 and 126: xvi) xvii) xviii) Climate Change, E
- Page 127: the Regional Spatial Strategy Polic
- Page 131 and 132: 2.9.10 In addition the report confi
- Page 133 and 134: 2.9.19 The Travel Plan Framework se
- Page 135 and 136: Phase 1 development on Moor Lane, w
- Page 137 and 138: 2.10.6 In addition, Paragraph 58 of
- Page 139 and 140: is no reason why the likely landsca
- Page 141 and 142: 2.14.2 In terms of flood risk the
- Page 143 and 144: 2.14.15 The application states that
- Page 145 and 146: 2.16.3 The Geoenvironmental Apprais
- Page 147 and 148: stage and a condition can be utilis
- Page 149 and 150: 2.19.9 In commenting on the applica
- Page 151 and 152: (b) directly related to the develop
- Page 153 and 154: Primary Care Trust 2.22.10 In terms
- Page 155 and 156: floorspace should secure at least 1
- Page 157 and 158: allocated for housing purposes. It
- Page 159 and 160: 2.26.3 The key issues in the determ
- Page 161 and 162: dwellings close to the watercourse
- Page 163 and 164: (3) highway construction details in
- Page 165 and 166: (ii) An independent Stage 2 Safety
- Page 167 and 168: Reason: To safeguard to the rights
- Page 169 and 170: Reason: In the interests of ecology
- Page 171 and 172: 171
- Page 173 and 174: efficiency and cumulative impact th
- Page 175 and 176: • Construction would be phased fr
- Page 177 and 178: The Parish Council are not sure wha
2.8.18 Other material considerations are the Draft Core Strategy Policies,<br />
however these can only be afforded limited weight as they are subject<br />
to extant objections.<br />
2.8.19 Following the initial Core Strategy Examination in Public further<br />
justification <strong>and</strong> evidence was sought for the housing numbers put<br />
forward, which stipulates a minimum of 700 units could be provided in<br />
Sherburn-in Elmet, given that this is based on up to date evidence it is<br />
considered that moderate weight should be attached to this. Whilst the<br />
figure is the subject of extant objections, it is considered that the effect<br />
of the objections will (if anything) cause the figure to go up. This is not,<br />
however, the position of the Council <strong>and</strong> will be determined at the<br />
forthcoming EIP.<br />
2.8.20 In terms of the Site Allocations DPD this will need to be re-written to<br />
reflect the new evidence base <strong>and</strong> as it is at a early stage of production<br />
very limited weight can be afforded to this. This further reduces the<br />
weight to be attached to the resolution of 13th September 2011, which<br />
purports to rely on a version of the Allocations DPD which is now out of<br />
date.<br />
2.8.21 In terms of sustainability Sherburn in Elmet is identified in the Local<br />
Plan as a Market Town, being one of the largest centres of population<br />
<strong>and</strong> employment <strong>and</strong> physically <strong>and</strong> environmentally the best able to<br />
accommodate significant growth. The Local Plan states that the town<br />
is close to the A1 <strong>and</strong> enjoys good accessibility, particularly following<br />
the opening of its bypass <strong>with</strong> major investment in infrastructure having<br />
already taken place. As such the Local Plan identifies Sherburn in<br />
Elmet as being one of the most sustainable locations identified in the<br />
<strong>District</strong>.<br />
2.8.22 In light of all of the above it is concluded that the principle of housing<br />
proposed for this site (also taking into account the other applications for<br />
development of this Phase 2 site) <strong>and</strong> the quantum of development<br />
proposed are acceptable as they are in accordance <strong>with</strong> the housing<br />
numbers released as part of Policy H2A. Very limited weight can be<br />
attached to the Council decision of 13 September 2011 in terms of<br />
releasing limited numbers on this site as the SADPD on which this<br />
decision was based is now out of date. The resolution is not a material<br />
consideration to which greater weight can attach than the adopted<br />
Local Plan. In addition significant weight should be attached to the<br />
compliance of the proposals <strong>with</strong> the NPPF. It is therefore concluded<br />
that the application for residential development on this Phase 2 site is<br />
acceptable in principle <strong>and</strong> the previous reasons for refusal have been<br />
overcome, in the light of the latest policies.<br />
2.9 Highways, Access <strong>and</strong> Transportation<br />
Relationship to Existing Highway <strong>and</strong> Access<br />
128