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 ...
2.22.3 Circular guidance requires that such contributions are fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the proposed development; are necessary to remedy any shortfalls or adverse impacts resulting from the proposed development; and are necessary to make the proposal acceptable in land use planning terms. 2.22.4 In terms of developer contributions then the “Approved Development Brief” for the wider site sets out a series of elements for consideration by the developers and the Council in progressing schemes for the site. 2.22.5 The submitted S106 Heads of Terms refers to education, recycling, and recreational open space provision. Affordable housing and Recreational Open Space have been considered earlier in this report. Taking the other matters in turn. Education 2.22.6 In terms of education matters then Policy SHB/1B (9) states that proposals must make provision for “appropriate community and smallscale local shopping facilities, including the reservation of land for a new primary school”. 2.22.7 Since the previous refusal on this site, the agents have submitted an application for change of use from agricultural to educational (use Class D1) and formation of new access road to Milford Road on land to the southern edge of Athelston CP School and this would be transferred to North Yorkshire County Council upon occupation of the first dwelling which would be secured via a Section 106 agreement. In addition they have offered a contribution towards the enhancement of education facilities at Athelstan CP School which would be secured via the Section 106 agreement. 2.22.8 North Yorkshire County Council have confirmed that they withdraw their previous objections and this decision has been taken in the expectation of the future expansion of Athelstan CP School and following; 1) Approval of the change of use application NY/2012/0171/COU for land adjacent to the school site. 2) Consideration of the local and national planning policies which would influence a future detailed planning application for development of the enlarged site including the National Planning Policy Framework. This is subject to developer contributions to secure education infrastructure, both land and financial, via s.106 provision. 2.22.9 As such the scheme is considered to accord with Criterion 3 of ENV1, Policy CS6 of the Local Plan and the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) on Developer Contributions. 152
Primary Care Trust 2.22.10 In terms of developer contributions to healthcare then the “Approved Development Brief” for the wider site outlines that the development “will be required to meet the healthcare needs generated by the development and the overall scheme should allow for the reservation of land for such facilities if necessary”, going on to state that “the preferred method of delivery and the level of payment required will be discussed with the PCT and suitable provision will be made to secure these improvements through a legal agreement”. As such alongside CS6, the Council’s SPD on Developer Contributions and the Development Brief there is a policy context to seek contributions to improvements in healthcare provision as a result of the development. 2.22.8 The PCT have confirmed that additional health care provision may need to be considered, however the PCT have not confirmed what contribution they would seek and what these monies would be utilised for. Therefore in the absence of this information it is considered that a contribution cannot be justified at this stage, as it cannot be shown by the LPA to be necessary or reasonably related in scale and kind to the development proposed (in the absence of evidence supporting the level of contribution). Waste and Recycling Facilities 2.22.11 As part of any S106 and in line with Policy CS6 and the Council’s SPD on Developer Contributions the provision of waste recycling for the dwellings would be based on the following levels subject to prices changing based on all of the units being “Dwellings with Gardens”. Therefore the total contribution would equate for the provision of 2 bins and 3 recycling bins and this would be secured via a Section 106 agreement. Community or Small Scale Retail Provision 2.22.12 In terms of developer contributions to community venues and retail provision the “Approved Development Brief” for the wider site outlines that as the site would ultimately accommodate more than 3000 residents, this level of population “may require a venue for meeting purposes and / other community needs”. 2.22.13 The scheme (together with other development on this Phase 2 site) does not include such a provision and the Parish Council although highlighting issues with capacity on existing services, have not identified specific proposals to which the developer could be asked to contribute in terms of existing facilities and the development of the site. In addition there is no evidence base to demonstrate the need for such facilities nor that the development would justify such provision for which to support such contributions and as such it is not considered that the development (taken together with other development on this Phase 2 153
- 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 and 128: the Regional Spatial Strategy Polic
- Page 129 and 130: 2.9.1 Policy ENV1 (2) states that i
- 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: (b) directly related to the develop
- 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
- Page 179 and 180: stronger emphasis on the delivery o
- Page 181 and 182: The Council has no evidence of any
- Page 183 and 184: The proposed development will only
- Page 185 and 186: countryside. The authority will nee
- Page 187 and 188: 1.4.20 Ramblers' Association No res
- Page 189 and 190: - Carousel Walk being opened up int
- Page 191 and 192: - Time frame for development up to
- Page 193 and 194: 2.7 Key Issues • Village Design S
- Page 195 and 196: 2.8.10 Policy H2A was clear that th
- Page 197 and 198: Elmet as being one of the most sust
- Page 199 and 200: an assessment of the cumulative imp
- Page 201 and 202: • Adequate facilities are provide
Primary Care Trust<br />
2.22.10 In terms of developer contributions to healthcare then the “Approved<br />
Development Brief” for the wider site outlines that the development “will<br />
be required to meet the healthcare needs generated by the<br />
development <strong>and</strong> the overall scheme should allow for the reservation of<br />
l<strong>and</strong> for such facilities if necessary”, going on to state that “the<br />
preferred method of delivery <strong>and</strong> the level of payment required will be<br />
discussed <strong>with</strong> the PCT <strong>and</strong> suitable provision will be made to secure<br />
these improvements through a legal agreement”. As such alongside<br />
CS6, the Council’s SPD on Developer Contributions <strong>and</strong> the<br />
Development Brief there is a policy context to seek contributions to<br />
improvements in healthcare provision as a result of the development.<br />
2.22.8 The PCT have confirmed that additional health care provision may<br />
need to be considered, however the PCT have not confirmed what<br />
contribution they would seek <strong>and</strong> what these monies would be utilised<br />
for. Therefore in the absence of this information it is considered that a<br />
contribution cannot be justified at this stage, as it cannot be shown by<br />
the LPA to be necessary or reasonably related in scale <strong>and</strong> kind to the<br />
development proposed (in the absence of evidence supporting the<br />
level of contribution).<br />
Waste <strong>and</strong> Recycling Facilities<br />
2.22.11 As part of any S106 <strong>and</strong> in line <strong>with</strong> Policy CS6 <strong>and</strong> the Council’s<br />
SPD on Developer Contributions the provision of waste recycling for<br />
the dwellings would be based on the following levels subject to prices<br />
changing based on all of the units being “Dwellings <strong>with</strong> Gardens”.<br />
Therefore the total contribution would equate for the provision of 2 bins<br />
<strong>and</strong> 3 recycling bins <strong>and</strong> this would be secured via a Section 106<br />
agreement.<br />
Community or Small Scale Retail Provision<br />
2.22.12 In terms of developer contributions to community venues <strong>and</strong> retail<br />
provision the “Approved Development Brief” for the wider site outlines<br />
that as the site would ultimately accommodate more than 3000<br />
residents, this level of population “may require a venue for meeting<br />
purposes <strong>and</strong> / other community needs”.<br />
2.22.13 The scheme (together <strong>with</strong> other development on this Phase 2 site)<br />
does not include such a provision <strong>and</strong> the Parish Council although<br />
highlighting issues <strong>with</strong> capacity on existing services, have not<br />
identified specific proposals to which the developer could be asked to<br />
contribute in terms of existing facilities <strong>and</strong> the development of the site.<br />
In addition there is no evidence base to demonstrate the need for such<br />
facilities nor that the development would justify such provision for which<br />
to support such contributions <strong>and</strong> as such it is not considered that the<br />
development (taken together <strong>with</strong> other development on this Phase 2<br />
153