02.07.2014 Views

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 ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

2.9.23 The indicative plans demonstrate that sufficient parking can be<br />

achieved <strong>with</strong>in the site in order to comply <strong>with</strong> policy.<br />

2.9.24 NYCC Highways have confirmed that “the local Highway Authority's<br />

current parking design guide still refers to maximum parking st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />

<strong>and</strong> they underst<strong>and</strong> this document was also adopted by <strong>Selby</strong> DC. In<br />

line <strong>with</strong> national guidance, maximum st<strong>and</strong>ards are no longer<br />

considered appropriate for new residential development. Parking levels<br />

should therefore be agreed <strong>with</strong> the Local Highways Authority (as in<br />

NYCC) <strong>and</strong> the Local Planning Authority rather than applying the<br />

'maximum' parking st<strong>and</strong>ards in the existing guidance”.<br />

2.9.25 On this basis it is considered that delivery of a detailed car parking<br />

arrangements can be confirmed at the reserved matters stage as part<br />

of the layout <strong>and</strong> as such the scheme is acceptable.<br />

Car Parking in the Village Centre<br />

2.9.26 Objectors have stated that there is a lack of parking in the village<br />

centre which is already constrained. The developers have not<br />

proposed any contribution towards improvements to the provision of<br />

car parking in the town centre as part of the submission.<br />

2.9.27 NYCC Highways <strong>and</strong> SDC Planning Officers have reviewed the lack of<br />

such improvements <strong>and</strong> consider that the site is in a sustainable<br />

location so people will not always drive to the village centre. As such it<br />

is not considered reasonable to require the developer to enhance or<br />

contribute to the enhancement of parking provision in the village<br />

centre.<br />

2.9.28 On this basis it is considered that the scheme is acceptable <strong>and</strong> no<br />

contribution or requirement for improvements to be made to the town<br />

centre car parking can or should be required from the development as<br />

any such requirements would be contrary to Circular Guidance in<br />

11/95.<br />

Conclusion on Highways, Access <strong>and</strong> Transportation<br />

2.9.29 In conclusion in terms of highways, access <strong>and</strong> transportation then the<br />

scheme is considered to be acceptable <strong>and</strong> through the use of S106<br />

mechanisms an appropriate access can be secured to the site at<br />

reserved matters stage, a mechanism can be put in place to secure an<br />

appropriate Travel Plan <strong>and</strong> that provision of footway <strong>and</strong> cycle links<br />

can be attained between the development site <strong>and</strong> the surrounding<br />

areas.<br />

2.9.30 In terms of the scope of conditions proposed by NYCC Highways then<br />

these are not considered acceptable given that access is reserved for<br />

future consideration.<br />

202

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!