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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Report Reference Number: 2011/1049/FUL <strong>Agenda</strong> Item No: 5.6<br />

___________________________________________________________________<br />

To:<br />

Planning Committee<br />

Date: 12 September 2012<br />

Author:<br />

Nancy Thynne<br />

Lead Officer:<br />

Dylan Jones (Business Manager)<br />

__________________________________________________________ _______<br />

APPLICATION<br />

NUMBER:<br />

2011/1049/FUL PARISH: Fairburn<br />

APPLICANT: Mr G Wilkinson VALID DATE: 2 November 2011<br />

PROPOSAL:<br />

LOCATION:<br />

EXPIRY DATE: 28 December 2011<br />

Erection of a residential development of 4No. dwellings <strong>and</strong><br />

construction of a new vehicular access<br />

Second Pinfold Farm, Caudle Hill, Fairburn<br />

This application has been brought before Planning Committee due to it being a Departure<br />

from the<br />

Development Plan as it is contrary to Policy H2A.<br />

Summary:<br />

The development of this site via the erection of 4 dwellings would be contrary to policy<br />

H2A of the <strong>Selby</strong> <strong>District</strong> Local Plan. However only limited weight should be afforded to<br />

policy H2A given its non conformity <strong>with</strong> the NPPF <strong>and</strong> consequently the scheme is<br />

considered to be acceptable in principle because it represents a sustainable form of<br />

development.<br />

Having reviewed the scheme against the relevant local, regional <strong>and</strong> national policies the<br />

scheme is considered to be acceptable in terms of its impact upon the character <strong>and</strong><br />

appearance of the area <strong>and</strong> the proposals would not have a significant adverse impact<br />

upon residential amenity, highway safety or biodiversity, nor would the development be at<br />

risk of, or cause an increased risk of flooding elsewhere.<br />

Recommendations:<br />

253

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!