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 ...
Recommends any approval includes conditions in respect of surface water since the existing watercourse is at capacity. CONSERVATION OFFICER (PREVIOUS) No objections to the proposal due to the increased views of the church and the movement away from the Church of the main bulk of the development. Any negative effect on the setting is outweighed by the opening up of views from other directions. H & H HERITAGE (CURRENT ACTING CONSERVATION OFFICER) The Ordnance Survey maps of 1892 and 1952 both show that Scarthingwell Hall was connected to the RC Chapel. The 1892 map notes that the church was a private chapel. Both maps show that there were also buildings close to the north and south elevations of the chapel. Feels that the situation in 1892 and 1952 are relevant in as much as there were buildings in close proximity to the chapel that would have contributed to its settingalbeit in some people’s eyes to the detriment of the chapel. The proposed erection of the 50 bed care homes and 15 close care apartments will to some extent open up the setting of the chapel. However feels that the following points should be taken into consideration when determining this application: - 1. The net increase in the volume of the proposed development. 2. The policy of development on the countryside. 3. The expert opinion of Dr Jolley with regard to avoiding the relocation of frail and elderly – it could be construed that the building works and change of accommodation within the redevelopment amounts to relocation. 4. The un-sustainability of the current repair and maintenance costs is not substantiated with any analysis of the costings to date and is not relevant to this application. H & H Heritage do not feel that enough justification has been provided for this application to be fully assessed. PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICER On the recent reconsultation, no objections are raised. TREE AND LANDSCAPE OFFICER No objections subject to a landscaping scheme for replacement planting. NORTH YORKSHIRE COUNTY ARCHAEOLOGIST No objections subject to a condition requiring archaeological evaluation. ENGLISH HERITAGE Do not consider it necessary to be consulted, no comments made. GARDEN HISTORY SOCIETY No objection but would urge the applicant to ensure the design and materials are sympathetic to its special location. NATURAL ENGLAND Satisfied that suitable surveys have been carried out, no objections subject to compliance with the reports submitted and an informative note with regard to obtaining a licence. 364
COUNTY ECOLOGIST It is recommended that a full bat survey is carried out at this site to determine the type and extent of roosts present. This should be carried out at a suitable time of year (mid May to August). This survey should be undertaken and submitted for comment prior to the planning application being determined, so that any potential impact on these protected species can be taken into account during the decision process. Surveys for European protected species, such as bats, cannot be conditioned as part of the planning process. The reason for this approach is because a small number of bats were found to be roosting behind hanging tiles on the south side of the building. The current survey was undertaken at a sub-optimal time of year and as such the extent and type of roost could not be confirmed. Since the buildings are to be demolished the roost will be lost and it is vital to understand the full impact of this loss. PUBLICITY Two petitions were received (11 signature and 14 signatures) from neighbouring properties concerned over the effect the development will have on the Green Belt and the adjacent listed building, access and safety issues, the three-storey height of part of the new building, effect on views of the lake and also the nature of the new use and the type of patients that are to be residing in the new development. In addition, four individual letters and emails, and multiple letters from a resident of Orchard Close, Barkston Ash including copy correspondence with other bodies, The Queen and the MP, have been received from properties within the park concerned over: • further development in the park, • departure from the development plan, • the impact on the church, the historic park and the Green Belt would not be appropriate, • the alleged nature of the occupants of the development, • highways issues, increase in traffic numbers and movements and use of Lakeside Approach during the construction period, the roads are all narrow and run through existing residential developments, evidence of damage to existing roads and consideration should be given to the logistics of construction traffic and personnel, • effects on wildlife and protected species, • unclear how access will be controlled, • the proximity of the new development to an immediate neighbour and issues of loss of privacy and overlooking. The reconsultation on the very special circumstances statement, the ‘Conservation Statement’ and the perspectives of the site has resulted in the following additional responses being received: A series of letters and a 64-signature petition has been received from a resident of Orchard Close, Barkston Ash. The petition signatories are from Barkston Ash and Lakeside Approach. The grounds of objection on the petition relate to: • very little has changed from the original submission, • conflicts with development plan policies, • no consideration has been given to the effect on the listed church, 365
- Page 313 and 314: Policies YH1, YH2, YH7, YH8, YH9, E
- Page 315 and 316: damage the environment (flora and f
- Page 317 and 318: 3. The principle of a dwelling in t
- Page 319 and 320: new buildings as inappropriate in G
- Page 321 and 322: have detrimental adverse affect on
- Page 323 and 324: 2.15.2 The NPPF paragraph 94 states
- Page 325 and 326: 2.21.2 The proposed developed is th
- Page 327 and 328: access) until splays are provided g
- Page 329 and 330: 329
- Page 331 and 332: Report Reference Number 2012/0479/F
- Page 333 and 334: 1.3.5 An application for conservati
- Page 335 and 336: 8. Nature conservation and protecte
- Page 337 and 338: 2.9.7 NPPF, Paragraph 200, states p
- Page 339 and 340: 2.12.2 The NPPF paragraph 94 states
- Page 341 and 342: the demolition and construction pha
- Page 343 and 344: INFORMATIVE: An explanation of the
- Page 345 and 346: 3.1.2 Human Rights Act 1998 It is c
- Page 347 and 348: Report Reference Number 2012/0443/F
- Page 349 and 350: edrooms in the care home accommodat
- Page 351 and 352: 1.4.8 Yorkshire Wildlife Trust The
- Page 353 and 354: 2.8.3 The Local Planning Authority
- Page 355 and 356: It is therefore concluded that the
- Page 357 and 358: uildings shall be occupied or broug
- Page 359 and 360: APPENDIX 1 The Town and Country Pla
- Page 361 and 362: Sustainability Given that the propo
- Page 363: covering being artificial slate. Th
- Page 367 and 368: ASSESSMENT The principal issues to
- Page 369 and 370: continually deteriorating building.
- Page 371 and 372: The proposed development would invo
- Page 373 and 374: The Landscape Assessment of the dis
- Page 375 and 376: The submitted bat report states tha
- Page 377 and 378: 377
- Page 379 and 380: 1. Introduction and background 1.1
- Page 381 and 382: Please see note at start of agenda
- Page 383 and 384: policy since the previous approval
- Page 385 and 386: Appendices: None 385
- Page 387 and 388: 387
- Page 389 and 390: 1. Introduction and background 1.1
- Page 391 and 392: • Significant height increase fro
- Page 393 and 394: which will have been judged to be a
- Page 395 and 396: In the interests of visual amenity
COUNTY ECOLOGIST<br />
It is recommended that a full bat survey is carried out at this site to determine the type <strong>and</strong><br />
extent of roosts present. This should be carried out at a suitable time of year (mid May to<br />
August). This survey should be undertaken <strong>and</strong> submitted for comment prior to the<br />
planning application being determined, so that any potential impact on these protected<br />
species can be taken into account during the decision process. Surveys for European<br />
protected species, such as bats, cannot be conditioned as part of the planning process.<br />
The reason for this approach is because a small number of bats were found to be roosting<br />
behind hanging tiles on the south side of the building. The current survey was undertaken<br />
at a sub-optimal time of year <strong>and</strong> as such the extent <strong>and</strong> type of roost could not be<br />
confirmed. Since the buildings are to be demolished the roost will be lost <strong>and</strong> it is vital to<br />
underst<strong>and</strong> the full impact of this loss.<br />
PUBLICITY<br />
Two petitions were received (11 signature <strong>and</strong> 14 signatures) from neighbouring properties<br />
concerned over the effect the development will have on the Green Belt <strong>and</strong> the adjacent<br />
listed building, access <strong>and</strong> safety issues, the three-storey height of part of the new<br />
building, effect on views of the lake <strong>and</strong> also the nature of the new use <strong>and</strong> the type of<br />
patients that are to be residing in the new development.<br />
In addition, four individual letters <strong>and</strong> emails, <strong>and</strong> multiple letters from a resident of<br />
Orchard Close, Barkston Ash including copy correspondence <strong>with</strong> other bodies, The<br />
Queen <strong>and</strong> the MP, have been received from properties <strong>with</strong>in the park concerned over:<br />
• further development in the park,<br />
• departure from the development plan,<br />
• the impact on the church, the historic park <strong>and</strong> the Green Belt would not be<br />
appropriate,<br />
• the alleged nature of the occupants of the development,<br />
• highways issues, increase in traffic numbers <strong>and</strong> movements <strong>and</strong> use of Lakeside<br />
Approach during the construction period, the roads are all narrow <strong>and</strong> run through<br />
existing residential developments, evidence of damage to existing roads <strong>and</strong><br />
consideration should be given to the logistics of construction traffic <strong>and</strong> personnel,<br />
• effects on wildlife <strong>and</strong> protected species,<br />
• unclear how access will be controlled,<br />
• the proximity of the new development to an immediate neighbour <strong>and</strong> issues of loss<br />
of privacy <strong>and</strong> overlooking.<br />
The reconsultation on the very special circumstances statement, the ‘Conservation<br />
Statement’ <strong>and</strong> the perspectives of the site has resulted in the following additional<br />
responses being received:<br />
A series of letters <strong>and</strong> a 64-signature petition has been received from a resident of<br />
Orchard Close, Barkston Ash. The petition signatories are from Barkston Ash <strong>and</strong><br />
Lakeside Approach.<br />
The grounds of objection on the petition relate to:<br />
• very little has changed from the original submission,<br />
• conflicts <strong>with</strong> development plan policies,<br />
• no consideration has been given to the effect on the listed church,<br />
365