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 ...
The site has an established, species rich hedgerow along Low Street which is classed as important at a local level under the Hedgerow Regulation 1997. Hedgerows are listed on national and local biodiversity action plans and we are disappointed to hear about the proposed removal of part of the Low Street hedgerow due to its high ecological value. We would advise that plans should be amended to allow for the retention of this hedgerow if possible. We are however pleased to see that new hedgerows will be created and existing ones repaired to compensate for such losses. Please ensure that all vegetation species used are native and of local provenance in order to best compensate the hedgerow losses along Low Street. We appreciate the timing of the removal of vegetation and bird nesting material so that it is outside of the bird nesting season (March to August inclusive) in section 10.5.8 of the Ecology report. All species of birds, their nests and eggs are protected under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). We support the proposed preservation of trees along the water course in addition to future woodland creation along the south and through the centre of the site, creating a habitat corridor. This should compensate for the possible loss of bird nesting spots and allow wildlife to move across the site to the surrounding countryside. We wish such planting to be of a variety of species and heights in order to provide a diverse mosaic of habitats for surrounding wildlife. Again the planting of native species of local provenance would be preferred. Access and green infrastructure Welcomes the provision of areas of green space within the site, and the use of footpaths and cycle routes throughout the site. We support the footpath and cycle links to the existing park and surrounding settlements and employment zones. We are pleased to see that the location of access roads to the site has taken the presence of existing trees and hedgerows into consideration in order to reduce the loss of such habitats. The planting of marginal vegetation to the attenuation and flood compensation area is welcomed. Such area will not only provide drainage for the site in the event of flooding but also provide new foraging and nesting areas for birds and mammals through the planting of vegetation. We would suggest that such vegetation to be of native, locally sourced species only and consist of a variety of species in order to increase the diversity of invertebrate species in the site. Landscape The proposed development is not within any sites designated for their landscape value. However, landscape issues should be considered with any proposal, as the development should always compliment the local character and distinctiveness of the surrounding area. We appreciate the consideration of the development with regards to the 40
character of surrounding dwellings however we would like the developers to refer to the local (Selby) landscape character assessment to ensure that the development visually compliments its surroundings. We welcome the proposed structural vegetation planting along the boundary of the site to screen the site from long distance views. Increased areas of planting surrounding the site would also be favoured in order to compensate for green space loss inside of the site. Overall we do not consider that the development will have a significant detrimental impact on landscape character. 1.5 Publicity: 1.5.1 Immediate neighbours were consulted by letter, 7 site notices were posted around the site and an advertisement was placed in the local newspaper. At the time of the collation of this report a total of 26 properties had submitted letters as a result of the two consultations undertaken on this application. 1.5.2 In addition a letter of objection has been received from Connaught (the promoters of the Hodgson Lane allocation) via their Agents Indigo Planning. 1.5.3 Residents have made comments under this application in relation to the proposals by the owners of the adjacent land off Carousel Walk/Fairfield Link which is not part of this application. These comments have not been noted in the following summary as they are not relevant to the consideration of this application. 1.5.4 The content of the objections received are summarised as follows: Principle of Development, Need for Housing and Timescales • development is on Green Belt land • destruction of agricultural land • Suitable Brownfield land in Tadcaster, Castleford and settlements along North and West Yorkshire boundary. • considerable development in Sherburn, other communities should play their part • development would narrow gap between Sherburn and South Milford creating a ‘super village’ with zero services, no leisure centre, police/fire building. • numbers proposed are too high for the village to cope with • problems booking doctor and dentist appointments • Sherburn will be unable to cope with increased number of houses • Lack of amenities for teenagers • No money is getting pumped into the village or shall we say small town, it is run down and scruffy all Sherburn seems to get is applications for housing developments. If it is to become a small town then we need the facilities like Wetherby, i.e sports centre, cinema, dentists, doctors. 41
- Page 1 and 2: Meeting: PLANNING COMMITTEE Date: W
- Page 3 and 4: Minutes Planning Committee Venue: C
- Page 5 and 6: 13.1 Application: 2012/0028/COU Loc
- Page 7 and 8: • TAG2 have suggested alternative
- Page 9 and 10: 13.3 Application: 2012/0342/FUL Loc
- Page 11 and 12: Public Speaker - Stephen Fell, Appl
- Page 13 and 14: explained that the proposal was the
- Page 15 and 16: Items for Planning Committee 12 Sep
- Page 17 and 18: Policy Matters Detailed below is th
- Page 21 and 22: Public Session Report Reference Num
- Page 23 and 24: 1.1.5 The site does not contain any
- Page 25 and 26: the wider allocation contrary to Pa
- Page 27 and 28: Further comments were received from
- Page 29 and 30: expected to accommodate in the orde
- Page 31 and 32: sufficient sites available within S
- Page 33 and 34: The Council has a 5.57 year supply
- Page 35 and 36: scheme of this size therefore has t
- Page 37 and 38: the site and other panned hedgerows
- Page 39: een carried out. Although it would
- Page 43 and 44: • It would appear that the develo
- Page 45 and 46: problems for local residents who, f
- Page 47 and 48: 2. The Report allow a further 8 yea
- Page 49 and 50: Taking these in turn. vi) Provision
- Page 51 and 52: 2.8.11 The Regional Spatial Strateg
- Page 53 and 54: compliance of the proposals with th
- Page 55 and 56: • Vehicular site access arrangeme
- Page 57 and 58: vehicles; and consider the needs of
- Page 59 and 60: 2.9.33 NYCC Highways have confirmed
- Page 61 and 62: 2.10.5 At a regional level the RSS
- Page 63 and 64: 2.11.5 The report concludes that th
- Page 65 and 66: 10) An appropriate flood risk asses
- Page 67 and 68: ii. and a site-specific flood risk
- Page 69 and 70: carried out in accordance with the
- Page 71 and 72: earlier in this Report seeking use
- Page 73 and 74: 2.17.8 In conclusion, it is conside
- Page 75 and 76: The indicative plans submitted demo
- 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
character of surrounding dwellings however we would like the<br />
developers to refer to the local (<strong>Selby</strong>) l<strong>and</strong>scape character<br />
assessment to ensure that the development visually compliments its<br />
surroundings. We welcome the proposed structural vegetation planting<br />
along the boundary of the site to screen the site from long distance<br />
views. Increased areas of planting surrounding the site would also be<br />
favoured in order to compensate for green space loss inside of the site.<br />
Overall we do not consider that the development will have a significant<br />
detrimental impact on l<strong>and</strong>scape character.<br />
1.5 Publicity:<br />
1.5.1 Immediate neighbours were consulted by letter, 7 site notices were<br />
posted around the site <strong>and</strong> an advertisement was placed in the local<br />
newspaper. At the time of the collation of this report a total of 26<br />
properties had submitted letters as a result of the two consultations<br />
undertaken on this application.<br />
1.5.2 In addition a letter of objection has been received from Connaught (the<br />
promoters of the Hodgson Lane allocation) via their Agents Indigo<br />
Planning.<br />
1.5.3 Residents have made comments under this application in relation to<br />
the proposals by the owners of the adjacent l<strong>and</strong> off Carousel<br />
Walk/Fairfield Link which is not part of this application. These<br />
comments have not been noted in the following summary as they are<br />
not relevant to the consideration of this application.<br />
1.5.4 The content of the objections received are summarised as follows:<br />
Principle of Development, Need for Housing <strong>and</strong> Timescales<br />
• development is on Green Belt l<strong>and</strong><br />
• destruction of agricultural l<strong>and</strong><br />
• Suitable Brownfield l<strong>and</strong> in Tadcaster, Castleford <strong>and</strong> settlements<br />
along North <strong>and</strong> West Yorkshire boundary.<br />
• considerable development in Sherburn, other communities should<br />
play their part<br />
• development would narrow gap between Sherburn <strong>and</strong> South<br />
Milford creating a ‘super village’ <strong>with</strong> zero services, no leisure<br />
centre, police/fire building.<br />
• numbers proposed are too high for the village to cope <strong>with</strong><br />
• problems booking doctor <strong>and</strong> dentist appointments<br />
• Sherburn will be unable to cope <strong>with</strong> increased number of houses<br />
• Lack of amenities for teenagers<br />
• No money is getting pumped into the village or shall we say small<br />
town, it is run down <strong>and</strong> scruffy all Sherburn seems to get is<br />
applications for housing developments. If it is to become a small<br />
town then we need the facilities like Wetherby, i.e sports centre,<br />
cinema, dentists, doctors.<br />
41
Change language