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 ...
2.18.6 The Design and Access Statement also sets out the indicative layout, landscaping, vehicle routes, open spaces, densities, phasing, densities, sections and scales to assist in demonstrating how the site could accommodate the number of units proposed. 2.18.7 In terms of designing out crime the applicants have confirmed the general approaches relating to areas of open space, footpath links, parking provision, boundary treatments, locating of rear gardens, use of defensive planting and fenestration design in terms of the building layouts, internal spaces and use of dual aspects buildings. 2.18.8 In commenting on these general principles North Yorkshire Police have noted “the developer has now provided details of how crime prevention is being considered in respect of the design and layout of the proposal in order to comply with Planning Policy Statement 1. The Police Architectural Liaison Officer goes on to state that he welcomes the positive comments made by the developer in respect of ‘designing out crime’. 2.18.9 As such the approaches outlined in the D&A are considered appropriate to the site’s location and it is considered that appropriate account and reference has been made in defining the design approach for the site to the existing settlement and surrounding development including the Redrow and Persimmon Phase 1 schemes. In terms of materials then the D&A includes an assessment of surrounding development and materials for the units and that these can be agreed via condition as part of the later reserved matters conditions. 2.18.10 On this basis it is considered that the scheme is acceptable and in accordance with Policy ENV1 of the Local Plan and reflective of the overall design principles in the Development Brief. 2.19 Amenity of the occupiers of Adjoining Properties 2.19.1 As the application is in outline form then the impact on the occupiers of the existing adjoining properties has to be considered in the context of the matters to be determined and informed by the approaches outlined in the D&A and shown on the Indicative Master Plan. 2.19.2 Policy ENV1 (1) of the Local Plan states that in considering proposals the District Council will take account of “the effect upon the character of the area or the amenity of adjoining occupiers” 2.19.3 Objectors have raised concerns in terms of the impact on existing residents as a result of overlooking, loss of privacy and disturbance arising during the construction of the site. Overlooking and loss of Privacy 74
The indicative plans submitted demonstrate that the site could be developed to achieve satisfactory separation distances from existing properties so as to ensure that there would not be a significant impact in terms of overlooking or loss of privacy. Disturbance arising during construction 2.19.4 In commenting on the application objectors have raised concerns in terms of the impact arising from the development as it is constructed. 2.19.5 The ES confirms that the applicants will collate a Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) in order to maximise recycling on site. In terms of the operation of the site then the ES makes no commitment to site operation practices, the control of noise, hours of operation or dust mitigation. 2.19.6 However, the Council’s LO-EH has in terms of noise, vibration, dust and dirt, noted that should planning permission be granted they would recommend a condition be added to require a scheme to minimise the impact of noise, vibration, dust and dirt on residential properties in close proximity to the site. 2.19.7 As such, it is considered that a scheme can be drawn up via condition to ensure that the amenity of the existing residents is appropriately protected during the construction stage in line with Policy ENV1 (1) of the Local Plan. 2.20 Noise within Proposed Dwellings 2.20.1 Policy ENV1 of the Local Plan and Policy SHB1/1B of the Local Plan states that proposals for the site should incorporate “appropriate noise amelioration measures, if necessary, to meet the requirements of an approved noise assessment undertaken at the developers expense.” 2.20.2 In addition the NPPF requires consideration of the impact of noise sources on new development which includes the impact arising from roads. 2.20.3 The Council’s LO-EH has noted that there is a possible impact on the new dwellings as a result of the location of development in relation to Low Street to the west and the A162, with confirmation being received from LO-EH that a noise assessment should be undertaken as part of the reserved matters stages to ensure that any required mitigation in terms of the new units is defined and as such this should be conditioned accordingly. 2.20.4 Given the above the scheme is considered to be acceptable in terms of the consideration of noise and the tests in Policy ENV1 and SHB/1B (7) of the Local Plan and the requirements of the NPPF subject to a condition requiring a noise report at reserved matters stage. 75
- 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 and 40: een carried out. Although it would
- Page 41 and 42: character of surrounding dwellings
- 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: 2.17.8 In conclusion, it is conside
- 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
- Page 91 and 92: No dwellings shall be constructed w
- Page 95 and 96: Public Session Report Reference Num
- Page 97 and 98: Low Street to the south of the vill
- Page 99 and 100: Reason for Refusal 1 The proposal b
- 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
The indicative plans submitted demonstrate that the site could be<br />
developed to achieve satisfactory separation distances from existing<br />
properties so as to ensure that there would not be a significant impact<br />
in terms of overlooking or loss of privacy.<br />
Disturbance arising during construction<br />
2.19.4 In commenting on the application objectors have raised concerns in<br />
terms of the impact arising from the development as it is constructed.<br />
2.19.5 The ES confirms that the applicants will collate a Site Waste<br />
Management Plan (SWMP) in order to maximise recycling on site. In<br />
terms of the operation of the site then the ES makes no commitment to<br />
site operation practices, the control of noise, hours of operation or dust<br />
mitigation.<br />
2.19.6 However, the Council’s LO-EH has in terms of noise, vibration, dust<br />
<strong>and</strong> dirt, noted that should planning permission be granted they would<br />
recommend a condition be added to require a scheme to minimise the<br />
impact of noise, vibration, dust <strong>and</strong> dirt on residential properties in<br />
close proximity to the site.<br />
2.19.7 As such, it is considered that a scheme can be drawn up via condition<br />
to ensure that the amenity of the existing residents is appropriately<br />
protected during the construction stage in line <strong>with</strong> Policy ENV1 (1) of<br />
the Local Plan.<br />
2.20 Noise <strong>with</strong>in Proposed Dwellings<br />
2.20.1 Policy ENV1 of the Local Plan <strong>and</strong> Policy SHB1/1B of the Local Plan<br />
states that proposals for the site should incorporate “appropriate noise<br />
amelioration measures, if necessary, to meet the requirements of an<br />
approved noise assessment undertaken at the developers expense.”<br />
2.20.2 In addition the NPPF requires consideration of the impact of noise<br />
sources on new development which includes the impact arising from<br />
roads.<br />
2.20.3 The Council’s LO-EH has noted that there is a possible impact on the<br />
new dwellings as a result of the location of development in relation to<br />
Low Street to the west <strong>and</strong> the A162, <strong>with</strong> confirmation being received<br />
from LO-EH that a noise assessment should be undertaken as part of<br />
the reserved matters stages to ensure that any required mitigation in<br />
terms of the new units is defined <strong>and</strong> as such this should be<br />
conditioned accordingly.<br />
2.20.4 Given the above the scheme is considered to be acceptable in terms of<br />
the consideration of noise <strong>and</strong> the tests in Policy ENV1 <strong>and</strong> SHB/1B (7)<br />
of the Local Plan <strong>and</strong> the requirements of the NPPF subject to a<br />
condition requiring a noise report at reserved matters stage.<br />
75